TenantAtlas/specs/258-customer-review-productization/checklists/requirements.md

Preparation Review Checklist: Customer Review Workspace Productization v1

Purpose: Validate repo-fit preparation quality after spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md are complete
Reviewed: 2026-04-30
Feature: spec.md
Supporting artifacts: plan.md, tasks.md, research.md, data-model.md, quickstart.md, customer-review-productization.openapi.yaml

Candidate Fit

• The selected candidate still matches the active P0 queue in docs/product/spec-candidates.md, the current priority order in docs/product/roadmap.md, and the open-gap wording in docs/product/implementation-ledger.md
• Existing specs/ coverage was checked so this package stays a new productization follow-up rather than a duplicate of Specs 249, 253, 254, 255, or 257
• The scope stays on the customer-review productization delta over the existing workspace and released-review detail flow instead of reopening review foundations
• Broader baseline/control overlays and management-packaging follow-through are explicitly deferred rather than hidden inside this slice

Constitution Fit

• The package stays on the existing Filament v5 + Livewire v4 admin plane and does not introduce panel/provider-registration work beyond the current bootstrap/providers.php truth
• No new persistence, customer identity plane, portal shell, authoring flow, publication engine, remediation flow, or destructive action surface is introduced
• Workspace/tenant isolation and capability-first RBAC remain explicit, including 404 for non-members and optional capability gating only for secondary access paths
• One dominant safe action per changed surface is explicitly described, with secondary proof affordances demoted out of peer header-action status
• Global-search safety is preserved without introducing a new searchable resource or widening existing review/evidence discovery across tenant boundaries
• Asset strategy remains unchanged; if later implementation unexpectedly registers assets, deployment still uses the existing cd apps/platform && php artisan filament:assets step

Artifact Consistency

• spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md all target the same workspace-summary plus released-review-detail follow-up
• The likely repo surfaces and plan structure match the current repository layout, including apps/platform/lang rather than a fictional app-local language directory
• Tasks directly cover RBAC, auditability, disclosure hierarchy, localization, access/unavailable states, and global-search safety
• Supporting artifacts exist, no unresolved template markers remain, and the package stays implementation-ready without touching application code

Test Governance

• Validation lanes remain explicitly bounded to confidence plus one existing browser smoke
• The package reuses the existing reviews test family instead of creating a new heavy-governance or browser family
• Reviewer proof commands remain explicit and minimal for the touched workspace, detail, pack, and proof surfaces
• The close-out path records the review outcome, guardrail status, and any document-in-feature vs follow-up-spec decision inside the spec package

Notes

• Reviewed after artifact alignment on 2026-04-30.
• This repository's preparation artifacts are intentionally implementation-oriented, so concrete routes, classes, affected surfaces, and validation commands are expected rather than treated as leakage.
• No application implementation was performed while preparing or reviewing this package.
• Implementation close-out on 2026-04-30 passed the focused feature checks, bounded browser smoke, and Pint. Audit gaps were handled with bounded additive action IDs for workspace entry and proof-open events; global-search and asset strategy remained unchanged.

Review Outcome

• Outcome: keep
• Reason: The package remains the narrow customer-review productization follow-up, explicitly records the baseline/control deferral, aligns the detail-page action hierarchy, and adds direct task coverage for global-search safety.
• Workflow result: Ready for /speckit.implement after this preparation review.

Implementation Outcome

• Outcome: implemented
• Workflow result: Ready for manual review after the implementation loop. No confirmed in-scope findings remain after the focused confidence checks, browser smoke, formatting, and post-implementation analysis.