Some checks failed
Main Confidence / confidence (push) Failing after 1m20s
## Summary - add the workspace-scoped findings hygiene report, overview signal, and supporting classification service for broken assignments and stale in-progress work - add Spec 225 artifacts and focused findings hygiene test coverage alongside the new Filament page and workspace overview wiring - align product roadmap and spec candidates around the layered canonical control catalog, CIS library, and readiness model - extend SpecKit constitution and templates with the XCUT-001 shared-pattern reuse guidance ## Notes - validation commands and implementation close-out notes are documented in `specs/225-assignment-hygiene/plan.md` and `specs/225-assignment-hygiene/quickstart.md` - this PR targets `dev` from `225-assignment-hygiene` Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de> Reviewed-on: #264
35 lines
1.4 KiB
Markdown
35 lines
1.4 KiB
Markdown
# Specification Quality Checklist: Assignment Hygiene & Stale Work Detection
|
|
|
|
**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
|
|
**Created**: 2026-04-22
|
|
**Feature**: [spec.md](../spec.md)
|
|
|
|
## Content Quality
|
|
|
|
- [x] No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
|
|
- [x] Focused on user value and business needs
|
|
- [x] Written for non-technical stakeholders
|
|
- [x] All mandatory sections completed
|
|
|
|
## Requirement Completeness
|
|
|
|
- [x] No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
|
|
- [x] Requirements are testable and unambiguous
|
|
- [x] Success criteria are measurable
|
|
- [x] Success criteria are technology-agnostic (no implementation details)
|
|
- [x] All acceptance scenarios are defined
|
|
- [x] Edge cases are identified
|
|
- [x] Scope is clearly bounded
|
|
- [x] Dependencies and assumptions identified
|
|
|
|
## Feature Readiness
|
|
|
|
- [x] All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
|
|
- [x] User scenarios cover primary flows
|
|
- [x] Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
|
|
- [x] No implementation details leak into specification
|
|
|
|
## Notes
|
|
|
|
- Repository spec governance intentionally requires route, RBAC, and surface-contract metadata; the spec avoids code-level implementation choices and keeps the feature framed around operator workflow, trust, and bounded scope.
|
|
- Validation pass completed on 2026-04-22 with no open clarification markers. |