## Summary - integrate the current `platform-dev` branch into `dev` - bring the latest platform work from the integration branch into the main development branch - include the recent findings lifecycle backfill removal slice together with the already accumulated `platform-dev` changes ## Scope - source branch: `platform-dev` - target branch: `dev` - branch role: integration PR, not a single-feature PR ## Validation - branch state reviewed before PR creation - `platform-dev` is ahead of `dev` with the expected integration history - this PR intentionally carries the accumulated `platform-dev` commits into `dev` ## Notes - this is the correct merge direction for the current workflow, where feature branches land in `platform-dev` first and `platform-dev` is then merged into `dev` - after merging, `platform-dev` can be recreated fresh from `dev` as usual Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de> Reviewed-on: #295
2.7 KiB
2.7 KiB
Specification Quality Checklist: Remove Findings Lifecycle Backfill Runtime Surfaces
Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
Created: 2026-04-28
Feature: specs/253-remove-findings-backfill-runtime-surfaces/spec.md
Content Quality
- No language/framework/API design leakage; concrete repo surfaces, commands, and labels are named only because this cleanup deletes those exact shipped traces.
- Focused on user value and business needs
- Written for non-technical stakeholders
- All mandatory sections completed
Requirement Completeness
- No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
- Requirements are testable and unambiguous
- Success criteria are measurable
- Success criteria are technology-agnostic (no implementation details)
- All acceptance scenarios are defined
- Edge cases are identified
- Scope is clearly bounded
- Dependencies and assumptions identified
Feature Readiness
- All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
- User scenarios cover primary flows
- Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
- No unintended implementation design leakage remains beyond the explicit cleanup special-case for named repo-visible traces
Test Governance Review
- Lane fit is explicit: the package uses
fast-feedbackandconfidence, plus one retainedheavy-governanceguard inapps/platform/tests/Feature/OperationalControls/NoAdHocOperationalControlBypassTest.phpso operational-control bypass residue cannot survive the cleanup silently. - No new browser or heavy-governance family is introduced; the retained guard stays explicit, bounded, and tied to operational-control source-trace removal only.
- Suite-cost outcome is net-negative: backfill-only tests, lane traces, and helper residue are removed in the same slice instead of widening shared defaults.
Review Outcome
- Review outcome class:
acceptable-special-case - Workflow outcome:
keep - Review-note location is explicit: the heavy-governance retention note lives in
spec.md,plan.md,tasks.md, and the final preparation report.
Notes
- The spec intentionally names concrete routes, commands, labels, and catalog keys because the product value of this slice is the removal of those specific repo-visible runtime surfaces.
- The slice stays small by deleting visible repair tooling only; acknowledged-status cleanup and creation-time invariant hardening remain explicit follow-up candidates.
- Validation pass complete: no clarification markers remain, LEAN-001 cleanup posture is explicit, and tenant-owned findings continue to treat
workspace_idplustenant_idas required anchors.