TenantAtlas/specs/261-provider-missing-policy-visibility/checklists/requirements.md

Specification Quality Checklist: Provider-Missing Policy Visibility & Restore Continuity v1

Purpose: Validate the spec package before implementation planning and task execution
Created: 2026-05-01
Feature: spec.md

Content Quality

• The spec stays on one bounded policy-only provider-presence correction and does not drift into workspace/tenant lifecycle governance
• Mandatory repo sections are completed, including candidate check, scope fields, cross-cutting reuse, provider boundary, guardrails, proportionality, and testing impact
• Candidate selection is grounded in repo reality as well as product docs, including the already-prepared Specs 251-260 and the documented narrower lifecycle follow-up
• No implementation diff leaks into the feature contract beyond concrete repo surfaces needed for local fit

Requirement Completeness

• No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
• Functional requirements are testable and bounded
• Success criteria are measurable and behavior-focused
• Acceptance scenarios cover current-state policy truth, backup eligibility, restore continuity, and reappearance behavior
• Edge cases cover ignored-plus-missing overlap, supported-type reclassification, and historical backup continuity
• Dependencies, assumptions, and risks are explicit

Guardrail & Surface Fit

• The spec, plan, and package keep the same native Filament classification, shared-family relevance, and surface-role hierarchy for policy, backup, and restore screens
• ignored_at is explicitly reserved for local suppression and missing_from_provider_at is the only new provider-presence truth proposed
• Combined-state filter membership and blocked-reason precedence are explicit across the spec, data model, plan, and conceptual contract
• Decision-first obligations are explicit for changed surfaces: one dominant next action, diagnostics-secondary ordering, hidden/capability-gated support detail, and no duplicate visible decision summary
• No new page, panel, provider, asset strategy, lifecycle engine, or SoftDeletes path is introduced
• OperationRun impact is explicitly bounded to existing sync/backup start surfaces with no new run type
• Provider-specific semantics stay inside sync interpretation rather than leaking into platform-core operator vocabulary

Test Governance

• Planned validation stays in focused fast-feedback and confidence lanes only
• The package reuses existing policy, backup, restore, and badge test families instead of introducing browser or heavy-governance proof
• The US2 proving suite is aligned across spec, plan, quickstart, and tasks
• Reviewer handoff and narrow Sail commands are explicit in the plan and quickstart artifacts

Notes

• Reviewed against docs/product/spec-candidates.md, docs/product/roadmap.md, docs/product/implementation-ledger.md, .specify/memory/constitution.md, apps/platform/app/Models/Policy.php, apps/platform/app/Services/Intune/PolicySyncService.php, apps/platform/app/Services/Intune/BackupService.php, apps/platform/app/Filament/Resources/PolicyResource.php, apps/platform/app/Filament/Resources/RestoreRunResource.php, and the related sync/backup/restore tests on 2026-05-01.
• No application implementation was performed while preparing this spec package.

Review Outcome

• Outcome class: acceptable-special-case
• Outcome: keep
• Reason: The package intentionally pulls one documented narrow follow-up ahead of the full lifecycle taxonomy, but it stays policy-only, uses one aligned proving suite, makes the combined-state contract explicit, reuses existing shared seams, and fixes a repo-visible truth bug without importing the broader lifecycle framework.
• Workflow result: Ready for implementation planning and task execution