ahmido/TenantAtlas
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects 1 Releases Wiki Activity
ab6eccaf40
TenantAtlas/specs/240-tenant-onboarding-readiness/checklists/requirements.md
ahmido ab6eccaf40
Some checks failed
Main Confidence / confidence (push) Failing after 48s
Details
feat: add onboarding readiness workflow (#277) 
## Summary
- add derived onboarding readiness to the managed tenant onboarding workflow and multi-draft picker
- keep provider-specific permission diagnostics secondary while preserving canonical `Open operation` and existing onboarding action semantics
- add spec-kit artifacts for `240-tenant-onboarding-readiness` and align roadmap/spec-candidate planning notes
- unify the required-permissions empty state copy to English

## Validation
- `cd apps/platform && ./vendor/bin/sail artisan test --compact tests/Feature/RequiredPermissions/RequiredPermissionsEmptyStateTest.php`
- `cd apps/platform && ./vendor/bin/sail bin pint --dirty --format agent`
- browser smoke exercised the onboarding picker, route-bound mismatch readiness state, canonical `Open operation` path, and local fixture cleanup

## Notes
- branch includes the generated spec artifacts under `specs/240-tenant-onboarding-readiness/`
- temporary browser smoke tenants/drafts/runs were cleaned from the local environment after validation

Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de>
Reviewed-on: #277
2026-04-25 21:17:31 +00:00

1.5 KiB
Raw Blame History

Specification Quality Checklist: Self-Service Tenant Onboarding & Connection Readiness

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-04-25 Feature: spec.md

Content Quality

  • No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
  • 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 implementation details leak into specification

Notes

  • Quality pass completed on 2026-04-25.
  • The spec stays intentionally narrow: it reuses existing onboarding session, provider connection, verification, and checkpoint truth and does not introduce new onboarding persistence.
  • Provider-specific Microsoft details remain contextual inside diagnostics instead of becoming new platform-core truth.
  • Items marked incomplete require spec updates before /speckit.clarify or /speckit.plan