TenantAtlas/specs/210-ci-matrix-budget-enforcement/checklists/requirements.md
ahmido bf38ec1780
Some checks failed
Main Confidence / confidence (push) Failing after 3m36s
Spec 210: implement CI test matrix budget enforcement (#243)
## Summary
- add explicit Gitea workflow files for PR Fast Feedback, `dev` Confidence, Heavy Governance, and Browser lanes
- extend the repo-truth lane support seams with workflow profiles, trigger-aware budget enforcement, artifact publication contracts, CI summaries, and failure classification
- add deterministic artifact staging, new CI governance guard coverage, and Spec 210 planning/contracts/docs updates

## Validation
- `cd apps/platform && ./vendor/bin/sail bin pint --dirty --format agent`
- `cd apps/platform && ./vendor/bin/sail artisan test --compact tests/Feature/Guards/CiFastFeedbackWorkflowContractTest.php tests/Feature/Guards/CiConfidenceWorkflowContractTest.php tests/Feature/Guards/CiHeavyBrowserWorkflowContractTest.php tests/Feature/Guards/CiLaneFailureClassificationContractTest.php tests/Feature/Guards/FastFeedbackLaneContractTest.php tests/Feature/Guards/ConfidenceLaneContractTest.php tests/Feature/Guards/HeavyGovernanceLaneContractTest.php tests/Feature/Guards/BrowserLaneIsolationTest.php tests/Feature/Guards/FixtureLaneImpactBudgetTest.php tests/Feature/Guards/TestLaneManifestTest.php tests/Feature/Guards/TestLaneArtifactsContractTest.php tests/Feature/Guards/TestLaneCommandContractTest.php`
- `./scripts/platform-test-lane fast-feedback`
- `./scripts/platform-test-lane confidence`
- `./scripts/platform-test-lane heavy-governance`
- `./scripts/platform-test-lane browser`
- `./scripts/platform-test-report fast-feedback`
- `./scripts/platform-test-report confidence`

## Notes
- scheduled Heavy Governance and Browser workflows stay gated behind `TENANTATLAS_ENABLE_HEAVY_GOVERNANCE_SCHEDULE=1` and `TENANTATLAS_ENABLE_BROWSER_SCHEDULE=1`
- the remaining rollout evidence task is capturing the live Gitea run set this PR enables: PR Fast Feedback, `dev` Confidence, manual and scheduled Heavy Governance, and manual and scheduled Browser runs

Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de>
Reviewed-on: #243
2026-04-17 18:04:35 +00:00

39 lines
1.8 KiB
Markdown

# Specification Quality Checklist: CI Test Matrix & Runtime Budget Enforcement
**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
**Created**: 2026-04-17
**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
- Validation run: 2026-04-17
- No template placeholders or [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain.
- The spec stays repository-governance-focused: it defines trigger policy, budget semantics, artifact expectations, and contributor behavior without prescribing language-, framework-, or API-level implementation.
- CI-specific nouns such as lane, artifact, budget, and failure class are treated as domain requirements for the repository validation contract rather than low-level implementation detail.
- The scope remains intentionally narrow: it operationalizes the existing governance work from Specs 206 through 209 instead of inventing a second test-execution model.
- Items marked incomplete require spec updates before `/speckit.clarify` or `/speckit.plan`.