# Specification Quality Checklist: Enterprise Appliance Experience Hardening

**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
**Created**: 2026-07-12
**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 completed on 2026-07-12.
- Revalidated after five clarification decisions on 2026-07-12; all 16 items remain passing.
- The clarification pass is complete and the specification is ready for `$speckit-plan`.

## Installer Architecture Readiness (2026-07-14)

- [x] Four bootable products and implementation order are explicit.
- [x] Exact zero-network acceptance and payload boundaries are testable.
- [x] Signing, integrity, update, rollback, interruption, sizing, and evidence contracts are defined.
- [x] Large-model packs and the shared offline-update format are separated from bootable media.
- [x] Model-pack quarantine, shared-object references, dependencies, uninstall, garbage collection,
      entitlement changes and redistribution-license changes have deterministic lifecycle rules.
- [x] Release signing trust domains, custody, separation of duties, receipts, rotation, revocation and
      compromised-root recovery are specified separately from named-owner approvals.
- [x] Installer assets, adversaries, trust boundaries, threats, controls, invariants, abuse tests and
      residual risks are defined across the full release lifecycle.
- [x] Every remaining Gate 1 decision has an accountable role, acceptable outcome and required
      approval/evidence field in one consolidated dossier.
- [x] Public planning artifacts use Cezen Technologies as accountable organization while restricted
      approval records retain authorized-person attribution and separation-of-duties evidence.
- [ ] Signing/revocation ownership and key-custody policy are approved.
- [ ] Machine-readable manifest and compatibility schemas are approved.
- [ ] Workstation hardware and starter-model revisions are pinned.
- [ ] Online Universal Server endpoint/trust/acquisition contract is approved.
- [ ] Update rollback, license-offline, payload inventory, and lab/evidence ownership blockers close.
- [x] All 30 Gate 1 architecture decisions carry Cezen Technologies approval records.
- [x] Gate 1 closure is audited against its normative definition and remaining evidence is allocated
      to Gates 2-6 without treating approval as implementation authority.
- [ ] Gate 2 implementation-readiness evidence and restricted assignments are complete.
- [ ] Gates 3-6 artifact, physical, update/model and release evidence are produced and reviewed.

The original enterprise-experience specification remains planned. Installer implementation readiness
is separately **blocked** until the unchecked items and analysis blockers B1-B11 are resolved.