3.6 KiB
3.6 KiB
Specification Quality Checklist: Enterprise Appliance Experience Hardening
Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-07-12 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
- 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)
- Four bootable products and implementation order are explicit.
- Exact zero-network acceptance and payload boundaries are testable.
- Signing, integrity, update, rollback, interruption, sizing, and evidence contracts are defined.
- Large-model packs and the shared offline-update format are separated from bootable media.
- Model-pack quarantine, shared-object references, dependencies, uninstall, garbage collection, entitlement changes and redistribution-license changes have deterministic lifecycle rules.
- Release signing trust domains, custody, separation of duties, receipts, rotation, revocation and compromised-root recovery are specified separately from named-owner approvals.
- Installer assets, adversaries, trust boundaries, threats, controls, invariants, abuse tests and residual risks are defined across the full release lifecycle.
- Every remaining Gate 1 decision has an accountable role, acceptable outcome and required approval/evidence field in one consolidated dossier.
- 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.
- All 30 Gate 1 architecture decisions carry Cezen Technologies approval records.
- 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.