Skip to content

Specification Quality Checklist: CLI & Core Agent Engine (v0.1)

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2025-10-19 Feature: 001-cli-core-engine/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

Specification Quality Summary

✅ PASSED - All checklist items complete. Specification is ready for planning phase.

Validation Details

Content Quality: The specification avoids implementation details (no specific Python frameworks, database engines, or API libraries mentioned). All requirements are business-focused and center on user workflows (developers initializing projects, defining agents through YAML, testing, and deploying).

Requirement Completeness: 30 functional requirements are clearly defined and testable. No unclear areas remain - all requirements can be verified through concrete acceptance criteria. 7 user stories with priorities (5 P1, 2 P2) provide clear prioritization for implementation phases. 10 measurable success criteria focus on user outcomes and system behavior.

Feature Readiness: Each user story is independently testable (can implement Story 1 alone and still deliver value). Requirements map directly to acceptance scenarios that can be automated or manually verified. Success criteria avoid implementation details - they measure user-facing outcomes like "response time under 3 seconds" rather than "API latency under 200ms".

Key Strengths

  1. Clear MVP Definition: P1 stories provide foundational value; P2 stories enhance workflow but aren't blocking
  2. Technology-Agnostic Success Criteria: Metrics like "tool tracking works with 100% accuracy" and "response time under 3 seconds" focus on user experience, not implementation
  3. Comprehensive Tool Coverage: All tool types mentioned in VISION.md (vectorstore, function, MCP) are included with clear requirements
  4. Error Handling: Requirements explicitly address validation, missing files, API failures, and evaluation failures
  5. Scope Clarity: Out of Scope section clearly delineates what's for v0.2+, reducing implementation ambiguity

Areas Ready for Planning

  • CLI command structure is well-defined and can be spec'd in detail
  • Agent YAML schema can be formally defined based on FR-004 through FR-007
  • Tool execution pipeline requirements are clear (FR-008 through FR-012)
  • Test/evaluation flow is unambiguous (FR-013 through FR-018)
  • API endpoint contract is defined (FR-024, FR-025)

Next Steps

Specification approved for implementation planning. No clarifications needed.