# Specification Quality Checklist: Anonymous Feedback Platform (Reklamator)

**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
**Created**: 2025-10-14
**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

## Validation Results

### Content Quality Review

✅ **PASS** - The specification is free of implementation details. All requirements focus on what the system must do, not how it should be implemented. Technology choices (AI service, storage mechanism) are mentioned only in Assumptions section where appropriate.

✅ **PASS** - The specification centers on user value: anonymous feedback submission, AI-powered analysis for product owners, and efficient dashboard access. Business needs are clearly articulated.

✅ **PASS** - Language is accessible to non-technical stakeholders. Technical jargon is minimal and necessary terms (e.g., "API timeout") are used only in edge cases.

✅ **PASS** - All mandatory sections are present and complete: User Scenarios & Testing, Requirements, Success Criteria.

### Requirement Completeness Review

✅ **PASS** - No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain in the specification. All ambiguities have been resolved with reasonable defaults.

✅ **PASS** - All 64 functional requirements are testable and unambiguous. Each requirement uses clear language (MUST) and specific criteria (e.g., "10MB per file", "10,000 characters", "3 files maximum").

✅ **PASS** - Success criteria include specific metrics: completion times (under 1 minute, under 30 seconds), accuracy thresholds (80%, 99%), performance targets (1000 items, 100 concurrent users), and qualitative measures (translation comprehensibility).

✅ **PASS** - Success criteria are technology-agnostic, focusing on user-observable outcomes like "users can submit in under 1 minute" rather than "API response time is X ms".

✅ **PASS** - Each user story includes detailed acceptance scenarios in Given-When-Then format covering normal flows, edge cases, and error conditions.

✅ **PASS** - Edge cases section identifies 13 specific boundary conditions and error scenarios to be addressed during implementation.

✅ **PASS** - Scope is clearly bounded with comprehensive "Out of Scope" section listing 15 items explicitly excluded (multilingual UI, real-time chat, mobile apps, advanced analytics, etc.).

✅ **PASS** - Assumptions section lists 15 explicit assumptions about technology choices, operational constraints, and scale expectations. Dependencies are implicit in user story priorities.

### Feature Readiness Review

✅ **PASS** - All 64 functional requirements are traceable to acceptance scenarios in the user stories. Requirements are organized by functional area for clarity.

✅ **PASS** - Four user stories cover the complete feature lifecycle: feedback submission (P1), AI analysis (P2), dashboard access (P3), and product management (P4). Each story is independently testable.

✅ **PASS** - The specification defines 14 measurable success criteria that will determine if the feature meets its goals.

✅ **PASS** - No implementation details are present in the requirements. Storage mechanism, AI service choice, and authentication method are appropriately deferred to planning phase.

## Notes

- Specification is ready for `/speckit.plan` phase
- All quality criteria passed on first validation
- User stories are properly prioritized and independently testable
- Clear separation maintained between WHAT (requirements) and HOW (implementation)
- Reasonable defaults applied for file size limits, character limits, and rate limiting based on standard practices

## Recommendation

✅ **APPROVED** - Specification meets all quality criteria and is ready to proceed to implementation planning phase.