# Specification Quality Checklist: Response Status Codes

**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
**Created**: 2026-06-18
**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

- Items marked incomplete require spec updates before `/speckit-clarify` or `/speckit-plan`.
- Two design forks were resolved with the user before drafting: (1) the code is a
  three-section structured value (flags / predefined / custom), with only the
  flags section being bitflags; (2) status codes apply to error responses only in
  this increment.
- The spec intentionally names a few framework concepts (`WireOutcome`,
  `IntoErrorResponse`, `Result<T, E>`) in the Constitution Alignment and Key
  Entities sections because the feature is an explicit refactor of those named
  contracts; the user stories, requirements, and success criteria themselves stay
  capability-focused and technology-agnostic.
- One detail is deliberately deferred to planning: the exact integer width of the
  status code (u16 vs u32) and the size of the custom section. This is recorded in
  Assumptions, not as a [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] marker, because it does not affect
  scope or testability.
