# Specification Quality Checklist: Intelligence Pattern Ports

**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
**Created**: 2026-06-16
**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`.
- Validation result (iteration 1): all items pass. The spec deliberately uses
  domain terms (LiveIndex, STEL, MCP, frecency, co-change) as these are the
  product's own vocabulary, not external implementation choices; success criteria
  are stated as agent-observable outcomes (dependent count visible with zero extra
  calls, doctrine present, ranking order) plus the project's standing verification
  gate (SC-007), which is a binding acceptance condition rather than an
  implementation detail.
- Five [NEEDS CLARIFICATION]-class decisions (footer scope, footer format, compact
  ranking vs new mode, find tool vs STEL-only, 004 sequencing) are intentionally
  pre-resolved with recommended defaults and are confirmed in `/speckit-clarify`
  (see brief §6); they are therefore not left as open markers in the spec.
