# API/MCP Interface Requirements Quality Checklist

**Purpose**: Validate API/MCP interface requirements are complete, clear, and consistent before implementation
**Created**: 2026-01-30
**Verified**: 2026-01-30
**Feature**: [spec.md](../spec.md)
**Focus**: MCP tool parameters, responses, error handling
**Depth**: Light (~15 items)
**Timing**: Pre-implementation

## Tool Input Requirements

- [x] CHK001 - Are all tool input parameters documented with types and validation rules? [Completeness, Spec §FR-002]
  - ✓ data-model.md: DeviceConnection, QueryRequest with full Pydantic validation
  - ✓ contracts/paloalto_query.json: JSON Schema with types, min/max
- [x] CHK002 - Are default values specified for optional parameters (port, timeout)? [Clarity, Contract]
  - ✓ port=22, timeout=30 in data-model.md and contracts
- [x] CHK003 - Is the maximum command batch size (10) justified with rationale? [Clarity, Spec §FR-007]
  - ✓ SC-004 specifies 10 commands; practical limit for SSH session efficiency
- [x] CHK004 - Are input validation error messages specified for invalid host/commands? [Gap, Edge Cases]
  - ✓ VALIDATION_ERROR code in data-model.md Error Codes table

## Tool Output Requirements

- [x] CHK005 - Are all response fields documented with types and when they appear? [Completeness, Contract]
  - ✓ QueryResponse, CommandResult models with conditional field rules
  - ✓ contracts/paloalto_query_response.json with full schema
- [x] CHK006 - Is the distinction between connection-level errors and command-level errors clear? [Clarity, data-model.md]
  - ✓ Entity Relationships: QueryResponse.error (connection), CommandResult.error (per-command)
- [x] CHK007 - Are partial success scenarios (some commands fail) response format specified? [Coverage, Spec §US3]
  - ✓ data-model.md Partial Result Handling: output and error can coexist

## Error Handling Requirements

- [x] CHK008 - Are all error codes exhaustively enumerated with mapping to conditions? [Completeness, Contract]
  - ✓ 7 codes: CONNECTION_TIMEOUT, AUTH_FAILED, CONNECTION_REFUSED, COMMAND_FAILED, VALIDATION_ERROR, CONFIG_ERROR, UNKNOWN_ERROR
- [x] CHK009 - Is `CONFIG_ERROR` (missing env vars) included in error codes? [Fixed, Contract updated]
- [x] CHK010 - Are error message content requirements specified (no credentials, actionable)? [Clarity, Spec §FR-006]
  - ✓ FR-006: "without exposing sensitive information"
  - ✓ data-model.md Security Considerations: "Generic messages, no credential details leaked"

## Consistency

- [x] CHK011 - Do contract JSON schemas align with data-model.md Pydantic definitions? [Consistency]
  - ✓ Verified: CommandResult output/error descriptions aligned after analysis fixes
- [x] CHK012 - Are env var names consistent across spec, research, quickstart, data-model? [Consistency]
  - ✓ PALOALTO_USERNAME, PALOALTO_PASSWORD consistent across all docs
- [x] CHK013 - Is the tool name `paloalto_query` consistent across all documents? [Consistency]
  - ✓ contracts/paloalto_query.json, research.md, tasks.md all use `paloalto_query`

## MCP Protocol Compliance

- [x] CHK014 - Is the tool description in contract sufficient for LLM tool discovery? [Clarity, Contract]
  - ✓ Description includes: purpose, read-only nature, credential source, command structure
- [x] CHK015 - Are MCP error response format requirements documented? [Gap, Constitution §I]
  - ✓ ErrorInfo model (code, message) in data-model.md
  - ✓ Error response format example in research.md

## Notes

- All items verified against: spec.md, data-model.md, contracts/, research.md, quickstart.md
- Partial result handling (output+error coexistence) documented after /speckit.analyze fixes
- Ready for /speckit.implement
