# Specification Quality Checklist: Async Query Service Fix

**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 Assessment
✅ **PASS** - Specification focuses on user scenarios and business value without exposing implementation details
✅ **PASS** - Written in language accessible to non-technical stakeholders
✅ **PASS** - All mandatory sections (User Scenarios, Requirements, Success Criteria) are complete

### Requirement Completeness Assessment
✅ **PASS** - All functional requirements (FR-001 through FR-010) are testable and unambiguous
✅ **PASS** - Non-functional requirements (NFR-001 through NFR-005) provide measurable criteria
✅ **PASS** - Success criteria (SC-001 through SC-007) are quantifiable and technology-agnostic
✅ **PASS** - Edge cases are comprehensively identified
✅ **PASS** - Dependencies and assumptions are clearly documented

### Feature Readiness Assessment
✅ **PASS** - User stories are prioritized (P1, P2, P3) with clear value propositions
✅ **PASS** - Acceptance scenarios follow Given-When-Then format
✅ **PASS** - Success criteria focus on user outcomes rather than system internals
✅ **PASS** - Technical architecture overview maintains appropriate abstraction level

## Quality Metrics

| Metric | Target | Actual | Status |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|
| Functional Requirements | ≥5 | 10 | ✅ |
| Non-Functional Requirements | ≥3 | 5 | ✅ |
| Success Criteria | ≥5 | 7 | ✅ |
| User Stories | ≥2 | 3 | ✅ |
| Edge Cases | ≥3 | 4 | ✅ |
| [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers | 0 | 0 | ✅ |

## Notes

- **Specification Quality**: All validation criteria have been met successfully
- **Readiness Status**: ✅ READY for `/speckit.clarify` or `/speckit.plan`
- **Key Strengths**: 
  - Comprehensive coverage of critical bug fix requirements
  - Clear prioritization of user scenarios
  - Measurable success criteria with specific performance targets
  - Well-defined technical architecture without implementation details
- **Recommendations**: 
  - Proceed to planning phase to define implementation tasks
  - Consider creating detailed test scenarios during clarify phase
  - Monitor performance metrics during implementation to validate success criteria