Hostaway MCP Server

# Specification Quality Checklist: Hostaway MCP Server with Authentication **Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning **Created**: 2025-10-12 **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 ✅ - **No implementation details**: Spec focuses on OAuth authentication (what), not FastAPI or httpx (how) - **User value focus**: All stories emphasize property manager time savings and AI assistant capabilities - **Non-technical language**: Uses property management domain terms, not technical jargon - **Mandatory sections**: User Scenarios, Requirements, Success Criteria all complete ### Requirement Completeness ✅ - **No clarification markers**: All requirements specified with informed defaults (OAuth method, rate limits, token validity) - **Testable requirements**: Each FR has verifiable outcomes (e.g., FR-001 "obtain OAuth access tokens" is testable) - **Measurable success criteria**: SC-001 through SC-014 all include specific metrics (5 seconds, 100 concurrent, 99%, etc.) - **Technology-agnostic success criteria**: Uses "AI agents", "property managers", "system" - no framework mentions - **Acceptance scenarios**: All 5 user stories have Given/When/Then scenarios - **Edge cases**: 7 edge cases identified (token expiration, rate limits, API unavailability, etc.) - **Scope boundaries**: Clear In/Out scope sections define what's included and excluded - **Dependencies**: External (Hostaway API) and internal (credentials, network) dependencies listed - **Assumptions**: 10 assumptions documented (OAuth method, token validity, account access, etc.) ### Feature Readiness ✅ - **FR acceptance criteria**: Each of 15 functional requirements maps to user scenarios and success criteria - **User scenario coverage**: 5 prioritized stories cover authentication (P1), property access (P1), bookings (P2), communication (P2), financials (P3) - **Measurable outcomes**: 14 success criteria define specific, verifiable metrics - **No implementation leakage**: Spec avoids mentioning FastAPI, Pydantic, httpx, or Python - stays at business/user level ## Notes **Specification Quality**: EXCELLENT All checklist items pass validation. The specification is: - Complete and unambiguous - Free from implementation details - Focused on user value and measurable outcomes - Ready for planning phase **Strengths**: 1. Comprehensive user scenarios with clear prioritization (P1-P3) 2. Well-defined functional requirements (15 total, all testable) 3. Measurable success criteria mixing technical metrics (response time, concurrency) with business value (time savings, accuracy) 4. Thorough edge case analysis covering authentication, rate limits, and failure modes 5. Clear scope boundaries preventing scope creep 6. Strong security considerations section addressing credential storage, PII, and audit logging **Ready for**: `/speckit.plan` (implementation planning) or `/speckit.clarify` (if additional stakeholder input desired) **Recommendation**: Proceed directly to `/speckit.plan` - no clarifications needed, all requirements clear and complete.