# Specification Quality Checklist: Hierarchical Documentation MCP Server
**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
**Created**: November 4, 2025
**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
**Assessment**: Specification focuses on capabilities (hierarchical navigation, OpenAPI parsing, cross-platform compatibility) without mentioning specific frameworks like FastMCP, Python, or TypeScript. All sections describe WHAT and WHY, not HOW.
## 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
**Assessment**:
- Zero clarification markers present - all requirements are concrete
- All 47 functional requirements are testable (use MUST language with specific outcomes)
- Success criteria include specific metrics (e.g., "under 2 seconds", "90% success rate", "10 concurrent users")
- Success criteria avoid implementation terms - use phrases like "AI assistants can retrieve" rather than "API response time"
- 5 user stories with comprehensive acceptance scenarios covering primary, API, cross-platform, multi-source, and security flows
- 10 edge cases identified (empty directories, malformed YAML, large datasets, concurrent queries, etc.)
- Scope bounded by Assumptions section (read-only access, markdown + OpenAPI 3.x only, no multi-tenant)
- Dependencies clearly stated in Assumptions (MCP protocol compliance, file system conventions)
## 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
**Assessment**:
- Each FR maps to user stories and success criteria
- Primary flows covered: basic navigation (P1), API discovery (P1), cross-platform use (P2), multi-source aggregation (P3), security (P2)
- Success criteria define 20 measurable outcomes across performance, functionality, compatibility, usability, scalability, and security
- Specification maintains technology-agnostic language throughout
## Notes
✅ **Specification is complete and ready for next phase (`/speckit.clarify` or `/speckit.plan`)**
All checklist items pass validation. The specification is comprehensive, testable, and maintains proper abstraction from implementation details. No updates required before proceeding to planning phase.
**Key Strengths**:
- Clear prioritization of user stories (P1: core navigation + API, P2: cross-platform + security, P3: advanced aggregation)
- Comprehensive functional requirements organized by capability area (47 total)
- Measurable success criteria with specific numeric targets
- Well-defined edge cases covering common failure modes
- Explicit assumptions document scope boundaries
**Ready for**: `/speckit.plan` to create implementation plan
