# Requirements Quality Checklist: Implementation Readiness

**Type**: Implementation Readiness Validation
**Focus**: Comprehensive Coverage
**Depth**: Standard
**Audience**: Implementation Team
**Created**: 2026-02-18
**Spec**: [001-my-legacy-workload](../spec.md)
**Plan**: [plan.md](../plan.md)

**Purpose**: Validate that requirements provide complete, clear, and consistent guidance for Terraform implementation using Azure Verified Modules. This checklist tests requirement quality, NOT implementation correctness.

---

## Requirement Completeness

### Infrastructure Resources

- [ ] CHK001 - Are AVM module references specified for all required Azure resources? [Completeness, Spec Infrastructure Requirements]
- [ ] CHK002 - Are resource naming requirements defined with specific patterns and constraints? [Completeness, Spec IC-003, IC-010]
- [ ] CHK003 - Are all resource configuration requirements specified (SKUs, tiers, capacity)? [Completeness, Spec FR-001 through FR-025]
- [ ] CHK004 - Are provider version constraints documented for azurerm and random providers? [Completeness, Plan Technical Context]
- [ ] CHK005 - Are all 12 Azure resources accounted for in both spec and plan? [Completeness, Cross-reference]

### Terraform-Specific Requirements

- [ ] CHK006 - Are requirements defined for all 5 Terraform files (terraform.tf, variables.tf, main.tf, outputs.tf, tfvars)? [Completeness, Spec FR-021, FR-022]
- [ ] CHK007 - Are state backend configuration requirements completely specified? [Completeness, Spec IC-002, State Management section]
- [ ] CHK008 - Are variable definition requirements clear for all configurable values? [Completeness, Spec FR-021]
- [ ] CHK009 - Are output requirements defined for infrastructure consumption by external consumers? [Gap, Plan outputs.tf section]
- [ ] CHK010 - Are Terraform validation workflow steps documented? [Completeness, Plan Constitution Principle V]

### Network Architecture

- [ ] CHK011 - Are VNet address space and subnet CIDR allocations completely specified? [Completeness, Spec IC-008, Clarifications]
- [ ] CHK012 - Are NSG rule requirements defined for all 3 subnets with source/destination specificity? [Completeness, Spec SEC-004 through SEC-007]
- [ ] CHK013 - Are private endpoint connectivity requirements fully documented? [Completeness, Spec FR-014, SEC-009, SEC-014]
- [ ] CHK014 - Are NAT Gateway association requirements clear (which subnets)? [Completeness, Spec FR-012]

### Security & Authentication

- [ ] CHK015 - Are password generation requirements specified with complexity constraints? [Completeness, Spec FR-006, SEC-002]
- [ ] CHK016 - Is the Key Vault secret storage and VM password reference flow clearly documented? [Completeness, Plan Password Flow section]
- [ ] CHK017 - Are managed identity requirements specified for all applicable resources? [Completeness, Spec SEC-001, SEC-003]
- [ ] CHK018 - Are diagnostic logging requirements defined for all monitored resources? [Completeness, Spec SEC-010]
- [ ] CHK019 - Are resource lock requirements specified with lock type and target resources? [Completeness, Spec SEC-011]

### Monitoring & Alerts

- [ ] CHK020 - Are alert condition thresholds quantified for all 3 critical alerts? [Completeness, Spec FR-020, Clarifications]
- [ ] CHK021 - Are Log Analytics retention requirements specified? [Completeness, Spec Clarifications - 180 days]
- [ ] CHK022 - Are alert action group requirements defined (notification method)? [Completeness, Spec Clarifications - Portal notifications]

---

## Requirement Clarity

### Ambiguity Resolution

- [ ] CHK023 - Is "Standard_D2s_v3" VM size explicitly stated (not "2 core, 8GB" generically)? [Clarity, Spec FR-001, Clarifications]
- [ ] CHK024 - Is "Standard HDD" tier explicitly specified vs ambiguous "standard storage"? [Clarity, Spec FR-002, FR-003, IC-007]
- [ ] CHK025 - Is "10.0.0.0/24" VNet address space quantified vs vague "small VNet"? [Clarity, Spec IC-008, Clarifications]
- [ ] CHK026 - Is "180 days" Log Analytics retention quantified vs vague "extended retention"? [Clarity, Spec Clarifications]
- [ ] CHK027 - Is "1TB" file share quota quantified vs vague "large capacity"? [Clarity, Spec Clarifications]

### Terraform-Specific Clarity

- [ ] CHK028 - Are AVM module variable names and structures referenced from module documentation? [Clarity, Spec FR-025]
- [ ] CHK029 - Is the random_password resource explicitly specified vs generic "password generator"? [Clarity, Plan main.tf section]
- [ ] CHK030 - Are AVM module "interfaces" (diagnostic_settings, lock, secrets) explicitly documented? [Clarity, Plan Constitution Principle III]
- [ ] CHK031 - Is "terraform.tfvars" explicit vs ambiguous "variable file"? [Clarity, Spec FR-021]

### Constraint Precision

- [ ] CHK032 - Is "15 characters or fewer" computer name limit quantified? [Clarity, Spec FR-004, IC-010]
- [ ] CHK033 - Is "westus3" region explicitly specified (not "US West" or "West US 3")? [Clarity, Spec IC-001]
- [ ] CHK034 - Is "vmadmin" username exact string specified? [Clarity, Spec FR-005]
- [ ] CHK035 - Are availability zone options explicitly defined as "1, 2, or 3 - NEVER -1"? [Clarity, Spec FR-023, IC-006]

---

## Requirement Consistency

### Cross-Reference Validation

- [ ] CHK036 - Do VNet subnet CIDRs in IC-008 match the clarifications section allocations? [Consistency, Cross-check IC-008 vs Clarifications]
- [ ] CHK037 - Is VM size requirement (FR-001) consistent across spec, user stories, and plan? [Consistency, FR-001, US1, Plan]
- [ ] CHK038 - Are file share capacity requirements consistent (1TB) across FR-013 and clarifications? [Consistency]
- [ ] CHK039 - Are NSG rule requirements consistent with subnet design (3 NSGs for 3 subnets)? [Consistency, FR-008, IC-008]
- [ ] CHK040 - Is Key Vault secret name requirement consistent (configurable via tfvars)? [Consistency, FR-016, SEC-002]

### Security Alignment

- [ ] CHK041 - Do NSG requirements align with zero-trust principles (deny-by-default in SEC-004)? [Consistency, SEC-004 through SEC-007]
- [ ] CHK042 - Are managed identity requirements consistent with "no credentials in code" requirement? [Consistency, SEC-001, SEC-003]
- [ ] CHK043 - Are private endpoint requirements consistent with "no public access" requirements? [Consistency, FR-014, SEC-009]

### Constitution Alignment

- [ ] CHK044 - Do spec requirements align with constitution Principle II (AVM-only)? [Consistency, Infrastructure Requirements vs Constitution]
- [ ] CHK045 - Do security requirements align with constitution Principle III (security controls)? [Consistency, SEC requirements vs Constitution]
- [ ] CHK046 - Do deployment requirements align with constitution Principle V (validation workflow)? [Consistency, SC-009 vs Constitution]

---

## Acceptance Criteria Quality

### Measurability

- [ ] CHK047 - Can "infrastructure deployment within 30 minutes" be objectively measured? [Measurability, SC-001]
- [ ] CHK048 - Can "RDP connection within 2 minutes" be objectively timed? [Measurability, SC-002]
- [ ] CHK049 - Can "diagnostic logs appear within 15 minutes" be objectively verified? [Measurability, SC-007]
- [ ] CHK050 - Can "total cost under $200/month" be objectively calculated? [Measurability, SC-013]

### Testability

- [ ] CHK051 - Are acceptance criteria testable with concrete validation steps? [Testability, All SC items]
- [ ] CHK052 - Are user story test scenarios written in Given/When/Then format? [Testability, User Stories 1-4]
- [ ] CHK053 - Do edge cases include expected behavior or just failure scenarios? [Testability, Edge Cases section]

### Completeness of Success Criteria

- [ ] CHK054 - Are success criteria defined for all 4 user stories? [Completeness, SC items map to US1-US4]
- [ ] CHK055 - Are success criteria defined for Terraform code quality (fmt, validate, tfsec)? [Completeness, SC-009]
- [ ] CHK056 - Are success criteria defined for security controls (no public IP, logs flowing)? [Completeness, SC-006, SC-007, SC-008]

---

## Scenario Coverage

### Primary Scenario Validation

- [ ] CHK057 - Are requirements defined for initial Terraform deployment (terraform apply)? [Coverage, Primary Flow]
- [ ] CHK058 - Are requirements defined for RDP access via Bastion post-deployment? [Coverage, US2]
- [ ] CHK059 - Are requirements defined for file share access via private endpoint? [Coverage, US3]
- [ ] CHK060 - Are requirements defined for internet access via NAT Gateway? [Coverage, US4]

### Alternate Scenario Coverage

- [ ] CHK061 - Are requirements defined for Terraform state backend configuration? [Coverage, Alternate Flow]
- [ ] CHK062 - Are requirements defined for variable customization via tfvars? [Coverage, FR-021]
- [ ] CHK063 - Are requirements defined for manual post-deployment file share mounting? [Coverage, Clarifications]

### Exception/Error Scenario Coverage

- [ ] CHK064 - Are requirements defined for handling VM naming exceeding 15 chars? [Coverage, Edge Cases]
- [ ] CHK065 - Are requirements defined for storage account name conflicts? [Coverage, Edge Cases]
- [ ] CHK066 - Are requirements defined for CIDR allocation failures? [Coverage, Edge Cases]
- [ ] CHK067 - Are requirements defined for partial deployment failures? [Coverage, Clarifications - incremental redeployment]
- [ ] CHK068 - Are requirements defined for Key Vault secret name conflicts? [Coverage, Edge Cases]

### Recovery Scenario Coverage

- [ ] CHK069 - Are requirements defined for redeploying after fixing errors? [Coverage, Clarifications - keep resources, fix, redeploy]
- [ ] CHK070 - Is the "no rollback/delete" approach clearly specified for failed deployments? [Coverage, Clarifications]

---

## Edge Case Coverage

### Boundary Conditions

- [ ] CHK071 - Is the 15-character NetBIOSlimit explicitly tested in edge cases? [Edge Case, IC-010, Edge Cases section]
- [ ] CHK072 - Are availability zone unavailability scenarios addressed? [Edge Case, Edge Cases section]
- [ ] CHK073 - Are VNet address space exhaustion scenarios addressed? [Edge Case, Edge Cases section]
- [ ] CHK074 - Are global naming conflicts (Key Vault, Storage Account) addressed? [Edge Case, Edge Cases section]

### Configuration Edge Cases

- [ ] CHK075 - Are NSG rule conflict scenarios addressed? [Edge Case, Edge Cases section]
- [ ] CHK076 - Are private DNS resolution failure scenarios addressed? [Edge Case, Edge Cases section]
- [ ] CHK077 - Are disk attachment failure scenarios addressed? [Edge Case, Edge Cases section]

---

## Non-Functional Requirements

### Performance Requirements

- [ ] CHK078 - Are deployment time expectations quantified (30 minutes in SC-001)? [NFR, SC-001]
- [ ] CHK079 - Are connection time expectations quantified (2 minutes RDP in SC-002)? [NFR, SC-002]
- [ ] CHK080 - Are log ingestion timeframes quantified (15 minutes in SC-007)? [NFR, SC-007]
- [ ] CHK081 - Is "Standard HDD is adequate" assumption documented? [NFR, Assumption A-009]

### Cost Requirements

- [ ] CHK082 - Is the cost constraint quantified (<$200/month)? [NFR, SC-013]
- [ ] CHK083 - Are cost optimization requirements specified (HDD vs SSD)? [NFR, IC-007]

### Security Requirements (Non-Functional)

- [ ] CHK084 - Are all security requirements explicitly listed in SEC section? [NFR, SEC-001 through SEC-014]
- [ ] CHK085 - Are encryption requirements specified (at-rest with Microsoft keys)? [NFR, SEC-013]
- [ ] CHK086 - Are soft-delete and purge protection requirements specified? [NFR, SEC-012]

### Compliance Requirements

- [ ] CHK087 - Are log retention requirements specified (180 days)? [NFR, Clarifications]
- [ ] CHK088 - Are resource lock requirements specified for compliance-critical resources? [NFR, SEC-011]

---

## Dependencies & Assumptions

### External Dependencies

- [ ] CHK089 - Are all Terraform/Azure CLI version dependencies documented? [Dependency, D-001, D-002]
- [ ] CHK090 - Is the pre-existing state backend dependency documented? [Dependency, D-005, A-002]
- [ ] CHK091 - Are AVM module registry dependencies documented? [Dependency, D-003]
- [ ] CHK092 - Are deployment permission dependencies documented? [Dependency, A-003]

### Assumption Validation

- [ ] CHK093 - Are quota assumptions documented (VM size, Bastion, NAT Gateway)? [Assumption, A-001]
- [ ] CHK094 - Are availability zone support assumptions documented? [Assumption, A-005]
- [ ] CHK095 - Are naming conflict assumptions documented? [Assumption, A-004]
- [ ] CHK096 - Is the "no domain join" assumption explicitly stated? [Assumption, A-014]
- [ ] CHK097 - Is the "no ExpressRoute/VPN" assumption explicitly stated? [Assumption, A-013]

### Validated Constraints

- [ ] CHK098 - Are all infrastructure constraints (IC-001 through IC-010) fully documented? [Dependency, Infrastructure Constraints section]
- [ ] CHK099 - Are Terraform provider version constraints specified? [Dependency, Plan Technical Context]

---

## Ambiguities & Conflicts

### Potential Ambiguities

- [ ] CHK100 - Is "Bastion SKU (Basic or Standard)" resolved to specific choice? [Ambiguity, Data Model section]
- [ ] CHK101 - Is "RBAC vs Access Policies" for Key Vault resolved to specific choice? [Ambiguity, Data Model section]
- [ ] CHK102 - Is "Action Group notification target" specified beyond "email or webhook"? [Ambiguity, Assumption A-011]
- [ ] CHK103 - Are AVM module version selection criteria specified (always latest stable)? [Ambiguity, Plan Technical Context note]

### Potential Conflicts

- [ ] CHK104 - Do VNet subnet CIDRs in spec match Clarifications section? [Conflict Check, IC-008 vs Clarifications]
- [ ] CHK105 - Does "no backup" decision conflict with any compliance requirements? [Conflict Check, Clarifications vs OS-006]
- [ ] CHK106 - Does "Standard HDD" choice conflict with performance expectations? [Conflict Check, IC-007, A-009]

### Specification Gaps

- [ ] CHK107 - Are requirements missing for NSG flow log configuration? [Gap, SEC-014 mentions flow logs]
- [ ] CHK108 - Are requirements missing for custom DNS configuration? [Gap, Private endpoint DNS]
- [ ] CHK109 - Are requirements missing for alert action group email address? [Gap, Clarifications mention portal only]
- [ ] CHK110 - Are requirements missing for VM OS disk size specification? [Gap, FR-002 mentions standard HDD but not size]

---

## Traceability & Documentation

### Requirement Traceability

- [ ] CHK111 - Are all functional requirements (FR-001 through FR-025) traceable to user stories? [Traceability]
- [ ] CHK112 - Are all security requirements (SEC-001 through SEC-014) traceable to constitution? [Traceability]
- [ ] CHK113 - Are all infrastructure constraints (IC-001 through IC-010) traceable to constitution or clarifications? [Traceability]
- [ ] CHK114 - Are all success criteria (SC-001 through SC-013) traceable to user stories? [Traceability]

### Clarification Documentation

- [ ] CHK115 - Are all clarification session Q&A pairs documented with decisions? [Documentation, Clarifications section]
- [ ] CHK116 - Are clarification decisions integrated into requirements (not just listed)? [Documentation, Requirements reflect clarifications]
- [ ] CHK117 - Are out-of-scope items explicitly documented? [Documentation, Out of Scope section]

### Plan-Spec Alignment

- [ ] CHK118 - Does the plan reference all 25 functional requirements? [Traceability, Plan addresses all FRs]
- [ ] CHK119 - Does the plan reference all 14 security requirements? [Traceability, Plan addresses all SECs]
- [ ] CHK120 - Does the plan reference all 10 infrastructure constraints? [Traceability, Plan addresses all ICs]

---

## Summary

**Total Checklist Items**: 120
**Expected Completion Time**: 2-3 hours for comprehensive review
**Target Audience**: Implementation team preparing to build Terraform code

**Usage Instructions**:
1. Review each checklist item sequentially
2. Mark ✅ for satisfied requirements, ❌ for gaps/issues
3. Document findings in adjacent notes column (if needed)
4. Escalate any ❌ items to spec author for clarification/resolution
5. Re-validate after spec updates

**Pass Criteria**:
- ≥95% items marked ✅ (114+ passing items)
- Zero CRITICAL gaps (ambiguities in security, naming, or Terraform structure)
- All conflicts resolved before implementation begins

**Next Steps After Completion**:
- If ≥95% pass: Proceed to implementation (terraform code generation)
- If <95% pass: Update spec.md to address gaps, then re-run checklist
- Archive this checklist with implementation for audit trail
