use-workflow-spec-validation

Workflow: SOW/Spec Validation

ID System

Document	Prefix	Links To
SOW	AC-N	-
Spec	FR-NNN	Implements: AC-N
Spec	T-NNN	FR: FR-NNN
Spec	NFR-NNN	Validates: AC-N
Spec	AS-NNN	-

Priority levels (P0/P1/P2) and the Gate rule are defined by the reviewer-spec agent. Each check below assigns priority per finding type.

Checks

Run P0-producing checks (1-3) first. If any P0 is raised, downstream checks may be skipped. The gate will already be NotReady.

1. AC→FR Traceability [P0 candidate]

Each AC-N must have ≥1 FR with Implements: AC-N.

Finding	Priority
AC has no FR implementing it	P0
Orphan FR implements non-existent AC	P1

2. FR→Test Coverage [P0 candidate]

Each FR-NNN must have ≥1 T-NNN with matching FR reference.

Finding	Priority
FR has no test scenario	P0
Test references non-existent FR	P1

3. Traceability Matrix Integrity [P0 candidate]

Column	Must exist in
AC	SOW Acceptance Criteria
FR	Spec Functional Req table
Test	Spec Test Scenarios
NFR	Spec NFR table

Finding	Priority
Matrix row references non-existent ID	P0
Matrix row missing expected column	P1

4. Scope↔Implementation [P1 candidate]

SOW In-Scope targets must appear in Spec phases. Extra files → P2.

5. Contradiction Detection [P0/P1 candidate]

Cross-check SOW↔Spec for technology mismatches, numeric conflicts.

Finding	Priority
SOW and Spec specify conflicting tech	P0
SOW and Spec specify conflicting numerics	P0
Terminology used inconsistently	P1

6. Ambiguous Expressions [P0 candidate]

Language	Patterns
JA	適切に、できる限り、なるべく、ある程度、検討する、考慮する、予定、高速に(数値なし)
EN	appropriately, as much as possible, reasonable, adequate, TBD, fast(no metric)

Finding	Priority
Ambiguous term inside a SHALL clause (FR)	P0
Ambiguous term in NFR Target	P0
Ambiguous term elsewhere	P1

7. Terminology Consistency [P1 candidate]

Same concept must use same term across documents.

Finding	Priority
Synonym mixing (user/member) in same role	P1
Abbreviation mixing (DB/database)	P2

8. Column Completeness [P0/P1/P2 candidate]

Finding	Priority
AC Observable signal column empty (SOW)	P0
In Scope Observable outcome column empty (SOW)	P1
NFR Rationale column empty	P1
Assumption Impact-if-broken column empty	P1
Dependency Purpose column empty	P2

Risks column rules (Probability/Mitigation × Impact): delegated to reviewer-spec Risks Completeness section.

9. Phase Dependency [P1 candidate]

Implementation table must declare Depends. Empty Depends blocks parallel scheduling judgment.

Finding	Priority
Phase Depends column empty	P1

10. YAGNI Compliance [P2]

With YAGNI Checklist: verify Spec excludes checked items. Flag over-engineering.

11. Scope Integrity [P0/P1 candidate]

SOW In Scope and Out of Scope must not overlap. ACs must target only In Scope.

Finding	Priority
In Scope target also listed in Out of Scope	P0
AC references a target absent from In Scope	P1
Out of Scope lacks Why not justification	P2

Output

Markdown appended to reviewer findings:

## Consistency Findings

| ID      | Priority | Check      | Location                         | CC Impact                        | Fix                                  |
| ------- | -------- | ---------- | -------------------------------- | -------------------------------- | ------------------------------------ |
| CON-001 | P0/P1/P2 | check name | sow.md:section / spec.md:section | What CC will do when it reads this | Concrete rewrite, not "clarify this" |

Finding format and Gate contribution follow the reviewer-spec agent.