39 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
39 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
# Requirements Quality Checklist: WebSocket Connection
|
|
|
|
## Meta
|
|
- **Feature**: Fix UI Styling, WebSocket Port Mismatch, and URL Validation
|
|
- **Domain**: WebSocket / Real-time Logs
|
|
- **Focus**: Connection Lifecycle & Environment Requirements
|
|
- **Depth**: Lightweight Sanity
|
|
- **Created**: 2025-12-20
|
|
|
|
## Requirement Completeness
|
|
- [x] CHK001 - Are the environment-specific URL construction rules (e.g., `ws` vs `wss`) explicitly defined for different deployment targets? [Gap]
|
|
- [x] CHK002 - Is the fallback mechanism for `PUBLIC_WS_URL` documented for production environments where port 8000 might be blocked? [Completeness, Spec §FR-002]
|
|
- [x] CHK003 - Are requirements defined for handling WebSocket authentication/authorization if the API becomes protected? [Gap - Out of scope for this fix, handled by global ADFS requirement]
|
|
|
|
## Requirement Clarity
|
|
- [x] CHK004 - Is the "exponential backoff" strategy quantified with specific initial delays, multipliers, and maximum retry counts? [Clarity, Spec §Clarifications]
|
|
- [x] CHK005 - Are the visual feedback requirements for connection failure (toast vs status indicator) clearly prioritized or combined? [Clarity, Spec §FR-004]
|
|
- [x] CHK006 - Is the term "real-time" quantified with a maximum latency threshold for log delivery? [Clarity, Spec §SC-004]
|
|
|
|
## Requirement Consistency
|
|
- [x] CHK007 - Does the WebSocket endpoint path in the contract (`/ws/logs/{id}`) align with the implementation plan and frontend routing? [Conflict, Contract §Endpoint]
|
|
- [x] CHK008 - Are the error handling requirements in the contract consistent with the visual feedback requirements in the spec? [Consistency, Contract §Error Handling]
|
|
|
|
## Acceptance Criteria Quality
|
|
- [x] CHK009 - Can the "100% success rate" in development be objectively measured and verified across different OS/browsers? [Measurability, Spec §SC-002]
|
|
- [x] CHK010 - Is there a measurable criterion for "successful reconnection" (e.g., within X attempts or Y seconds)? [Gap - Defined in Clarifications]
|
|
|
|
## Scenario Coverage
|
|
- [x] CHK011 - Are requirements specified for the "Partial Log" scenario (e.g., connection established but no data received)? [Coverage, Gap]
|
|
- [x] CHK012 - Does the spec define the behavior when a task completes while the WebSocket is still active? [Coverage, Gap]
|
|
|
|
## Edge Case Coverage
|
|
- [x] CHK013 - Does the spec define the behavior when the backend port (8000) is unavailable or occupied by another process? [Edge Case, Spec §FR-002]
|
|
- [x] CHK014 - Are requirements defined for handling browser-side WebSocket limits (e.g., maximum concurrent connections)? [Edge Case, Gap - Handled by single-connection-per-task design]
|
|
|
|
## Non-Functional Requirements
|
|
- [x] CHK015 - Are there requirements for WebSocket connection stability under high network jitter or packet loss? [Gap - Handled by exponential backoff]
|
|
- [x] CHK016 - Is the impact of long-lived WebSocket connections on server resources (memory/CPU) addressed? [Gap - Handled by graceful closing on task completion]
|