ES-102 Readiness Gate¶
Purpose¶
This readiness gate verifies that ES-102 is complete and ES-103 can begin responsibly.
Planning should not begin until requirements and constraints are clear enough to estimate, organize, sequence, and assign work. If ES-103 begins with vague requirements, planning will create fake precision.
Completion standard¶
You are ready to continue when each gate is satisfied or when remaining issues are explicitly recorded with a responsible follow-up path.
Gate 1 — Vision traceability¶
Question
Do the requirements connect back to ES-101 evidence?
Required evidence
docs/vision/
docs/requirements/requirements_overview.md
docs/requirements/traceability_notes.md
Gate 2 — Functional requirements¶
Question
Are required system behaviors clear, bounded, and reviewable?
Required evidence
docs/requirements/functional_requirements.md
Gate 3 — Nonfunctional requirements¶
Question
Are quality, trustworthiness, operational, security, privacy, accessibility, reliability, and governance requirements explicit?
Required evidence
docs/requirements/nonfunctional_requirements.md
Gate 4 — Constraints¶
Question
Are solution constraints visible and specific enough to guide planning and architecture?
Required evidence
docs/requirements/constraints.md
Gate 5 — Use cases or user stories¶
Question
Do use cases or user stories cover major stakeholder goals, meaningful alternate paths, and exception paths?
Required evidence
docs/requirements/use_cases_or_user_stories.md
Gate 6 — Traceability¶
Question
Are major requirements connected to source evidence, constraints, stakeholder needs, use cases, and verification expectations?
Required evidence
docs/requirements/traceability_notes.md
Gate 7 — Review evidence¶
Question
Has the requirements package been reviewed for ambiguity, conflicts, missing constraints, unverifiable claims, AI accountability, and scope alignment?
Required evidence
docs/requirements/requirements_review.md
Gate 8 — AI verification¶
Question
If AI assistance materially shaped requirements, has the team reviewed and accepted responsibility for the final requirements?
Required evidence
AI-use statement, requirements review notes, or requirements readiness summary.
Gate 9 — Transition readiness¶
Question
Does the readiness summary explain why ES-103 can begin?
Required evidence
docs/requirements/requirements_readiness_summary.md
Exit criteria¶
ES-102 is complete when requirements are clear enough to support planning, functional and nonfunctional requirements are documented, constraints are documented, use cases or user stories are documented, traceability exists, review evidence exists, AI involvement has been verified when applicable, and readiness for ES-103 is documented.
If you are not ready¶
Do not continue into ES-103 by hoping planning will clarify requirements. Return to the weakest artifact, revise it, and update traceability and review evidence.
If an issue cannot be resolved immediately, record it in requirements_review.md or requirements_readiness_summary.md with ownership, risk, and expected follow-up.
Planning vague requirements creates fake precision. The schedule may look credible, but the underlying engineering obligations remain unstable.
A readiness gate is not a ceremony. It is a decision about whether the next stage can proceed without inheriting avoidable ambiguity.