ES-104 Readiness Gate¶
Purpose¶
This readiness gate verifies that ES-104 is complete and ES-105 can begin responsibly.
Design should not begin until architecture provides enough structure, responsibility allocation, boundaries, evidence flow, AI control, quality strategy, and recorded rationale.
Completion standard¶
You are ready to continue when each gate is satisfied or when an explicit exception is documented in docs/architecture/architecture_readiness_summary.md.
Gate 1 — Requirements alignment
Question: Does the architecture address the major ES-102 requirements and constraints?
Required evidence: docs/architecture/architecture_overview.md and architecture traceability to docs/requirements/.
Status: ☐ Yes ☐ Needs review
Gate 2 — Planning alignment
Question: Does the architecture account for major ES-103 work packages, risks, dependencies, and planning assumptions?
Required evidence: docs/planning/ and docs/architecture/architecture_overview.md.
Status: ☐ Yes ☐ Needs review
Gate 3 — System context
Question: Are external actors, external systems, organizational boundaries, operating context, and trust relationships clear?
Required evidence: docs/architecture/system_context.md.
Status: ☐ Yes ☐ Needs review
Gate 4 — Component responsibility
Question: Are major components, responsibilities, interfaces, and dependencies defined?
Required evidence: docs/architecture/component_model.md.
Status: ☐ Yes ☐ Needs review
Gate 5 — Data and evidence flow
Question: Are data movement, evidence creation, evidence review, evidence storage, retention, and downstream evidence use visible?
Required evidence: docs/architecture/data_and_evidence_flow.md.
Status: ☐ Yes ☐ Needs review
Gate 6 — Quality attributes
Question: Does the architecture explain how major quality requirements and trustworthiness expectations will be supported?
Required evidence: docs/architecture/quality_attribute_strategy.md.
Status: ☐ Yes ☐ Needs review
Gate 7 — AI control
Question: If AI is used, are AI boundaries, inputs, outputs, human review, evidence, fallback behavior, and prohibitions defined?
Required evidence: docs/architecture/ai_control_architecture.md.
Status: ☐ Yes ☐ Not applicable ☐ Needs review
Gate 8 — Architecture decisions
Question: Are major architecture decisions, rationale, consequences, and accepted tradeoffs recorded?
Required evidence: docs/architecture/architecture_decision_records.md.
Status: ☐ Yes ☐ Needs review
Gate 9 — Review evidence
Question: Has the architecture been reviewed for requirements coverage, boundaries, quality support, evidence preservation, AI control, operational feasibility, and governance visibility?
Required evidence: docs/architecture/architecture_review.md.
Status: ☐ Yes ☐ Needs review
Gate 10 — Transition readiness
Question: Does the readiness summary explain why ES-105 can begin and what design work must account for?
Required evidence: docs/architecture/architecture_readiness_summary.md.
Status: ☐ Yes ☐ Needs review
Exit criteria¶
ES-104 is complete when architecture evidence is sufficient for design work to begin responsibly. The system structure should be clear enough that ES-105 does not have to rediscover major responsibilities, boundaries, evidence paths, AI controls, quality strategies, or architectural tradeoffs.
If you are not ready¶
Do not proceed to ES-105 if the architecture lacks evidence preservation, trust boundaries, access control, AI boundaries, component responsibility, or recorded decision rationale.
Return to the relevant ES-104 activity, correct the architecture evidence, and update the readiness summary.
Do not proceed to design if architecture has not addressed evidence preservation, access control, and AI boundaries. Those concerns cannot be reliably patched in later.
The readiness gate protects ES-105 from inherited ambiguity. A weak architecture stage creates design work that appears detailed but rests on unstable structure.