| 1 |
Consists of a single, concise paragraph summarizing only the primary success scenario |
N-A |
Format is Fully Dressed. |
| 2 |
Written as an informal multi-paragraph narrative; may mention some alternate flows without formal structure |
N-A |
Format is Fully Dressed. |
| 3 |
All standard sections are present: actors, preconditions, postconditions, main success scenario, alternative/exception flows |
Pass |
Scope, level, primary actor, stakeholders, preconditions, postconditions, main scenario and extensions are present. |
| 4 |
Preconditions and postconditions are explicitly defined |
Pass |
Preconditions and postconditions are defined. |
| 5 |
Primary actor is explicitly stated |
Pass |
Primary actor: Maintainer. |
| 6 |
Stakeholders and their interests are stated |
Pass |
S01, S02 and S03 with their interests. |
| 7 |
Main success scenario is written as clear, numbered steps |
Pass |
Ten numbered steps; optional steps 5 and 7 are marked. |
| 8 |
Alternative/exception flows correctly reference <<include>>/<<extend>> use cases where relevant, per UML 2.5.1 |
N-A |
No include or extend relationships are used. |
| 9 |
Explicit business rules are captured per step where applicable, rather than embedded loosely in narrative text |
Pass |
Business rules table per step. |
| 10 |
Naming of actors and use case title is consistent with the corresponding Use Case Diagram and User Stories |
Pass |
Title and actor match US-001 and UCD-001 (re-checked after UCD-001 was created). |
| 11 |
Scope/level (e.g. summary, user-goal, subfunction) is explicitly stated |
Pass |
Scope RepoFoundry, level user-goal. |
| 12 |
Use case is written from the actor's goal perspective, free of UI or implementation detail |
Pass |
Written from the Maintainer's goal. A reference to a hooks setting option was reworded during this review; HTTPS or SSH, the submodule and the AGPL license remain because they are the Maintainer's stated requirements. |
