Define and accept the contract of the shared quality-check workflow

Add the brief use case UC-005 (Run Project Quality Checks), the actor and use case in UCD-001, stories US-001.09 and US-001.10, and ADR-0005 with the inputs, the pinned tools and what a pass and a fail mean, based on a probe of the runner image. Review and accept them (RC-035 to RC-038) and update TM-001 and the registry. Task: MIL-003#2
2026-10-10 16:06:30 +08:00
parent bf077b1910
commit 385d2fb7cb
10 changed files with 424 additions and 18 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+# Review Record: UC-005 (quality checks)
+
+## Metadata
+| Key | Value |
+| --- | --- |
+| ID | RC-037 |
+| CrossReference | [UC-005], [QC-UC-001] |
+
+## Version History
+| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
+| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | pending |
+
+---
+
+## Artifact Under Review
+
+- Instance reviewed: [UC-005]
+- Checklist used: [QC-UC-001] (Brief format)
+
+## Checklist Results
+
+| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- |
+| 1 | Consists of a single, concise paragraph summarizing only the primary success scenario | Pass | Finding fixed during this review: the paragraph also described the failure output; it now summarizes only the main success scenario (the failure is US-001.10). |
+| 2 | Written as an informal multi-paragraph narrative; may mention some alternate flows without formal structure | N-A | Format is Brief. |
+| 3 | All standard sections are present: actors, preconditions, postconditions, main success scenario, alternative/exception flows | N-A | Format is Brief; actor, stakeholders, pre- and postconditions and the paragraph are present. |
+| 4 | Preconditions and postconditions are explicitly defined | Pass | Both stated. |
+| 5 | Primary actor is explicitly stated | Pass | Software Engineer. |
+| 6 | Stakeholders and their interests are stated | Pass | S02 and S05. |
+| 7 | Main success scenario is written as clear, numbered steps | N-A | Format is Brief. |
+| 8 | Alternative/exception flows correctly reference `<<include>>`/`<<extend>>` use cases where relevant, per UML 2.5.1 | N-A | No alternative flows in a Brief use case. |
+| 9 | Explicit business rules are captured per step where applicable, rather than embedded loosely in narrative text | N-A | No steps in a Brief use case. |
+| 10 | Naming of actors and use case title is consistent with the corresponding Use Case Diagram and User Stories | Pass | Title and actor match UCD-001 and US-001. |
+| 11 | Scope/level (e.g. summary, user-goal, subfunction) is explicitly stated | Pass | Scope and user-goal level. |
+| 12 | Use case is written from the actor's goal perspective, free of UI or implementation detail | Pass | Goal wording; no tool named. |
+
+## Overall Verdict
+
+Go - all applicable criteria pass; the one finding (criterion 1) was fixed during the review. S01 gave the Go in chat on 2026-10-10, standing in for the other reviewers as ADR-0002 records; there is no independent reader.
+
+## Action Items
+
+| Action | Owner | Due |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| None | - | - |
+
+---
+
+[UC-005]: ../../uc-005/uc.md
+[QC-UC-001]: ../../../framework/qc/qc-use-case.md