feat(ci): add markdownlint-cli2 for consistent markdown formatting

Add automated markdown linting to ensure consistent formatting across
all markdown files in the repository.

Changes:
- Add .markdownlint-cli2.jsonc configuration
- Create .github/workflows/lint.yml for CI/CD integration
- Fix all 908 existing markdown errors across 27 files
- Enforce ATX-style headings and asterisk emphasis
- Set consistent 2-space list indentation

This prevents markdown errors after project initialization and
maintains high documentation quality standards.
This commit is contained in:
Benjamin Pahl
2025-10-20 00:49:15 +02:00
parent ea90d02c41
commit 33a07969c3
28 changed files with 247 additions and 174 deletions

View File

@@ -10,12 +10,14 @@ scripts:
**CRITICAL CONCEPT**: Checklists are **UNIT TESTS FOR REQUIREMENTS WRITING** - they validate the quality, clarity, and completeness of requirements in a given domain.
**NOT for verification/testing**:
- ❌ NOT "Verify the button clicks correctly"
- ❌ NOT "Test error handling works"
- ❌ NOT "Confirm the API returns 200"
- ❌ NOT checking if code/implementation matches the spec
**FOR requirements quality validation**:
- ✅ "Are visual hierarchy requirements defined for all card types?" (completeness)
- ✅ "Is 'prominent display' quantified with specific sizing/positioning?" (clarity)
- ✅ "Are hover state requirements consistent across all interactive elements?" (consistency)
@@ -80,7 +82,7 @@ You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
- spec.md: Feature requirements and scope
- plan.md (if exists): Technical details, dependencies
- tasks.md (if exists): Implementation tasks
**Context Loading Strategy**:
- Load only necessary portions relevant to active focus areas (avoid full-file dumping)
- Prefer summarizing long sections into concise scenario/requirement bullets
@@ -91,7 +93,7 @@ You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
- Create `FEATURE_DIR/checklists/` directory if it doesn't exist
- Generate unique checklist filename:
- Use short, descriptive name based on domain (e.g., `ux.md`, `api.md`, `security.md`)
- Format: `[domain].md`
- Format: `[domain].md`
- If file exists, append to existing file
- Number items sequentially starting from CHK001
- Each `/speckit.checklist` run creates a NEW file (never overwrites existing checklists)
@@ -103,7 +105,7 @@ You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
- **Consistency**: Do requirements align with each other?
- **Measurability**: Can requirements be objectively verified?
- **Coverage**: Are all scenarios/edge cases addressed?
**Category Structure** - Group items by requirement quality dimensions:
- **Requirement Completeness** (Are all necessary requirements documented?)
- **Requirement Clarity** (Are requirements specific and unambiguous?)
@@ -114,14 +116,14 @@ You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
- **Non-Functional Requirements** (Performance, Security, Accessibility, etc. - are they specified?)
- **Dependencies & Assumptions** (Are they documented and validated?)
- **Ambiguities & Conflicts** (What needs clarification?)
**HOW TO WRITE CHECKLIST ITEMS - "Unit Tests for English"**:
**WRONG** (Testing implementation):
- "Verify landing page displays 3 episode cards"
- "Test hover states work on desktop"
- "Confirm logo click navigates home"
**CORRECT** (Testing requirements quality):
- "Are the exact number and layout of featured episodes specified?" [Completeness]
- "Is 'prominent display' quantified with specific sizing/positioning?" [Clarity]
@@ -130,7 +132,7 @@ You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
- "Is the fallback behavior specified when logo image fails to load?" [Edge Cases]
- "Are loading states defined for asynchronous episode data?" [Completeness]
- "Does the spec define visual hierarchy for competing UI elements?" [Clarity]
**ITEM STRUCTURE**:
Each item should follow this pattern:
- Question format asking about requirement quality
@@ -138,28 +140,28 @@ You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
- Include quality dimension in brackets [Completeness/Clarity/Consistency/etc.]
- Reference spec section `[Spec §X.Y]` when checking existing requirements
- Use `[Gap]` marker when checking for missing requirements
**EXAMPLES BY QUALITY DIMENSION**:
Completeness:
- "Are error handling requirements defined for all API failure modes? [Gap]"
- "Are accessibility requirements specified for all interactive elements? [Completeness]"
- "Are mobile breakpoint requirements defined for responsive layouts? [Gap]"
Clarity:
- "Is 'fast loading' quantified with specific timing thresholds? [Clarity, Spec §NFR-2]"
- "Are 'related episodes' selection criteria explicitly defined? [Clarity, Spec §FR-5]"
- "Is 'prominent' defined with measurable visual properties? [Ambiguity, Spec §FR-4]"
Consistency:
- "Do navigation requirements align across all pages? [Consistency, Spec §FR-10]"
- "Are card component requirements consistent between landing and detail pages? [Consistency]"
Coverage:
- "Are requirements defined for zero-state scenarios (no episodes)? [Coverage, Edge Case]"
- "Are concurrent user interaction scenarios addressed? [Coverage, Gap]"
- "Are requirements specified for partial data loading failures? [Coverage, Exception Flow]"
Measurability:
- "Are visual hierarchy requirements measurable/testable? [Acceptance Criteria, Spec §FR-1]"
- "Can 'balanced visual weight' be objectively verified? [Measurability, Spec §FR-2]"
@@ -195,7 +197,7 @@ You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
- ❌ "Click", "navigate", "render", "load", "execute"
- ❌ Test cases, test plans, QA procedures
- ❌ Implementation details (frameworks, APIs, algorithms)
**✅ REQUIRED PATTERNS** - These test requirements quality:
- ✅ "Are [requirement type] defined/specified/documented for [scenario]?"
- ✅ "Is [vague term] quantified/clarified with specific criteria?"
@@ -225,6 +227,7 @@ To avoid clutter, use descriptive types and clean up obsolete checklists when do
**UX Requirements Quality:** `ux.md`
Sample items (testing the requirements, NOT the implementation):
- "Are visual hierarchy requirements defined with measurable criteria? [Clarity, Spec §FR-1]"
- "Is the number and positioning of UI elements explicitly specified? [Completeness, Spec §FR-1]"
- "Are interaction state requirements (hover, focus, active) consistently defined? [Consistency]"
@@ -235,6 +238,7 @@ Sample items (testing the requirements, NOT the implementation):
**API Requirements Quality:** `api.md`
Sample items:
- "Are error response formats specified for all failure scenarios? [Completeness]"
- "Are rate limiting requirements quantified with specific thresholds? [Clarity]"
- "Are authentication requirements consistent across all endpoints? [Consistency]"
@@ -244,6 +248,7 @@ Sample items:
**Performance Requirements Quality:** `performance.md`
Sample items:
- "Are performance requirements quantified with specific metrics? [Clarity]"
- "Are performance targets defined for all critical user journeys? [Coverage]"
- "Are performance requirements under different load conditions specified? [Completeness]"
@@ -253,6 +258,7 @@ Sample items:
**Security Requirements Quality:** `security.md`
Sample items:
- "Are authentication requirements specified for all protected resources? [Coverage]"
- "Are data protection requirements defined for sensitive information? [Completeness]"
- "Is the threat model documented and requirements aligned to it? [Traceability]"
@@ -282,10 +288,10 @@ Sample items:
```
**Key Differences:**
- Wrong: Tests if the system works correctly
- Correct: Tests if the requirements are written correctly
- Wrong: Verification of behavior
- Correct: Validation of requirement quality
- Wrong: "Does it do X?"
- Wrong: "Does it do X?"
- Correct: "Is X clearly specified?"