This template is filled in by the spec author and posted as a PR comment when requesting external review. Reviewers respond with the checklist at the bottom.
Review window: 72 hours from the time this comment is posted. See docs/project-management.md for the full review policy.
## Spec Review Request: <spec-id> — <spec-name>
**Review window closes**: YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM UTC (72h from now)
**Reviewers requested**: @reviewer1, @reviewer2, @reviewer3
---
### Summary
One paragraph: what problem does this spec solve and what does it govern?
---
### Problem Statement
- What is broken or missing today?
- Who is blocked by the absence of this spec?
- What is the failure mode without it?
---
### Success Criteria
What does "done" look like? List 3–5 observable outcomes that prove the spec works:
- [ ] ...
- [ ] ...
- [ ] ...
---
### Non-Goals
Explicit list of things this spec intentionally does NOT cover:
- Not: ...
- Not: ...
---
### Migration / Compatibility Impact
- Does this change existing contracts, APIs, or CLI behavior?
- What is the upgrade path for existing consumers?
- Is this a breaking change? If yes, what is the semver strategy?
---
### Threat Model Summary
- What can go wrong if this spec is wrong?
- What is the blast radius of a spec defect? (e.g., silent data loss, security bypass, irreversible state)
- What invariants must hold?
---
### Runnable Example
A command someone can actually run today (or after the PR merges) to see this working:
```bash
# Example:
cargo run -p traverse-cli -- bundle inspect examples/expedition/registry-bundle/manifest.jsonExpected output:
---
## Reviewer Checklist (reviewer fills this in)
Copy this block into your review comment and answer each question:
```markdown
## Review: <spec-id> — <your GitHub handle>
**Verdict**: [ ] Approve [ ] Approve with changes [ ] Reject
---
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Is the problem statement clear and accurate? | Yes / No / Unclear |
| Are the success criteria testable? | Yes / No / Unclear |
| Are the non-goals sufficient to prevent scope creep? | Yes / No |
| Is the compatibility impact acceptable? | Yes / No / N/A |
| Is the threat model honest? (Are risks understated?) | Yes / No |
| Does the runnable example work as described? | Yes / No / Not tested |
**Concerns** (if any):
> ...
**Specific change requests** (if Approve with changes):
> ...