spec(§1.6–1.9): outcomes, business scope, assumptions, business use cases BUC-1..5
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
@@ -88,19 +88,150 @@ nothing built on top can ever actually launch.
|
||||
|
||||
### 1.6 Targeted Business Outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- §1.6 pending -->
|
||||
| Outcome | Success metric | Baseline → Target | Guardrail (must not regress) | How / when measured |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| Merchants can exist on the platform | A real person can go from stranger to merchant-with-storefront, unaided | impossible → possible in every environment | No dark patterns at the door: no trial clock, no payment demand, no plan wall (OHM: Agency & Anti-Manipulation) | Walk the flow end-to-end in each environment at release |
|
||||
| The product line is unblocked | Subsequent Features attach to a real account + storefront spine | everything mocked → nothing mocked | The spine doesn't need rework to host the next Feature (no throwaway auth/tenancy) | First post-MVP Feature builds on it without spine changes |
|
||||
| Launching anywhere is routine | A fresh, empty environment reaches "first merchant signs up and creates the first storefront" through the product flows alone | folklore → documented, rehearsed gesture | Zero hand-seeded data in any environment | Bootstrap rehearsal executed on pre-prod, then prod, at release |
|
||||
|
||||
### 1.7 Scope (business)
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- §1.7 pending -->
|
||||
- **In scope:** a person establishing an identity on the platform (joining and
|
||||
returning); a merchant establishing their one storefront; the merchant
|
||||
standing on a stable management surface for it; the platform being
|
||||
bring-up-able from empty in every environment it runs in (local development,
|
||||
pre-production, production).
|
||||
- **Out of scope (later designs):** anything sold or bought — catalog, orders,
|
||||
checkout, payments; the shopper-facing public storefront; teams/staff
|
||||
(anyone besides the one merchant touching the storefront); plans, billing,
|
||||
or any commercial relationship between merchant and platform; storefront
|
||||
settings/management beyond simply *having* the surface.
|
||||
- **Non-goals:** gating who may join (the prototype admitted users by
|
||||
invitation; ecomm is an open product — anyone may become a merchant, and
|
||||
re-introducing an admission gate is explicitly not pursued); supporting more
|
||||
than one storefront per merchant *in this design* (the business wants the
|
||||
door left open, not the capability now).
|
||||
|
||||
### 1.8 Assumptions · Constraints · Dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- §1.8 pending -->
|
||||
- **Assumptions:**
|
||||
- One storefront per merchant is the right *experience* bar for the MVP;
|
||||
multiple-storefront merchants are a future need, not a current one. Risk
|
||||
if wrong: an early merchant genuinely needs a second storefront — accepted;
|
||||
the door is designed to stay open (§1.7, #1 acceptance).
|
||||
- Merchants are reachable by email and will complete an email-based step to
|
||||
join. Risk if wrong: an entry channel rethink — accepted at MVP scale.
|
||||
- **Constraints:**
|
||||
- OHM-groundedness is a charter constraint: entry must be honest — no
|
||||
manufactured urgency, no data collected beyond need, no lock-in mechanics.
|
||||
- The three environments are a constraint, not a stretch goal: Feature #1's
|
||||
acceptance says no environment is "later".
|
||||
- Wiggleverse engineering standards apply (handbook): provisioning and
|
||||
deploy via flotilla (§8), secrets never in repos or transcripts (§6.3),
|
||||
private repos by default (§5.5).
|
||||
- **Dependencies:**
|
||||
- **flotilla / launch-app** for environment provisioning and deploy (the
|
||||
operator-run front door, handbook §8.5) — needed when the pre-prod and
|
||||
prod environments are stood up.
|
||||
- An **email delivery channel** for the entry step in real environments —
|
||||
needed by the production-readiness slice (§7).
|
||||
|
||||
### 1.9 Business Use Cases
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- §1.9 pending -->
|
||||
**BUC-1 — As a merchant, I can establish my identity on the platform, so that I can begin doing business there.**
|
||||
|
||||
```gherkin
|
||||
Scenario: BUC-1 — A stranger becomes known to the platform
|
||||
Given a person who has never dealt with the platform
|
||||
When they present themselves and prove who they are
|
||||
Then the platform knows them as a returning individual from then on
|
||||
And they were asked for nothing beyond what proving who they are required
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
```gherkin
|
||||
Scenario: BUC-1a — A person who cannot prove who they are is not admitted as someone else
|
||||
Given a person presenting an identity they cannot prove
|
||||
When their proof fails
|
||||
Then the platform does not mistake them for the claimed identity
|
||||
And the genuine owner of that identity is unharmed
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- **BUC-1 acceptance criteria:** the same person, returning later, is
|
||||
recognized as the same merchant; two different people are never conflated;
|
||||
no personal data beyond the minimum was demanded (OHM: Privacy & Data
|
||||
Minimization).
|
||||
|
||||
**BUC-2 — As a returning merchant, I can resume my standing on the platform, so that my business presence persists beyond a single visit.**
|
||||
|
||||
```gherkin
|
||||
Scenario: BUC-2 — A known merchant returns
|
||||
Given a merchant the platform already knows
|
||||
When they return and prove who they are
|
||||
Then they resume exactly the standing they had — same identity, same storefront
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- **BUC-2 acceptance criteria:** returning costs only the proof-of-identity
|
||||
step; nothing about their standing is lost or reset.
|
||||
|
||||
**BUC-3 — As a merchant, I can establish my storefront, so that my business has a presence of its own on the platform.**
|
||||
|
||||
```gherkin
|
||||
Scenario: BUC-3 — A merchant claims their storefront
|
||||
Given a merchant known to the platform who has no storefront yet
|
||||
When they establish their storefront
|
||||
Then the platform holds exactly one storefront that is theirs
|
||||
And establishing it cost them nothing and committed them to nothing
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
```gherkin
|
||||
Scenario: BUC-3a — One storefront is the bar
|
||||
Given a merchant who already has their storefront
|
||||
When they deal with the platform
|
||||
Then they are never led toward acquiring a second one
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- **BUC-3 acceptance criteria:** every merchant who completes the step has
|
||||
exactly one storefront; no payment, plan, or commitment was demanded
|
||||
(corpus: 14.01.0015, 14.01.0016); the platform's books would still be
|
||||
correct if a merchant were someday allowed several (the 1-1 bar is an
|
||||
experience rule, not a law of the data — Feature #1 constraint).
|
||||
|
||||
**BUC-4 — As a merchant, I can stand on a management surface for my storefront, so that everything I will later do for my business has a home.**
|
||||
|
||||
```gherkin
|
||||
Scenario: BUC-4 — The merchant arrives at their storefront's home
|
||||
Given a merchant with a storefront
|
||||
When they return to the platform
|
||||
Then they arrive directly at their storefront's management surface
|
||||
And it is honestly empty — it claims no capability that does not exist yet
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- **BUC-4 acceptance criteria:** arrival is direct (no dead ends, no limbo —
|
||||
a merchant *without* a storefront is guided to establish one instead, never
|
||||
stranded); the surface carries the storefront's identity and nothing
|
||||
fabricated.
|
||||
|
||||
**BUC-5 — As a platform operator, I can bring the platform to life in a fresh environment, so that merchants can be served there without any hand-built state.**
|
||||
|
||||
```gherkin
|
||||
Scenario: BUC-5 — An empty environment reaches its first merchant
|
||||
Given a brand-new environment with empty persistence
|
||||
When the operator performs the documented bring-up gesture
|
||||
And the first merchant walks the ordinary product flows
|
||||
Then the environment serves that merchant a working storefront
|
||||
And no data was placed by hand at any step
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
```gherkin
|
||||
Scenario: BUC-5a — Bring-up is rehearsable
|
||||
Given the bring-up gesture documented for one environment
|
||||
When it is performed in the next environment (dev → pre-prod → prod)
|
||||
Then it is the same gesture, and day-one production is simply the bootstrap state
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- **BUC-5 acceptance criteria:** bring-up is a repeatable, documented gesture
|
||||
(not folklore); it holds identically in local development, pre-production,
|
||||
and production; the first merchant arrives through the product flows alone.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user