Skip to content
arula

Stage 420 minutesPairs301-P · Executable intent

Bound the scope

State what this slice does not do, so scope creep becomes a visible specification decision rather than an invisible delivery one.

You will produce

Scope boundary

We will demonstrate

Exclusions are decisions, not omissions

Done when

Every exclusion says where the behavior goes instead.

Sibling repository../payments-validation-fixture836a75dShared with course 301. You work from specs/product/payments.md rather than the diff.

Orient

Why this stage exists

F6 is scope creep, and the scope guard is mechanical only when a manifest exists to compare against. Someone has to write the manifest, and it is not the engineer.

An exclusion that says only "not now" will be reopened by the first person who finds it inconvenient. An exclusion with a destination will not.

Start from

What you start from

Work from these inputs only. Anything not on this list is either a later stage’s concern or a decision you do not own.

Acceptance contract
Your criteria from stage 3.
Requirement risk map
The gaps you marked out of scope in stage 1.
Allowed paths
workbench/allowed-paths.json, the manifest the scope guard reads.
Demonstrate

Exclusions are decisions, not omissions

One worked pass, so the shape of the work is visible before you do it on your own.

  1. List behavior adjacent to the slice that this work will not change.
  2. For each exclusion, say where it goes: a later slice, another team, or nowhere.
  3. Record the constraints and assumptions the slice depends on.
  4. Name who agreed to the boundary, and when.

What this turns onOut of scope means not decided here. It does not mean forbidden, and it does not mean unimportant.

Practice

Do the work

  1. Write the scope boundary for the refund slice.
  2. Give every exclusion a destination.
  3. Write the allowed-paths manifest the scope guard would read.
  4. Challenge another pair for exclusions that are really unmade decisions.
Output

You produce

Artifact

Scope boundary

  • In this slice
  • Not in this slice
  • Where it goes instead
  • Constraint or assumption
  • Who agreed
Pressure-test

Challenge your own result

An engineer proposes a refactor that would make the slice cleaner. Out of scope?

Show how this resolves

Not automatically. Re-scope deliberately and record it, or defer it with a destination. What you cannot do is let it arrive unrecorded and call it delivery.

Gate

Ready to continue when

Readiness gate
  • Every exclusion says where the behavior goes instead.
  • The boundary names who agreed to it.

What transfersA scope you did not write is a scope someone else will write for you during delivery.

Source · 05 Organizational handshake