github-featured/tractorjuice--arckit-gemini
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Deployments Models Agent Notes Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
Files
main
tractorjuice--arckit-gemini/templates/traceability-matrix-template.md
T
tractorjuice 7c598c3028 chore: sync with arc-kit v6.10.0
2026-08-18 09:37:18 +00:00

13 KiB
Raw Permalink Blame History

Requirements Traceability Matrix: [PROJECT_NAME]

Template Origin: Official | ArcKit Version: [VERSION] | Command: /arckit:traceability

Document Control

Revision History

Version Date Author Changes Approved By Approval Date
[VERSION] [DATE] ArcKit AI Initial creation from /arckit.[COMMAND] command [PENDING] [PENDING]

Document Purpose

[Brief description of what this document is for and how it will be used]

1. Overview

1.1 Purpose

This Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM) provides end-to-end traceability from business requirements through design, implementation, and testing. It ensures:

  • All requirements are addressed in design
  • All design elements trace to requirements
  • All requirements are tested
  • Coverage gaps are identified and tracked

1.2 Traceability Scope

This matrix traces:

flowchart TD
    BR[Business Requirements<br/>BR] --> FR[Functional Requirements<br/>FR]
    FR --> SC[System Components<br/>Design]
    SC --> TC[Test Cases<br/>TC]

    style BR fill:#E3F2FD
    style FR fill:#FFF3E0
    style SC fill:#E8F5E9
    style TC fill:#F3E5F5

1.3 Document References

Document Version Date Link
Requirements Document [VERSION] [DATE] [LINK]
High-Level Design (HLD) [VERSION] [DATE] [LINK]
Detailed Design (DLD) [VERSION] [DATE] [LINK]
Test Plan [VERSION] [DATE] [LINK]

2. Traceability Matrix

2.1 Forward Traceability: Requirements → Design → Tests

BR ID FR ID Functional Requirement Design Component HLD Section DLD Section Test Case ID(s) Status Comments
BR-001 FR-001 [Requirement description] [Service/Component] [Section] [Section] TC-001, TC-002 [✅ Covered | ⚠️ Partial | ❌ Gap]
BR-001 FR-002 [Requirement description] [Service/Component] [Section] [Section] TC-003 [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
BR-002 FR-003 [Requirement description] [Service/Component] [Section] [Section] TC-004, TC-005 [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
BR-002 FR-004 [Requirement description] [Service/Component] [Section] [Section] - [❌ Gap] Test cases missing
BR-003 FR-005 [Requirement description] Not yet designed - - - [❌ Gap] Design not started

Legend:

  • ✅ Covered: Requirement fully addressed in design and tested
  • ⚠️ Partial: Requirement partially addressed; needs clarification or additional work
  • ❌ Gap: Requirement not addressed in design or testing

2.2 Backward Traceability: Tests → Design → Requirements

This ensures no "orphan" design elements or tests that don't trace to requirements.

Test Case ID Test Description Design Component FR ID BR ID Status Comments
TC-001 [Test description] [Component] FR-001 BR-001 [✅ Traced | ⚠️ Unclear | ❌ Orphan]
TC-002 [Test description] [Component] FR-001 BR-001 [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
TC-003 [Test description] [Component] FR-002 BR-001 [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
TC-099 [Test description] [Component] - - [❌ Orphan] Test exists but no requirement - remove or trace

3. Coverage Analysis

3.1 Requirements Coverage Summary

Category Total Covered Partial Gap % Coverage
Business Requirements (BR) [X] [Y] [Z] [N] [Y/X × 100%]
Functional Requirements (FR) [X] [Y] [Z] [N] [Y/X × 100%]
Non-Functional Requirements (NFR) [X] [Y] [Z] [N] [Y/X × 100%]

Target Coverage: 100% of BR and FR, 95%+ of NFR

Current Status: [ON TRACK | AT RISK | BEHIND]

3.2 Design Coverage

Component/Service Requirements Addressed FR IDs % of Total FRs Comments
[Service A] [X] FR-001, FR-002, FR-005 [Y%]
[Service B] [X] FR-003, FR-004, FR-007 [Y%]
[Service C] [X] FR-006, FR-008 [Y%]
Total [X] 100%

Orphan Components: [Components in design that don't trace to any requirement - should they be removed?]

3.3 Test Coverage

Test Level Total Tests Requirements Covered % Coverage Comments
Unit Tests [X] [Y FRs] [Z%]
Integration Tests [X] [Y FRs] [Z%]
E2E Tests [X] [Y FRs] [Z%]
Performance Tests [X] [Y NFRs] [Z%]
Security Tests [X] [Y NFRs] [Z%]

Test Coverage Goal: 100% of functional requirements, 90%+ of NFRs

4. Gap Analysis

4.1 Requirements Without Design

Requirements that have NOT been addressed in HLD or DLD:

BR ID FR ID Requirement Priority Reason for Gap Target Completion
[BR-X] [FR-Y] [Description] [HIGH | MED | LOW] [Reason] [DATE]

Impact: [Description of impact if gaps not addressed]

Mitigation: [Plan to address gaps]

4.2 Requirements Without Tests

Requirements that have been designed but NOT yet tested:

BR ID FR ID Requirement Design Component Missing Test Type Target Completion
[BR-X] [FR-Y] [Description] [Component] [Unit | Integration | E2E] [DATE]

Risk: [Impact of untested requirements]

4.3 Design Components Without Requirements

Components in design that do NOT trace back to any requirement (potential over-engineering or missing requirements):

Component Purpose Should Trace To Action
[Component X] [Purpose] [Missing BR/FR or "Technical necessity"] [Add requirement | Remove component | Justify]

5. Non-Functional Requirements Traceability

5.1 Performance Requirements

NFR ID Requirement Target Design Strategy Test Plan Status Comments
NFR-P-001 API response time <200ms (p95) [Caching, async processing] [Load testing plan] [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
NFR-P-002 Throughput 10K TPS [Auto-scaling, load balancing] [Stress testing plan] [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]

5.2 Security Requirements

NFR ID Requirement Design Control Implementation Test Plan Status Comments
NFR-SEC-001 Authentication (SSO/MFA) [OIDC with MFA] [Component] [Security test cases] [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
NFR-SEC-002 Encryption at rest [AES-256, KMS] [RDS config] [Config audit] [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]

5.3 Availability & Resilience

NFR ID Requirement Target Design Strategy Test Plan Status Comments
NFR-A-001 Availability SLA 99.95% [Multi-AZ, health checks] [Availability monitoring] [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
NFR-A-002 RPO <15 min [Continuous backup] [DR drill] [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
NFR-A-003 RTO <4 hours [Automated failover] [Failover test] [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]

5.4 Compliance Requirements

NFR ID Requirement Design Controls Evidence Audit Trail Status Comments
NFR-C-001 GDPR compliance [Data residency, deletion APIs] [Compliance doc] [Audit logs] [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
NFR-C-002 Audit logging [7-year retention, immutable] [Log config] [Log analysis] [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]

6. Change Impact Analysis

This section tracks how requirement changes ripple through design and tests.

6.1 Requirement Changes

Change ID Date BR/FR ID Change Description Impacted Components Impacted Tests Status Impact Level
CHG-001 [DATE] FR-005 [Changed from X to Y] [Service A, Service C] [TC-010, TC-012] [In Progress] [HIGH | MED | LOW]

Change Impact Legend:

  • HIGH: Requires significant rework of design and tests
  • MEDIUM: Requires moderate updates to design or tests
  • LOW: Minor updates, limited impact

7. Metrics and KPIs

7.1 Traceability Metrics

Metric Current Value Target Status
Requirements with Design Coverage [X/Y] ([Z%]) 100% [✅ On Track | ⚠️ At Risk | ❌ Behind]
Requirements with Test Coverage [X/Y] ([Z%]) 100% [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
Orphan Components (no requirement trace) [X] 0 [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
Orphan Tests (no requirement trace) [X] 0 [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]
Outstanding Gaps [X] 0 [✅ | ⚠️ | ❌]

7.2 Coverage Trends

Track coverage over time to monitor progress:

Date Requirements Coverage Design Coverage Test Coverage
[DATE] [X%] [Y%] [Z%]
[DATE] [X%] [Y%] [Z%]
[DATE] [X%] [Y%] [Z%]

Trend: [Improving | Stable | Declining]

8. Action Items

8.1 Gap Resolution

ID Gap Description Owner Priority Target Date Status
GAP-001 [FR-X not designed] [Owner] HIGH [DATE] [Open | In Progress | Closed]
GAP-002 [FR-Y not tested] [Owner] MEDIUM [DATE] [Open | In Progress | Closed]

8.2 Orphan Resolution

ID Orphan Item Type Resolution Owner Target Date Status
ORP-001 [Component X] Design Component [Add requirement | Remove] [Owner] [DATE] [Open | In Progress | Closed]
ORP-002 [Test TC-099] Test Case [Add requirement | Remove] [Owner] [DATE] [Open | In Progress | Closed]

9. Review and Approval

9.1 Review Checklist

  • All business requirements traced to functional requirements
  • All functional requirements traced to design components
  • All design components traced back to requirements (no orphans)
  • All requirements have test coverage defined
  • All gaps identified and action plan in place
  • All NFRs addressed in design and test plan
  • Change impact analysis complete

9.2 Approval

Role Name Review Date Approval Signature Date
Product Owner [NAME] [DATE] [ ] Approve [ ] Reject _________ [DATE]
Enterprise Architect [NAME] [DATE] [ ] Approve [ ] Reject _________ [DATE]
QA Lead [NAME] [DATE] [ ] Approve [ ] Reject _________ [DATE]
Project Manager [NAME] [DATE] [ ] Approve [ ] Reject _________ [DATE]

10. Appendices

Appendix A: Full Requirements List

[Link to complete requirements document]

Appendix B: Design Documents

[Links to HLD and DLD]

Appendix C: Test Plan

[Link to test plan and test cases]

Appendix D: Traceability Tools

[If using tools like Jira, Azure DevOps, or specialized traceability tools, document how to access and use them]

Document Control

Version Date Author Changes
0.1 [DATE] [AUTHOR] Initial draft
1.0 [DATE] [AUTHOR] Baseline after requirements approval
1.1 [DATE] [AUTHOR] Updated after HLD review
2.0 [DATE] [AUTHOR] Updated after DLD completion

External References

This section provides traceability from generated content back to source documents. Follow citation instructions in the project's citation reference guide.

Document Register

Doc ID Filename Type Source Location Description
None provided — — — —

Citations

Citation ID Doc ID Page/Section Category Quoted Passage
— — — — —

Unreferenced Documents

Filename Source Location Reason
— — —

Generated by: ArcKit /arckit:traceability command Generated on: [DATE] ArcKit Version: [VERSION] Project: [PROJECT_NAME] Model: [AI_MODEL]

Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink