gap-analysislisted

# gap-analysis — how far the build drifted from the document A design document and the code it produced diverge in three directions, and only one of them is obvious. Missing is easy to see. Extra — built but never specified — and divergent — built to a different rule than written — are what this looks for. ## Comparison dimensions Four kinds, whatever the project is. The examples name a web service because that is the common case, not because it is the only one — substitute the equivalent and the dimension still holds. 1. **The surface others touch** — whatever a caller reaches for, and what comes back. HTTP paths, methods and status codes; a CLI's flags, exit codes and stdout shape; a library's exported names and signatures; a screen's controls and states; a queue's topics and message shapes. 2. **The shape of what persists** — entities and relationships, field names, types and constraints, and how existing data gets to the new shape. Tables and migrations; a file format and its version field; cache keys and their expiry; what a client keeps on disk between launches. 3. **The rules that decide** — feature completeness, edge cases, error scenarios, validation. This dimension is the same everywhere and is usually where the real divergence hides, because it is the one a document describes in prose rather than in a table. 4. **Conventions** — naming, folder structure, import patterns, error message format. Drift here is rarely a defect on its