A Practical Framework from Enterprise Delivery
For me, an FSD review is not just a document review. It is an early architecture checkpoint to identify design gaps, integration risks, data issues, security gaps, performance concerns, and production support challenges.
A good solution architect should not only ask, “Can we build this?”
We should ask, “Can we build this correctly, securely, scalably, testably, and supportably?”
1. Understand the Business Problem First
Before reviewing screens, fields, buttons, or validations, I first check:
Why is this requirement needed?
Which user or business problem is it solving?
What process does it support?
What happens if this feature is not delivered?
Is the requirement solving the real problem or only automating an unclear process?
2. Validate the Domain Logic
The FSD should be aligned with the business/domain model.
I check:
Are the right business entities defined?
Are relationships between entities clear?
Is the lifecycle/status flow explained?
Are exceptions and edge cases covered?
Is historical data or versioning required?
In regulated or scientific systems, even a small configuration change can impact calculation, audit, reporting, or approval.
3. Confirm Source of Truth
This is very important in microservices.
The FSD should clearly answer:
Which module owns the data?
Who can create or update it?
Which modules only consume it?
Is data fetched live, synced, cached, or stored as a snapshot?
What happens when the source data changes?
Lack of source-of-truth clarity can lead to duplicate data, inconsistent behavior, and production issues.
4. Review Data Model and Traceability
Even if the requirement looks simple, the data design should support future needs.
I check:
Mandatory and optional fields
Status and lifecycle
Audit requirements
History/versioning
Deactivation versus deletion
Reporting and downstream usage
A simple question I ask is:
After six months, can we still explain why the system behaved in a particular way?
5. Evaluate Integration Impact
A small change in one module may impact many systems.
I check:
APIs impacted
Events/messages required
Synchronous vs asynchronous flow
Retry and failure handling
Cache impact
Downstream reports or jobs
Impact on other microservices
This helps avoid surprises during development, UAT, and production.
6. Review Non-Functional Requirements
Functional requirements are not enough.
I also check:
Performance and volume
Security and authorization
Audit and compliance
Error handling
Monitoring and logging
Data retention
Production support needs
Example: If the FSD says export data, I ask:
How many records?
Should it be async?
Who can download?
Where will the file be stored?
How long should it be retained?
7. Check Security and Access Control
Access should not be defined only at UI level.
I check:
Page access
API access
Record-level access
Field-level access
Workflow-step access
Export/report access
What the UI hides, the backend must also protect.
8. Make Sure It Is Testable and Supportable
The FSD should help QA and support teams.
I check whether it supports:
Positive and negative test cases
Integration testing
Regression testing
Security testing
Performance testing
Audit testing
Production troubleshooting
A feature is not complete only because it works in UAT. It should also be monitorable, supportable, and recoverable in production.
Final Thought
A solution architect reviews an FSD to reduce ambiguity early.
The goal is to help BA, FA, developers, QA, DBA, DevOps, security, and support teams move with the same understanding.
A good FSD review prevents rework, reduces production risk, and ensures the solution is practical for real enterprise delivery.
