Someone asked me for examples of testable acceptance criteria… Alright. Who wants some?

User story:
As Ash, I want to defend myself against deadites (undead creatures) so that I can retrieve pages from the Book of the Dead.

Acceptance criteria:
– defend from a distance
– defend at close range

Two distinct pieces of value, huh? Clearly, we need a story split here!

User story:
As Ash, I want to repurpose the stump of my right arm into a fearsome weapon so that I can defend myself against undead creatures at close range.

Acceptance criteria:
– portable
– well supported, weight-balanced
– hands-free operation
– use available materials
– holds up under stress
– close-range fighting

Technical implementation:
– leather harness
– chainsaw mounted on handcuff
– chainsaw pull operated via bracket on harness

User story:
As Ash, I want another weapon for my left hand so that I can defend myself against undead creatures at a distance.

Acceptance criteria:
– portable
– easy storage
– one-handed operation
– uses available materials
– distance fighting

Technical implementation:
– sawed-off shotgun
– uses right-hand-mounted chainsaw to saw off shotgun (story dependency or taking advantage of existing features?)
– convenient back holster

Bonus feature/discovered value:
– clever shorthand terminology: “Boomstick”

By now, the distinction between testable user story acceptance criteria focused on user value and the resulting technical implementation should be painfully clear. Groovy?

Tonight’s episode is brought to you by: the beauty of claymation, the number 2, and the words Klaatu… verata… n… Necktie. Nectar. Nickel. Noodle.

Image source