Acceptance criteria become usable when each requirement identifies an observable condition, an agreed evidence method, the delivered version, and the person authorized to accept or require revision.
Governing language, version, and accountable roles
Begin with the signed scope, incorporated specifications, approved changes, and any acceptance clause that governs the milestone. Preserve the original language and cite the document, section, date, and approving role before paraphrasing it. If two records conflict, mark the conflict for the parties to resolve instead of selecting the more convenient instruction. The acceptance table should also name the exact deliverable version, submission date, review window, and client role authorized to record the disposition.
Separate three roles that are often blended: the person who produced the work, the person who verifies technical evidence, and the person who accepts on behalf of the client. NIST's acceptance guidance describes responsibilities, traceability, procedures, and criteria as explicit parts of the acceptance plan. A project channel reaction or informal compliment can be preserved as context, but it should not be converted into formal acceptance unless the governing process gives it that effect.
Observable conditions and reproducible proof
Translate each included requirement into an observable property without inventing a new standard. A requirement for a report may be checked through named sections, source coverage, file format, and delivery location. A software feature may be checked through a scenario, starting state, action, result, environment, and recorded test. Terms such as robust, intuitive, complete, or fast remain ambiguous until the parties supply an agreed criterion or accept a documented demonstration.
Each row should link the requirement source, current artifact, test or demonstration procedure, raw result, reviewer, limitation, and proposed state. Re-run technical checks from a clean or controlled environment when feasible. Screenshots can support visual evidence but should not replace a deterministic result that already exists. A non-run caused by unavailable access should remain missing evidence, while a run that contradicts the criterion should be recorded as a failure.
Disposition states and client authority
Use states that describe the record rather than imply a contractual outcome: unmapped, evidence pending, ready for review, revision requested, exception proposed, accepted, or excluded by agreement. Define who may move each state and what evidence is required. A delivery lead can prepare a ready-for-review row, but only the authorized client role should enter acceptance when the agreement assigns that authority to the client.
Milestone Proof prepares the criteria and evidence through Reality Contact, LLC. The delivery lead checks the packet and sends it; the client interprets its agreement and makes the acceptance decision. The system supports a clear submission and reusable phase gate but does not determine payment rights, waive defects, or replace either party's legal review.
Where the service stops
Reality Contact, LLC implements the evidence system but does not provide legal advice, interpret disputed contract rights, decide whether a client must accept or pay, sign on either party's behalf, send the submission, or issue an invoice. The delivery lead reviews the packet, submits the milestone for explicit client acceptance, invoices under the applicable agreement, and carries the accepted gates into the next phase. This is delivery-operations implementation and document preparation; it does not replace either party's legal, contract, accounting, tax, or commercial review. We do not promise client acceptance, payment, dispute prevention, enforceability of a signature, or successful completion of requirements whose meaning remains unresolved.
Sources: NIST Guide to Software Acceptance; Current FAR acceptance responsibilities.