[devenson]

Is the checklist complete? If not, it might lull you into a false sense of security. How do you know if it's complete or not?

[massysett]

The checklist doesn't have to be perfect. Just continually improve it.

I keep several checklists - some I use several times a week, others every few months or so. If I notice something needs to be added to the checklist or removed, I do so.

It's always better to start with an imperfect checklist vs not having any checklist at all. With no checklist, you start from scratch every single time. Not starting from scratch allows you to focus on marginal improvements with each use.

[ethan_smith]

A checklist is never truly "complete" - treat it as a living document with a built-in review step that asks "what did we miss?" after each use.

[spc476]

I did this at a previous job for running a complicated regression test (that couldn't be fully automated for reasons). I initially did this for myself as the regression test wasn't run that often. I also made sure that anyone new to the department would have to run the regression test and report/update with any missing steps.

[autoexec]

"Update checklist if needed" should be the last thing on every checklist!

[vorgol]

That's just like saying that if no tests are failing then we don't have any bugs.

[NewEntryHN]

Would't any additional item increase safety?

[ceejayoz]

No, not if you overdo it. You start getting into https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarm_fatigue territory.

[0x457]

If your checklist is PITA to got through, then completing it will more like to lure you into that false sense of security that you might even miss something obvious.

IMO the best way is to start small, and every time checklist didn't catch an issue either modify existing item(s) or add new item(s). Organic complexity is the best complexity.

[kragen]

Clearly you need a checklist for making checklists.