A material specification is constitutionally sufficient when its identity, composition, formation, consequential structure, operating behaviors, thresholds, failure modes, provenance, and uncertainty are stated with enough precision to support later measurement and execution without requiring invention.
Then define the required fields:
Identity — what material class or grade is this?
Composition — what constituents define it?
Formation — how did it acquire this material state?
Structure — grain, weave, porosity, phase, layering, etc.
Behavior — mechanical, thermal, electrical, chemical, optical, environmental.
Thresholds — conditions beyond which behavior materially changes.
Failure modes — fracture, creep, corrosion, delamination, decay, fatigue, etc.
Provenance — source and measurement/reference history.
Uncertainty — tolerance, range, unresolved fields, condition dependence.
CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMING
Behavior — mechanical, thermal, electrical, chemical, optical, environmental.
Thresholds — conditions beyond which behavior materially changes.
Failure modes — fracture, creep, corrosion, delamination, decay, fatigue, etc.
Provenance — source and measurement/reference history.
Uncertainty — tolerance, range, unresolved fields, condition dependence.
Then each material gets its own record:
PORCELAIN
Material class: fired ceramic
Constitution: ...
Formation: ...
Mechanical behavior: ...
Thermal behavior: ...
Electrical behavior: ...
Environmental behavior: ...
Failure modes: ...
Reference conditions: ...
Provenance: ...
Same schema for gold, basalt, wool, bronze, paper, steel, glass, etc.
The constitutional rule underneath it should be:
No material name is treated as a complete specification.
“Steel” is not enough. “Glass” is not enough. “Leather” is not enough. The name opens the record; it does not complete it.
A higher layer may select among material capabilities. It may not attribute capabilities the material record does not support.
Specification establishes what execution may rely upon. It does not itself execute.