Just to piggyback on the good comments already mentioned, there is often a need for a "technical spec to be written like a legal contract" because legal contrac

Just to piggyback on the good comments already mentioned, there is often a need for a "technical spec to be written like a legal contract" because legal contracts often reference technical specs. Anyone who's worked a contract that has ambiguous technical specs knows it often becomes fodder for rules-lawyering. One example from my past was a contract that levied specific requirements for equipment operated autonomously with software, but "autonomous" wasn't explicitly defined. A contractor who didn't want to spend the money to meet the extra requirements argued the system couldn't be considered autonomous because it required a human to turn it on (despite being fully autonomous after that point).