Explain What 'Good Enough' Means as a Standard in Complex Work

Good enough is not a feeling. It is a threshold that can be defined, and the signals that tell you you have crossed it can be made specific. The cost of over-polishing is real, the cost of under-polishing is real, and the calibration problem between them is domain-specific. This defines the threshold for your specific domain, names the three signals that tell you you have crossed it, and gives you a decision rule to apply at the end of a work session.

I work in {WORK_DOMAIN} and struggle with knowing when something I have produced is good enough to release, submit, or share. I tend to {PERFECTION_TENDENCY} [for example: keep revising past the point of improvement, rush to release before I am happy, or oscillate between both].

Explain what 'good enough' actually means in this context:
1. The functional definition: what 'good enough' means in professional work contexts, stated as a standard rather than a feeling
2. The signals that tell you something has crossed the threshold: the [three] most reliable indicators that a piece of work has reached the point where further effort produces diminishing returns
3. What the cost of over-polishing looks like in my domain: the specific way that taking work beyond 'good enough' manifests as a real cost in {WORK_DOMAIN}
4. What the cost of under-polishing looks like: the specific way that releasing too early manifests as a cost
5. The decision rule: a specific question I can ask at the end of a work session that would give me a clear signal about which side of the threshold I am on