Dispatcher Management System Test Case - WX05US05

Test Case 01: Unified Dashboard Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_001
Title: Verify unified dashboard displays pending, assigned, completed, and historical service orders with real-time counts matching user story specifications
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter/Onboarding Services, UI, Database, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-CxServices/API/Database, Dashboard-Core, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: CxServices, API, Dashboard Service, Authentication Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Smoke-Test-Results, User-Acceptance, Customer-Segment-Analysis
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC01, Section 4 Solution Dashboard Overview, Section 9 Sample Data
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_002, WX05US05_TC_024

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Service Order API, Dashboard Service, Authentication Service, Real-time notification service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds page load
Data_Requirements: Service orders in all statuses per user story sample data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Valid dispatcher credentials, active service orders in database matching user story counts
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with dashboard access permissions
Test_Data: Pending SO (10), Assigned SO (52), Completed SO (430), History SO (678) as per user story sample data
Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication and login functionality must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to dispatcher dashboard URL	Dashboard loads within 3 seconds showing unified interface with 4 main tabs	dispatcher.example.com/dashboard	AC01 - Dashboard visibility requirement
2	Verify "Pending Service Orders" tab display	Tab shows with count (10) matching user story sample data	Count: 10 pending orders	AC01 - Real-time count verification
3	Verify "Assigned Service Orders" tab display	Tab shows with count (52) including breakdown: 0 Assigned, 37 Accepted, 14 In Progress, 1 Refused	Count: 52 total assigned	AC01 - Status breakdown per user story
4	Verify "Completed Service Orders" tab display	Tab shows with count (430) and metrics: 1 Total Completed, 51 Rejected, 378 Approved, Avg time 1d 2h 22m	Count: 430 completed	AC01 - Completion metrics per user story
5	Verify "History Service Orders" tab display	Tab shows with count (678) including Total: 678, Completed: 1, Approved: 378, Rejected: 51	Count: 678 historical	AC01 - Historical data access
6	Verify real-time count updates	Create new SO and verify counts update automatically without page refresh	Create SO001 in pending	AC01 - Real-time functionality
7	Verify dashboard description text	Confirms "Unified dispatch management interface with real-time visibility" displays	N/A	AC01 - Interface description
8	Check navigation consistency	All tabs clickable and maintain consistent interface layout	Tab navigation	AC01 - Unified interface requirement

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All four dashboard tabs (pending, assigned, completed, history) display with accurate real-time counts matching user story sample data
Secondary_Verifications: Dashboard loads within performance baseline, tabs interactive, counts reflect exact user story metrics, interface description present
Negative_Verification: No error messages displayed, no broken UI elements, no count discrepancies

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Authentication/Login functionality
Blocked_Tests: All subsequent dashboard functionality tests
Parallel_Tests: None - foundation test
Sequential_Tests: Must execute before all other dashboard tests

Additional Information

Notes: Foundation test for all dispatcher functionality, critical for user story success
Edge_Cases: Large data volumes, concurrent user sessions
Risk_Areas: Real-time update failures, performance degradation with scale
Security_Considerations: Role-based access validation, data exposure controls

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Dashboard performance with 1000+ service orders across all statuses
Type: Performance/Edge Case
Rationale: User story indicates scalability needs for enterprise utility customers
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Concurrent dispatcher sessions viewing same real-time data
Type: Integration/Concurrency
Rationale: Multi-dispatcher environments common in large utility operations
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 02: Multiple Service Order Selection

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_002
Title: Verify dispatchers can select multiple service orders using individual checkboxes in pending service orders table with exact user story data
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, UI, Database, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product/QA/Regression-Coverage/User-Acceptance/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Selection-Component, Multi-Select, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 15%
Integration_Points: Pending Service Orders API, Selection Component, UI State Management
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Regression-Coverage, User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Engineering
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC02, Section 7 Business Rules - Service Order Selection, Section 9 Sample Data
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_003, WX05US05_TC_005

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Pending service orders API, selection component, UI state management
Performance_Baseline: < 500ms selection response time
Data_Requirements: Minimum 10 pending service orders with mixed priorities and areas

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Dispatcher role authenticated, pending service orders populated
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with order management access
Test_Data: SO001 (Critical, Downtown), SO002 (High, Suburbs), SO003 (Medium, Industrial), SO004 (Low, Downtown), SO005 (Critical, Suburbs) per user story
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_001 (Dashboard display) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to "Pending Service Orders" tab	Pending SO table loads showing Service Orders with individual checkboxes, displays "Service Orders (10) - 0 selected"	10 pending orders visible	AC02 - Individual checkbox availability
2	Click checkbox next to SO001 (Critical, Downtown)	SO001 selected with visual feedback (checkbox checked), count updates to "Service Orders (10) - 1 selected"	SO001: Critical priority, Downtown area	AC02 - Individual selection capability
3	Click checkbox next to SO003 (Medium, Industrial)	SO003 selected, SO001 remains selected, count shows "Service Orders (10) - 2 selected"	SO003: Medium priority, Industrial area	AC02 - Multi-selection without affecting previous
4	Click checkbox next to SO005 (Critical, Suburbs)	SO005 selected, running total shows "Service Orders (10) - 3 selected"	SO005: Critical priority, Suburbs area	AC02 - Multiple selection accumulation
5	Verify selection visual indicators	All 3 selected orders show checked checkboxes with visual highlighting	SO001, SO003, SO005 checked	AC02 - Visual feedback requirement
6	Uncheck SO003 checkbox	SO003 deselected, count updates to "Service Orders (10) - 2 selected", SO001 and SO005 remain selected	SO003 unchecked	AC02 - Deselection functionality
7	Verify disabled checkboxes for assigned orders	Orders already assigned to technicians show disabled checkboxes (grayed out)	Previously assigned orders	AC02 - Assignment prevention rule
8	Test selection persistence during page actions	Apply filter, return to original view, verify selections maintained	Area filter: Downtown	AC02 - Selection state persistence

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Individual checkboxes allow multiple service order selection with accurate dynamic count display in "Service Orders (X) - Y selected" format
Secondary_Verifications: Visual feedback on selection/deselection, count updates immediately, selection state persists across page actions
Negative_Verification: Cannot select orders already assigned to technicians (checkboxes disabled per user story business rules)

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_001 (Dashboard display)
Blocked_Tests: WX05US05_TC_005 (Bulk assign button state)
Parallel_Tests: Can run with other selection tests
Sequential_Tests: Must execute before bulk assignment tests

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for bulk assignment workflow, enables efficient dispatcher operations
Edge_Cases: Maximum selections, rapid selection/deselection, filtered view selections
Risk_Areas: UI state management failures, count calculation errors
Security_Considerations: Ensure users can only select orders they have permission to assign

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Selection behavior with 50+ pending orders across multiple pages
Type: Performance/Edge Case
Rationale: Large utility operations may have high order volumes
Priority: P3

Scenario_2: Selection state during real-time order status changes
Type: Integration/Real-time
Rationale: Orders may change status while dispatcher is making selections
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 03: Select All Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_003
Title: Verify "Select All" checkbox functionality selects all visible service orders on current page with user story pagination behavior
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, UI, Database, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Regression-Coverage/Module-Coverage/User-Acceptance/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Pagination, Bulk-Select, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 18%
Integration_Points: Pagination Component, Selection State Management, UI Controls
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: Regression-Coverage, Module-Coverage, User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC03, Section 7 Business Rules - Select All Functionality, Section 9 Sample Data pagination
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_002, WX05US05_TC_004

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Pagination service, selection state management, UI rendering engine
Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for select all operation
Data_Requirements: 15+ pending service orders spanning multiple pages (10 per page per user story)

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Pending service orders exceed single page limit, pagination enabled
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with bulk selection permissions
Test_Data: SO001-SO015 pending orders, paginated display (10 per page), mixed service associations
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_001, WX05US05_TC_002 must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to pending service orders (page 1)	Displays 10 service orders with master "Select All" checkbox, shows "Service Orders (10) - 0 selected", pagination shows "Page 1 of 2"	SO001-SO010 visible	AC03 - Master checkbox availability
2	Click "Select All" master checkbox	All 10 visible orders selected with checkboxes checked, count updates to "Service Orders (10) - 10 selected"	All page 1 orders	AC03 - Page-specific bulk selection
3	Verify visual feedback for all selections	All individual checkboxes checked, rows highlighted, master checkbox shows checked state	Visual indicators active	AC03 - Comprehensive visual feedback
4	Navigate to page 2 using pagination	Shows remaining 5 orders (SO011-SO015), master checkbox unchecked, count shows "Service Orders (5) - 0 selected"	SO011-SO015 visible	AC03 - Page isolation behavior
5	Click "Select All" on page 2	All 5 visible orders selected, count shows "Service Orders (5) - 5 selected"	SO011-SO015 selected	AC03 - Independent page selection
6	Return to page 1	Previously selected orders (SO001-SO010) remain selected, count shows "Service Orders (10) - 10 selected"	Page 1 state maintained	AC03 - Selection persistence
7	Uncheck "Select All" on page 1	All page 1 orders deselected, count shows "Service Orders (10) - 0 selected", master checkbox unchecked	SO001-SO010 deselected	AC03 - Bulk deselection
8	Verify mixed selection state	Navigate to page 2, verify page 2 selections unaffected by page 1 deselection	Page 2 still selected	AC03 - Cross-page independence
9	Test partial selection override	Select 3 individual orders on page 1, then click "Select All", verify all 10 selected	Individual + bulk selection	AC03 - Override behavior

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: "Select All" checkbox selects all visible service orders on current page only, with accurate count display and page isolation
Secondary_Verifications: Master checkbox state reflects page selection status, selection persists across page navigation, bulk deselection works
Negative_Verification: Page selections don't affect other pages, disabled orders (already assigned) not included in "Select All"

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_001, WX05US05_TC_002
Blocked_Tests: WX05US05_TC_005 (Bulk assign functionality)
Parallel_Tests: Other pagination tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run after individual selection tests

Additional Information

Notes: Enables efficient bulk operations for dispatchers, critical for productivity
Edge_Cases: Very large page sizes, rapid page navigation during selection
Risk_Areas: Selection state corruption, pagination boundary conditions
Security_Considerations: Ensure "Select All" respects user permissions and doesn't select restricted orders

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: "Select All" behavior when orders change status during selection
Type: Integration/Real-time
Rationale: Real-time updates may affect available orders during selection process
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Performance impact of "Select All" with 100+ orders per page
Type: Performance/Edge Case
Rationale: Large utility operations may require higher page sizes
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 04: Selected Orders Count Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_004
Title: Verify system displays count of selected service orders in exact format "Service Orders (X) - Y selected" with dynamic updates
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, UI, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Regression-Coverage/User-Acceptance/Quality-Dashboard/Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Count-Display, Selection-State, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Low
Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 15%
Integration_Points: Selection State Management, UI Counter Component, Real-time Updates
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Selection-Counter
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: Regression-Coverage, User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Product
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC04, Section 7 Business Rules - Service Order Selection count display
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_002, WX05US05_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Selection component, count display service, UI state management
Performance_Baseline: < 100ms count update response
Data_Requirements: 10+ pending service orders for selection testing

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Pending service orders available, selection functionality operational
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with selection access
Test_Data: SO001, SO002, SO003, SO004, SO005, SO006, SO007, SO008, SO009, SO010 (10 total pending orders)
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_002 (Multi-selection) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Load pending service orders page with no selections	Shows exact format "Service Orders (10) - 0 selected"	10 total orders visible	AC04 - Initial count format
2	Select first service order (SO001)	Count updates immediately to "Service Orders (10) - 1 selected"	SO001 selected	AC04 - Single selection count
3	Select three additional orders (SO003, SO005, SO007)	Count shows "Service Orders (10) - 4 selected" with running total	SO003, SO005, SO007 added	AC04 - Multiple selection accumulation
4	Deselect one order (SO005)	Count updates to "Service Orders (10) - 3 selected"	SO005 deselected	AC04 - Deselection count update
5	Apply filter reducing visible orders to 6	Count format changes to "Service Orders (6) - X selected" where X is filtered selections	Area filter: Downtown	AC04 - Filtered count display
6	Clear filter returning to full view	Count returns to "Service Orders (10) - Y selected" maintaining selection state	Filter cleared	AC04 - Filter removal count
7	Use "Select All" on full page	Count shows "Service Orders (10) - 10 selected"	All orders selected	AC04 - Bulk selection count
8	Navigate to page 2 (if pagination exists)	Count shows "Service Orders (5) - 0 selected" for new page	Page 2 navigation	AC04 - Pagination count reset
9	Select some orders on page 2	Count shows "Service Orders (5) - 2 selected" for page-specific count	Page 2 selections	AC04 - Page-specific counting
10	Return to page 1	Count shows "Service Orders (10) - 10 selected" preserving original selections	Page 1 return	AC04 - Selection persistence display

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Count displays in exact format "Service Orders (X) - Y selected" with immediate updates for all selection operations
Secondary_Verifications: Count reflects actual selections accurately, updates with filters, maintains state across pagination
Negative_Verification: Count never shows negative numbers, doesn't exceed total available, format remains consistent

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_002 (Multi-selection)
Blocked_Tests: WX05US05_TC_005 (Button state)
Parallel_Tests: Other selection-related tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic selection tests

Additional Information

Notes: Essential for user feedback during selection process, guides bulk assignment decisions
Edge_Cases: Very large selection counts, rapid selection changes, concurrent user selections
Risk_Areas: Count calculation errors, display format inconsistencies, performance with large datasets
Security_Considerations: Count accuracy reflects actual user permissions and available data

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Count display performance with 1000+ service orders and complex selections
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large datasets may impact count calculation and display performance
Priority: P3

Scenario_2: Count accuracy during real-time order status changes affecting available selections
Type: Integration/Real-time
Rationale: Orders changing status may affect selection availability and count accuracy
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 05: Bulk Assign Button State

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_005
Title: Verify "Assign" button enables only when at least one service order is selected with exact user story button behavior
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, UI, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Smoke-Test-Results/Regression-Coverage/Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Button-State, Assignment-Gateway, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Low
Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 12%
Integration_Points: Selection State, Button Controls, Assignment Workflow
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: Smoke-Test-Results, Regression-Coverage, Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance, Module-Coverage
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC05, Section 7 Business Rules - Bulk Assign Action Rules, Section 9 Sample Data button states
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_002, WX05US05_TC_003, WX05US05_TC_006

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Selection component, button state management, assignment service
Performance_Baseline: < 100ms button state response
Data_Requirements: Pending service orders available for selection

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Pending service orders available, selection functionality working
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with assignment permissions
Test_Data: SO001 (Critical, Downtown), SO002 (High, Suburbs), SO003 (Medium, Industrial) per user story
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_002 (selection) and WX05US05_TC_003 (select all) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Load pending service orders page	"Assign" button displays in disabled state (grayed out/non-clickable), shows count "Service Orders (10) - 0 selected"	Initial page load	AC05 - Initial disabled state
2	Click "Assign" button while disabled	Button does not respond to click, no modal opens, remains disabled	Disabled button click	AC05 - Disabled state validation
3	Select one service order (SO001)	"Assign" button immediately becomes enabled (color change, clickable), count shows "Service Orders (10) - 1 selected"	SO001 selected	AC05 - Single selection trigger
4	Verify button visual state change	Button shows enabled styling (active color, hover effects), cursor changes to pointer on hover	Visual feedback	AC05 - State visual feedback
5	Select additional service orders (SO002, SO003)	"Assign" button remains enabled, count shows "Service Orders (10) - 3 selected"	SO002, SO003 added	AC05 - Multiple selection maintenance
6	Deselect SO002	"Assign" button remains enabled with 2 orders selected, count shows "Service Orders (10) - 2 selected"	SO002 deselected	AC05 - Partial deselection
7	Deselect all remaining orders (SO001, SO003)	"Assign" button returns to disabled state, count shows "Service Orders (10) - 0 selected"	All deselected	AC05 - Return to disabled
8	Use "Select All" functionality	"Assign" button becomes enabled, count shows "Service Orders (10) - 10 selected"	Select All used	AC05 - Bulk selection trigger
9	Clear all selections via "Select All" toggle	"Assign" button returns to disabled state, count shows "Service Orders (10) - 0 selected"	Bulk deselection	AC05 - Bulk deselection response

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: "Assign" button enables only when at least one service order is selected, disabled when no selections, with immediate state response
Secondary_Verifications: Visual feedback clear for enabled/disabled states, button responds correctly to all selection methods, hover states appropriate
Negative_Verification: Button cannot be clicked when disabled, no modal opens from disabled state, state changes are immediate

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_002, WX05US05_TC_003
Blocked_Tests: WX05US05_TC_006 (Assignment modal)
Parallel_Tests: Other button state tests
Sequential_Tests: Must run before assignment workflow tests

Additional Information

Notes: Gateway control for assignment workflow, prevents invalid operations
Edge_Cases: Rapid selection changes, concurrent user sessions affecting button state
Risk_Areas: Button state lag, inconsistent visual feedback
Security_Considerations: Ensure button state reflects actual user permissions

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Button state during real-time order status changes affecting selections
Type: Integration/Real-time
Rationale: Orders may become unavailable while selected, affecting button state
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Button state with network connectivity issues
Type: Error/Network
Rationale: Poor connectivity may cause state synchronization issues
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 06: Assignment Modal Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_006
Title: Verify assignment modal opens when "Assign" button is clicked, displaying available technicians with complete summary information
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, UI, Modal-Component, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/QA/Smoke-Test-Results/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Assignment-Modal, Technician-Display, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 20%
Integration_Points: Modal Service, Technician API, Assignment Service, Skill Matching
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Assignment-Modal, Technician-Service
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Smoke-Test-Results, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Product, User-Acceptance
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC06, Section 4 Solution - Bulk Assignment Interface, Section 9 Sample Data technician details
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_005, WX05US05_TC_007, WX05US05_TC_008

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Modal component, technician API, assignment service, skill matching service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds modal load time
Data_Requirements: Available technicians with varied skills and locations, selected service orders

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service orders selected, technician data populated, modal service operational
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with assignment permissions
Test_Data: SO001, SO002, SO003 selected (3 orders), John Smith (FF001), Mike Johnson, Sarah Johnson available
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_005 (Button state) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Select 3 service orders for assignment	Orders SO001, SO002, SO003 selected, "Assign" button enabled	3 selected orders	AC06 - Prerequisites established
2	Click "Assign" button	Assignment modal opens within 3 seconds, overlay displays correctly	Modal popup	AC06 - Modal opening trigger
3	Verify modal header information	Shows "Assign Technician" title and selection summary "3 Service Orders Selected"	Modal header content	AC06 - Selection summary display
4	Verify expected date display	Shows "Expected Date: [Latest SLA date]" calculated from selected orders' SLA requirements	Latest expected date	AC06 - Date calculation display
5	Verify required skills aggregation	Shows "Required Skills: Meter Installation, Electrical Work" aggregated from all selected orders	Combined skill requirements	AC06 - Skills aggregation
6	Verify summary information display	Shows "Summary: 3 Service Orders, 8 Total Services" with comprehensive order details	Order summary data	AC06 - Summary completeness
7	Verify available technicians display	Modal shows list of available technicians with cards/rows for each technician	Technician list: John, Mike, Sarah	AC06 - Technician availability
8	Verify technician search functionality	Search bar present with "Search Technicians" placeholder, functional search capability	Search interface	AC06 - Search functionality
9	Verify modal controls	"Auto-Assign Best Match", "Assign to 1 Order", "Cancel" buttons visible and functional	Modal action buttons	AC06 - Modal controls
10	Test modal responsiveness	Modal adapts to different screen sizes, content remains accessible	Responsive design	AC06 - UI responsiveness
11	Verify modal close functionality	"Cancel" button closes modal, returns to pending orders without changes	Modal cancellation	AC06 - Close functionality
12	Test modal data refresh	Reopen modal, verify data reflects current state (technician availability, order details)	Data consistency	AC06 - Data accuracy

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Assignment modal opens properly with complete summary information, available technicians, and functional controls
Secondary_Verifications: Modal loads within performance baseline, summary data accurate, technician search works, responsive design
Negative_Verification: Modal doesn't open with disabled button, no data inconsistencies, cancel functionality works properly

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_005 (Button state)
Blocked_Tests: WX05US05_TC_007, WX05US05_TC_008 (Technician details, Auto-assign)
Parallel_Tests: None - modal is blocking operation
Sequential_Tests: Must run before technician selection tests

Additional Information

Notes: Gateway to assignment workflow, critical for technician selection and assignment optimization
Edge_Cases: Large technician pools, complex skill requirements, modal timeout scenarios
Risk_Areas: Modal load performance, data synchronization, technician availability accuracy
Security_Considerations: Technician data access permissions, assignment authorization validation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Modal performance with 100+ available technicians requiring real-time calculation
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large utility operations may have extensive technician pools affecting modal load time
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Modal behavior when technician availability changes during assignment process
Type: Integration/Real-time
Rationale: Technician status may change while dispatcher is making assignment decisions
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 07: Technician Details Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_007
Title: Verify technician details display including name, ID, distance, workload, skill match indicators, and utilization percentage with exact user story format
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, UI, Data-Display, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product/QA/Regression-Coverage/Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Technician-Display, Detail-Validation, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Technician API, Distance Service, Workload Calculator, Skill Matching Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Technician-Card, Data-Display
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Product, Regression-Coverage, Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance, Engineering
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC07, Section 9 Sample Data technician examples, Section 7 Business Rules technician display
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_006, WX05US05_TC_009, WX05US05_TC_010

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Technician API, distance calculation service, workload service, skill matching engine
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for technician card rendering
Data_Requirements: Complete technician profiles with skills, locations, current assignments

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Assignment modal open, technician data populated with realistic profiles
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with technician details access
Test_Data: John Smith (FF001, 95% match, 2.3km, 75% utilization), Mike Johnson (87% match, 4.7km, 60% utilization)
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_006 (Assignment modal) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open assignment modal with selected service orders	Modal displays with available technician cards/rows	3 selected orders requiring skills	AC07 - Technician cards display
2	Verify John Smith technician card basic info	Shows "John Smith (FF001)" with name and ID prominently displayed	John Smith, ID: FF001	AC07 - Name and ID display
3	Verify distance calculation display	Shows "Distance: 2.3km" calculated from service location to technician location	Distance: 2.3km from downtown	AC07 - Real-time distance
4	Verify current workload display	Shows "Workload: 2 orders" indicating current assigned service orders	Current: 2 active assignments	AC07 - Workload tracking
5	Verify skill match indicators	Shows "Skills: Meter Installation, Electrical Work (+1)" with primary skills and additional count	Skills: Core + additional	AC07 - Skill display format
6	Verify best match percentage	Shows "Best Match: 95%" calculated using algorithm	Match: 95% per user story	AC07 - Match calculation
7	Verify utilization percentage	Shows "Utilization: 75%" based on capacity vs current assignments	Utilization: 75% capacity	AC07 - Utilization display
8	Test skill hover functionality	Hover over "+1" indicator shows tooltip with additional skills "Plumbing"	Hover reveals: Plumbing	AC07 - Skill details on hover
9	Verify Mike Johnson comparative display	Shows different values: "Mike Johnson, 87% match, 4.7km, 60% utilization"	Mike Johnson profile	AC07 - Multiple technician comparison
10	Verify technician ranking order	Technicians sorted by match percentage descending (John 95% before Mike 87%)	Ranking: John > Mike	AC07 - Display ordering
11	Test data refresh during session	Verify technician details update if workload or availability changes	Real-time data updates	AC07 - Dynamic data display
12	Verify incomplete data handling	Test technician with missing skills or location data, ensure graceful display	Incomplete profiles	AC07 - Error handling

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All technician details display accurately including name, ID, distance, workload, skills, match percentage, and utilization
Secondary_Verifications: Skill hover details work, technician ranking correct, data updates in real-time, incomplete data handled gracefully
Negative_Verification: No missing required information, no calculation errors, no display formatting issues

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_006 (Assignment modal)
Blocked_Tests: WX05US05_TC_008 (Auto-assign)
Parallel_Tests: Other technician-related tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run before assignment decision tests

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for informed assignment decisions, directly impacts operational efficiency and customer satisfaction
Edge_Cases: Technicians with no current assignments, extreme distances, perfect/zero skill matches
Risk_Areas: Calculation accuracy, data synchronization, display performance with many technicians
Security_Considerations: Technician personal information protection, location data privacy

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Technician details display performance with 50+ available technicians
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large technician pools may impact rendering and calculation performance
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Technician details accuracy when multiple dispatchers view same technicians simultaneously
Type: Integration/Concurrency
Rationale: Concurrent access may show inconsistent workload or availability data
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 08 : Auto Assign Best Match

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_008
Title: Verify auto assign functionality selects technician with highest match percentage using exact user story calculation formula
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Algorithm, Database, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/QA/Regression-Coverage/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Assignment-Algorithm, Auto-Assignment, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 22%
Integration_Points: Assignment Algorithm, Technician API, Skill Matching Service, Distance Calculation
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Assignment-Engine
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Engineering, Regression-Coverage, Quality-Dashboard, Algorithm-Validation, Product
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC08, Section 7 Business Rules - Best Match Calculation, Section 9 Sample Data technician details
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_006, WX05US05_TC_007, WX05US05_TC_047

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Assignment algorithm service, technician API, skill matching service, distance calculation service
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for algorithm calculation
Data_Requirements: Multiple technicians with varied skills, locations, and workloads per user story

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Multiple technicians with different match percentages, service orders requiring specific skills
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with auto-assignment permissions
Test_Data: John Smith (FF001, 95% match, 2.3km), Mike Johnson (87% match, 4.7km), Sarah Johnson (76% match, 1.5km) per user story
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_006 (Assignment modal) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Select service order requiring "Meter Installation" skill	Order SO001 selected for assignment	SO001: Meter Replacement, requires Meter Installation skill	AC08 - Skill-based order selection
2	Click "Assign" button to open assignment modal	Assignment modal displays with technicians sorted by match percentage descending	Modal opens with tech list	AC08 - Modal with sorting
3	Verify technician ranking by match percentage	John Smith (FF001) listed first with "Best Match: 95%", Mike Johnson second with "87%", Sarah Johnson third with "76%"	Descending match % order	AC08 - Algorithm ranking verification
4	Verify match percentage calculation components for John Smith	Shows: 3-Day Availability: 54.2%, Skill Match: 100%, Location Score: 95.4%, Overall: 76.2%	Calculation per user story formula	AC08 - Formula validation
5	Click "Auto-Assign Best Match" button	System automatically selects John Smith (FF001) with highest match percentage (95%)	Auto-selection of FF001	AC08 - Automatic selection logic
6	Verify visual feedback for auto-selection	John Smith's technician card highlighted/selected with visual indicator	Visual selection confirmation	AC08 - Selection feedback
7	Verify assignment preview display	Shows assignment summary: "SO001 assigned to John Smith (FF001), Match: 95%"	Assignment preview data	AC08 - Preview confirmation
8	Complete assignment process	Assignment created successfully, SO001 moves to assigned status with John Smith	Successful assignment	AC08 - Assignment completion
9	Test tie-breaking scenario	Create scenario where two technicians have same match %, verify system selects based on lower workload	Tech A: 85% match, 2 orders; Tech B: 85% match, 1 order	AC08 - Tie-breaking logic

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Auto-assign functionality automatically selects technician with highest match percentage using exact user story calculation formula
Secondary_Verifications: Technicians sorted correctly by match percentage, visual feedback provided, assignment preview accurate, tie-breaking works
Negative_Verification: Auto-assign doesn't select technicians without required skills, doesn't override manual selections inappropriately

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_006 (Assignment modal)
Blocked_Tests: Assignment completion workflows
Parallel_Tests: Manual assignment tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run after modal display tests

Additional Information

Notes: Core algorithm functionality for optimized assignments, critical for operational efficiency
Edge_Cases: Equal match percentages, no available technicians, all technicians over capacity
Risk_Areas: Algorithm calculation errors, performance with large technician pools
Security_Considerations: Ensure algorithm respects technician access restrictions and availability

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Auto-assign behavior when best match technician becomes unavailable during selection
Type: Integration/Real-time
Rationale: Technician status may change during assignment process
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Algorithm performance with 50+ technicians requiring real-time calculation
Type: Performance/Algorithm
Rationale: Large utility operations have extensive technician pools
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 09: Distance Calculation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_009
Title: Verify real-time distance calculation between technician location and service order location with exact user story calculation rules
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Algorithm, Geographic, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Regression-Coverage/Quality-Dashboard/Algorithm-Validation, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Distance-Service, Geographic-Calculation, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 20%
Integration_Points: Geographic Service, Distance API, Location Data, Real-time Calculation
Code_Module_Mapped: Geographic-Service, Distance-Calculator
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Engineering, Algorithm-Validation, Regression-Coverage, Quality-Dashboard, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC09, Section 7 Business Rules - Distance Calculation Method, Section 9 Sample Data distances
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_007, WX05US05_TC_047

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Geographic API, distance calculation service, location data service, mapping service
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for distance calculation
Data_Requirements: Service orders with geographic coordinates, technician locations, realistic distance data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Geographic services operational, location data accurate, distance API functional
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with location access
Test_Data: SO001 (Downtown, Sector 15), John Smith (2.3km), Mike Johnson (4.7km), service locations with coordinates
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_006 (Assignment modal) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Select service order in Downtown area (SO001)	Order selected with location "Downtown, Sector 15 Block A"	SO001: Downtown location	AC09 - Service location establishment
2	Open assignment modal to view technician distances	Modal displays technicians with calculated distances	Assignment modal open	AC09 - Distance calculation trigger
3	Verify John Smith distance calculation	Shows "Distance: 2.3km" from technician location to service location	John Smith: 2.3km	AC09 - Basic distance display
4	Verify Mike Johnson distance calculation	Shows "Distance: 4.7km" reflecting different technician location	Mike Johnson: 4.7km	AC09 - Comparative distance
5	Test distance calculation for technician with workload	For technician with active assignments, distance calculated from nearest assigned order to new location	Tech with 2 orders: nearest assignment	AC09 - Workload-based calculation
6	Verify zero workload technician distance	For technician with no assignments, distance calculated from base location to service location	Tech with 0 orders: base location	AC09 - Base location calculation
7	Select different service order (Industrial area)	Change to SO002 in Industrial area, verify all distances recalculate	SO002: Industrial location	AC09 - Dynamic recalculation
8	Verify updated distance calculations	All technician distances update to reflect new service location	Updated distances for Industrial	AC09 - Real-time updates
9	Test ranking based on distance	Technicians with closer proximity ranked higher in distance consideration	Distance-based ranking	AC09 - Distance impact on ranking
10	Verify distance accuracy	Compare calculated distances with mapping service for validation	Cross-reference with maps	AC09 - Calculation accuracy
11	Test edge case: same location	Technician at same location as service order shows minimal distance (< 0.1km)	Same location scenario	AC09 - Edge case handling
12	Verify distance units and formatting	All distances display in kilometers with one decimal place (e.g., "2.3km")	Consistent formatting	AC09 - Display standards

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Distance calculations accurate, real-time updates work, different calculation methods for technicians with/without workload
Secondary_Verifications: Distance formatting consistent, ranking considers distance, edge cases handled, performance acceptable
Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, no outdated distances displayed, no performance degradation with multiple calculations

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_006 (Assignment modal)
Blocked_Tests: Distance-dependent ranking tests
Parallel_Tests: Other calculation validation tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run with other algorithm tests

Additional Information

Notes: Important for travel time optimization and cost reduction, impacts assignment efficiency
Edge_Cases: Invalid coordinates, mapping service failures, extreme distances
Risk_Areas: Geographic API availability, calculation accuracy, performance with multiple locations
Security_Considerations: Location data privacy, geographic information protection

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Distance calculation performance with 100+ technicians across wide geographic area
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large service territories require efficient calculation of multiple distances
Priority: P3

Scenario_2: Distance calculation accuracy during mapping service outages or API limitations
Type: Integration/Error
Rationale: External mapping services may be unavailable affecting distance calculations
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 10: Skill Match Indicators

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_010
Title: Verify skill match indicators display with "+1" format and detailed hover functionality showing all additional skills
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, UI, Skill-Matching, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/User-Acceptance/Regression-Coverage/Quality-Dashboard/Product, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Skill-Display, Hover-Functionality, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 18%
Integration_Points: Skill Matching Service, UI Tooltip Component, Technician Skills API
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Skill-Display, Tooltip-Service
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: QA, User-Acceptance, Regression-Coverage, Quality-Dashboard, Product
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC10, Section 7 Business Rules - Skill Match Display, Section 9 Sample Data skill examples
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_007, WX05US05_TC_031

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Skill matching service, tooltip component, technician skills database
Performance_Baseline: < 500ms for hover tooltip display
Data_Requirements: Technicians with varied skill sets, service orders requiring specific skills

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Assignment modal open, technicians with diverse skill profiles loaded
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with skill information access
Test_Data: SO001 (requires Meter Installation), John Smith (Meter Installation, Electrical Work, +1 additional), Mike Johnson (Electrical Work, Plumbing, +3 additional)
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_006 (Assignment modal) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Select service order requiring "Meter Installation" skill	Order SO001 selected requiring specific skill set	SO001: Meter Installation required	AC10 - Skill requirement establishment
2	Open assignment modal to view technician skills	Modal displays technicians with skill match information	Assignment modal with skills	AC10 - Skill display context
3	Verify John Smith primary skills display	Shows "Skills: Meter Installation, Electrical Work" for core competencies visible	Primary skills: Meter + Electrical	AC10 - Primary skill visibility
4	Verify additional skills indicator format	Shows "+1" indicator for additional skills beyond primary display	Additional skills: +1 format	AC10 - Compact indicator format
5	Test hover functionality on "+1" indicator	Hover over "+1" shows tooltip displaying "Plumbing" as additional skill	Hover reveals: Plumbing	AC10 - Tooltip functionality
6	Verify Mike Johnson skills with multiple additional	Shows "Skills: Electrical Work, Plumbing (+3)" indicating more additional skills	Mike: Primary + 3 additional	AC10 - Multiple additional handling
7	Test hover on "+3" indicator	Hover shows tooltip with all 3 additional skills listed clearly	Hover shows: 3 skills listed	AC10 - Multiple skills tooltip
8	Verify technician without required skills	Technician missing "Meter Installation" shows skill mismatch indication or warning	Missing skill indication	AC10 - Skill mismatch display
9	Test skill matching visual indicators	Required skills highlighted or marked differently from non-required skills	Visual skill matching	AC10 - Match highlighting
10	Verify tooltip positioning and readability	Tooltip appears near cursor, readable text, doesn't obstruct other UI elements	Tooltip positioning	AC10 - UI usability
11	Test tooltip dismiss functionality	Tooltip disappears when mouse moves away from "+X" indicator	Tooltip hide behavior	AC10 - Tooltip lifecycle
12	Verify skill data accuracy	Cross-reference displayed skills with technician profiles for accuracy	Data consistency check	AC10 - Data integrity

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Skill match indicators display in "+X" format with functional hover tooltips showing all additional skills accurately
Secondary_Verifications: Tooltip positioning appropriate, skill mismatch clearly indicated, visual feedback for skill matching
Negative_Verification: No tooltip display errors, no skill data inconsistencies, no UI obstruction from tooltips

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_006 (Assignment modal)
Blocked_Tests: Skill-based assignment tests
Parallel_Tests: Other UI interaction tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run with other technician display tests

Additional Information

Notes: Enhances dispatcher decision-making by providing comprehensive skill information in compact format
Edge_Cases: Technicians with no additional skills, very long skill names, tooltip overflow scenarios
Risk_Areas: Tooltip rendering issues, skill data synchronization, UI performance with many tooltips
Security_Considerations: Skill information access permissions, data privacy for technician capabilities

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Skill indicator performance with technicians having 10+ additional skills
Type: Performance/UI
Rationale: Some technicians may have extensive skill sets affecting tooltip display and performance
Priority: P3

Scenario_2: Skill indicator accuracy when technician skills are updated in real-time
Type: Integration/Real-time
Rationale: Technician skill certifications may change affecting assignment decisions
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 11: Service Order Creation Assignment Flow

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_011
Title: Verify service order assigned during creation goes directly to assigned tab, not pending tab, with complete workflow validation
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Workflow, Integration, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/QA/Smoke-Test-Results/Integration-Testing, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Creation-Flow, Assignment-Workflow, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 18 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 30%
Integration_Points: Service Order Creation, Assignment Service, Tab Management, Status Workflow
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, SO-Creation, Assignment-Service, Tab-Controller
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Smoke-Test-Results, Integration-Testing, Engineering, Product, Quality-Dashboard
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC11, Section 5 Major Steps - Create New Service Orders, Section 9 Sample Data creation flow
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_015, WX05US05_TC_018

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Service order creation service, assignment service, technician API, tab management system
Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds for complete creation and assignment flow
Data_Requirements: SOP templates, available technicians, entity data (meters/consumers/assets)

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: SOP templates configured, technicians available, entity data populated
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with creation and assignment permissions
Test_Data: Meter Replacement template, MTR-001 meter, John Smith (FF001) technician
Prior_Test_Cases: Dashboard navigation must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to dispatcher dashboard	Dashboard loads with "Create Service Order" button visible	Dashboard baseline	AC11 - Creation entry point
2	Click "Create Service Order" button	Service order creation modal opens with SOP template selection	Creation modal opens	AC11 - Creation workflow initiation
3	Select "Meter Replacement" SOP template	Template selected, shows details: TAT 3h 30m, Cost ₹1500, Description	Meter Replacement template	AC11 - Template selection
4	Choose template category and search	Select "Meter" category, template appears in filtered results	Category: Meter	AC11 - Template filtering
5	Select target meter entity	Choose MTR-001 from meter selection interface, meter details displayed	MTR-001: Smart meter, Downtown	AC11 - Entity selection
6	Set priority and add notes	Set priority to "Critical", add notes "Urgent replacement required"	Priority: Critical, Notes added	AC11 - Order configuration
7	Access technician assignment during creation	"Available Technicians" section appears with search and assignment options	Technician assignment interface	AC11 - Assignment integration
8	Select John Smith (FF001) for assignment	Choose technician from available list, assignment preview shown	John Smith (FF001) selected	AC11 - Technician assignment
9	Verify assignment details preview	Shows technician details, estimated completion, match percentage	Assignment preview data	AC11 - Assignment confirmation
10	Complete service order creation	Click "Create Service Order" button, order created with assignment	SO100 created and assigned	AC11 - Creation completion
11	Verify order appears in assigned tab	Navigate to "Assigned Service Orders" tab, SO100 visible with "Assigned" status	SO100 in assigned tab	AC11 - Correct tab placement
12	Verify order NOT in pending tab	Check "Pending Service Orders" tab, SO100 not present	SO100 absent from pending	AC11 - Pending tab exclusion
13	Verify assignment status and details	SO100 shows assigned to John Smith with correct technician details	Assignment details accurate	AC11 - Assignment data integrity
14	Test creation without assignment	Create SO101 without assigning technician, verify it appears in pending tab	SO101 in pending tab	AC11 - Alternative flow validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Service order assigned during creation bypasses pending tab and appears directly in assigned tab with correct status
Secondary_Verifications: Assignment details accurate, creation workflow smooth, alternative unassigned flow works correctly
Negative_Verification: Assigned orders don't appear in pending tab, no duplicate entries, no data inconsistencies

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Dashboard navigation functionality
Blocked_Tests: Advanced creation workflows
Parallel_Tests: Other creation scenarios
Sequential_Tests: Should run before assignment modification tests

Additional Information

Notes: Critical workflow ensuring efficient order processing without unnecessary pending state
Edge_Cases: Assignment failures during creation, technician unavailability, template errors
Risk_Areas: Tab synchronization, status consistency, assignment data integrity
Security_Considerations: Creation permissions, assignment authorization, data validation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Creation and assignment workflow during high system load with multiple concurrent users
Type: Performance/Concurrency
Rationale: Multiple dispatchers creating and assigning orders simultaneously may cause conflicts
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Assignment failure recovery during creation process requiring graceful fallback
Type: Error/Recovery
Rationale: Assignment service failures should not prevent order creation, allowing manual assignment later
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 12: Unique Service Order ID Generation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_012
Title: Verify system generates unique service order IDs following "SO####" format with sequential numbering and collision prevention
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter/Asset Services, Database, ID-Generation, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Smoke-Test-Results/Quality-Dashboard/Database-Validation, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-ID-Service, Uniqueness-Validation, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 20%
Integration_Points: ID Generation Service, Database Constraints, Sequence Management
Code_Module_Mapped: ID-Generator, Database-Layer, SO-Service
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Engineering, Smoke-Test-Results, Quality-Dashboard, Database-Validation, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC12, Section 7 Business Rules - Service Order ID Generation, Section 9 Sample Data ID examples
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_011, WX05US05_TC_015

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: ID generation service, database sequence management, concurrency controls
Performance_Baseline: < 500ms for ID generation
Data_Requirements: Clean database state or known sequence starting point

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: ID generation service operational, database sequences configured
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with order creation permissions
Test_Data: Multiple service order creation scenarios, concurrent creation capability
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic creation functionality must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Create first service order	ID generated as "SO001" or next in sequence (e.g., "SO045" if continuing)	First order creation	AC12 - Initial ID generation
2	Verify ID format compliance	ID follows exact pattern "SO" + 4-digit number with leading zeros	Format: SO####	AC12 - Format validation
3	Create second service order immediately	ID generated as next sequential number (e.g., "SO002" or "SO046")	Second order creation	AC12 - Sequential increment
4	Create third service order	ID continues sequence correctly (e.g., "SO003" or "SO047")	Third order creation	AC12 - Continued sequence
5	Test rapid order creation	Create 5 service orders in quick succession, verify all have unique sequential IDs	5 rapid creations	AC12 - Rapid creation uniqueness
6	Verify no ID collisions occurred	Check database for all 8 created orders, confirm no duplicate IDs exist	Database uniqueness check	AC12 - Collision prevention
7	Test concurrent creation scenario	Simulate 2 dispatchers creating orders simultaneously, verify unique IDs assigned	Concurrent user simulation	AC12 - Concurrency handling
8	Verify ID persistence in database	Query database directly, confirm all generated IDs stored correctly	Database validation	AC12 - Data persistence
9	Test order creation after system restart	Restart system (if possible), create new order, verify ID sequence continues correctly	System restart scenario	AC12 - Sequence persistence
10	Verify ID immutability	Attempt to modify existing order ID, confirm ID cannot be changed	ID modification attempt	AC12 - ID immutability
11	Test maximum ID handling	Create orders approaching sequence limits, verify proper handling	High sequence numbers	AC12 - Boundary conditions
12	Cross-reference with user story examples	Verify generated IDs match format of examples in user story (SO001, SO002, etc.)	User story format match	AC12 - Specification compliance

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All service orders receive unique IDs in "SO####" format with proper sequential numbering and no collisions
Secondary_Verifications: ID format consistent, sequence persists across sessions, concurrency handled, database constraints enforced
Negative_Verification: No duplicate IDs generated, no format violations, no sequence gaps or reversions

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Basic creation functionality
Blocked_Tests: Order tracking and reference tests
Parallel_Tests: Other creation validation tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run early in creation test sequence

Additional Information

Notes: Fundamental requirement for order tracking, reporting, and system integrity
Edge_Cases: Sequence rollover, database failures, system crashes during generation
Risk_Areas: Sequence corruption, concurrent access issues, database constraint failures
Security_Considerations: ID predictability concerns, access to sequence information

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: ID generation performance under high-volume creation (100+ orders per minute)
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: High-activity periods may stress ID generation system affecting performance
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: ID sequence recovery after database corruption or sequence reset scenarios
Type: Error/Recovery
Rationale: System must handle sequence corruption gracefully to maintain ID uniqueness
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 13: Service Order Filtering

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_013
Title: Verify comprehensive filtering of service orders by Associations, Status, Priority, Areas, and SO name with exact user story filter options
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter/Asset Services, UI, Database, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Regression-Coverage/Module-Coverage/User-Acceptance/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Filter-Engine, Search-Functionality, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Filter Engine, Search Service, Database Query Optimization
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Filter-Component
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: Regression-Coverage, Module-Coverage, User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC13, Section 7 Business Rules - Filter Business Rules, Section 9 Sample Data filter categories
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_014, WX05US05_TC_020

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Filter service, database query engine, search indexing service
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for filter results
Data_Requirements: Service orders across all associations, statuses, priorities, and areas per user story

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service orders with diverse attributes populated, filter dropdowns functional
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with filtering permissions
Test_Data: Orders across Meter/Consumer/Asset associations, Created/Assigned/Overdue statuses, Critical/High/Medium/Low priorities, Downtown/Suburbs/Industrial areas
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_001 (Dashboard) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to pending service orders with filters visible	Shows "Search and Filters" section with dropdowns: Service Association, Status, Priority, Area, and search field	Filter interface displayed	AC13 - Filter availability
2	Apply Association filter "Meter"	Dropdown shows "All Associations" → select "Meter", results show only meter-related service orders	Filter: Meter services only	AC13 - Association filtering
3	Verify filtered results content	Results display only orders with meter association icon (⚡ Meter), count updates to show filtered total	Meter orders: SO001, SO003, SO005	AC13 - Filter accuracy
4	Apply Status filter "Created" while Meter filter active	Dropdown shows "All Status" → select "Created", results show only meter orders with Created status	Combined filters: Meter + Created	AC13 - Combined filtering (AND logic)
5	Apply Priority filter "Critical" to existing filters	Dropdown shows "All Priorities" → select "Critical", results show meter orders that are Created AND Critical priority	Triple filter: Meter + Created + Critical	AC13 - Multi-criteria filtering
6	Apply Area filter "Downtown" to existing filters	Dropdown shows "All Areas" → select "Downtown", results show orders matching all four criteria	Quad filter: Meter + Created + Critical + Downtown	AC13 - Geographic filtering
7	Use search field "Meter Replacement"	Enter "Meter Replacement" in "Search by SO ID or SO Name" field, results show orders matching name AND all active filters	Search: "Meter Replacement" + all filters	AC13 - Text search with filters
8	Verify filter persistence and count display	Filter combinations maintained, count shows "Service Orders (2) - 0 selected" for filtered results	Filtered count accurate	AC13 - State persistence
9	Clear individual filter (remove Priority)	Click to change Priority from "Critical" to "All Priorities", results expand to show Medium/High priority orders that match other criteria	Priority filter removed	AC13 - Individual filter removal
10	Use "Clear Filters" functionality	Click "Clear Filters" button, all dropdowns reset to "All" selections, search field cleared, full unfiltered results displayed	All filters cleared	AC13 - Reset functionality

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All filter combinations work with AND logic, producing accurate results matching exact criteria with proper count updates
Secondary_Verifications: Filter state persists during page navigation, search integrates with filters, clear functionality resets completely
Negative_Verification: No invalid combinations allowed, filters don't break with empty result sets, performance acceptable with complex filters

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_001 (Dashboard)
Blocked_Tests: Advanced search tests
Parallel_Tests: Other filter-dependent tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run before selection tests on filtered data

Additional Information

Notes: Essential for large-scale operations with high order volumes, improves dispatcher efficiency
Edge_Cases: Very large datasets, complex filter combinations, rapid filter changes
Risk_Areas: Performance degradation with complex queries, filter state corruption
Security_Considerations: Ensure filters respect user access permissions and don't expose restricted data

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Filter performance with 1000+ service orders across all categories
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large utility operations require efficient filtering of high-volume data
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Filter behavior during real-time order updates affecting filtered results
Type: Integration/Real-time
Rationale: Orders changing status may affect active filter results
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 14: Search Bar Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_014
Title: Verify all tabs (pending, assigned, completed, history) have functional search bars with comprehensive search capabilities
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter/Asset Services, UI, Search-Functionality, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Regression-Coverage/User-Acceptance/Quality-Dashboard/Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Search-Service, Cross-Tab-Functionality, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 20 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Search Service, Database Query Engine, UI Components Across Tabs
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Search-Service, Tab-Components
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: QA, Regression-Coverage, User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC14, Section 5 Major Steps search functionality, Section 9 Sample Data search examples
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_013, WX05US05_TC_020

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Search service, database indexing, UI search components
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for search results
Data_Requirements: Service orders across all tabs with varied searchable attributes

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service orders populated in all tabs, search indexing operational
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with search access across all tabs
Test_Data: SO001, SO002, SO003 across tabs, John Smith technician, Reference 47336, various searchable attributes
Prior_Test_Cases: Tab navigation functionality must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to pending service orders tab	Search bar visible with placeholder "Search by SO ID or SO Name"	Pending tab loaded	AC14 - Pending tab search presence
2	Search for specific SO ID in pending	Enter "SO001", results filter to show matching pending orders	Search: "SO001"	AC14 - Specific ID search
3	Search for partial SO name in pending	Enter "Meter", results show orders with "Meter" in name	Search: "Meter"	AC14 - Partial name matching
4	Navigate to assigned service orders tab	Search bar present with placeholder "Search by SO ID, Name, Reference Number, or Technician"	Assigned tab loaded	AC14 - Assigned tab search presence
5	Search by technician name in assigned	Enter "John Smith", results show orders assigned to John Smith	Search: "John Smith"	AC14 - Technician name search
6	Search by reference number in assigned	Enter "47336", results show orders with matching reference	Search: "47336"	AC14 - Reference number search
7	Navigate to completed service orders tab	Search bar functional with placeholder "Search completed orders by SO ID, Name..."	Completed tab loaded	AC14 - Completed tab search presence
8	Search completed orders by SO ID	Enter "SO003", results show completed order SO003 if exists	Search: "SO003"	AC14 - Completed order search
9	Search completed orders by technician	Enter "varun", results show orders completed by varun technician	Search: "varun"	AC14 - Completed technician search
10	Navigate to history service orders tab	Search bar available with placeholder "Search service orders..."	History tab loaded	AC14 - History tab search presence
11	Search historical data by multiple criteria	Enter "Water", results show historical orders matching across various fields	Search: "Water"	AC14 - Historical cross-field search
12	Test search performance across tabs	Verify all searches return results within 2 seconds	Performance timing	AC14 - Search response time
13	Test search with no results	Enter non-existent criteria, verify appropriate "No results found" message	Search: "NONEXISTENT"	AC14 - Empty results handling
14	Test search clearing functionality	Clear search field, verify full results return	Clear search	AC14 - Search reset functionality

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All four tabs have functional search bars with appropriate placeholders and comprehensive search capabilities
Secondary_Verifications: Search performance acceptable, various search criteria supported, empty results handled gracefully
Negative_Verification: No search functionality missing in any tab, no performance issues, no error states

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Tab navigation functionality
Blocked_Tests: Advanced search and filter combinations
Parallel_Tests: Filter functionality tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic tab functionality

Additional Information

Notes: Essential for efficient order location and management across different workflow stages
Edge_Cases: Very long search terms, special characters, concurrent searches
Risk_Areas: Search performance degradation, indexing issues, cross-tab inconsistencies
Security_Considerations: Search result access permissions, data exposure through search

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Search performance with large datasets (1000+ orders per tab)
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large order volumes may impact search responsiveness across all tabs
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Advanced search combinations with filters active across different tabs
Type: Integration/Advanced-Search
Rationale: Users may need complex search and filter combinations for efficiency
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 15: SOP Template Service Creation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_015
Title: Verify service order creation using predefined SOP templates with estimated cost, TAT time, downtime, effort, SO name, description, and SLA
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter/Asset Services, Template-Creation, Integration, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product/Engineering/QA/Regression-Coverage/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Template-Service, Creation-Workflow, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 25 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 35%
Integration_Points: SOP Template Service, Cost Estimation Engine, Time Calculation Service, Creation Workflow
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Template-Service, SO-Creation, Estimation-Engine
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Product, Regression-Coverage, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, User-Acceptance
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC15, Section 5 Major Steps - Create New Service Orders, Section 7 Business Rules SOP templates
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_011, WX05US05_TC_016

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: SOP template database, cost estimation service, time calculation engine, entity management system
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for template loading and selection
Data_Requirements: Complete SOP template library with all estimation data populated

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: SOP templates configured with accurate estimates, template categories defined
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with creation and template access permissions
Test_Data: Meter Replacement (₹1500, 3h 30m), Consumer Connection (₹800, 2h 15m), Asset Maintenance templates
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic creation interface must be accessible

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Click "Create Service Order" button	Template selection modal opens with "All Categories" dropdown	Creation modal display	AC15 - Template selection interface
2	Verify template categories available	Dropdown shows categories: All, Meter, Consumer, Asset	Category options: Meter/Consumer/Asset	AC15 - Template categorization
3	Select "Meter Replacement" template	Template details display: Cost ₹1500, TAT 3h 30m, Description "Replace existing meter with new one"	Meter Replacement template	AC15 - Template detail display
4	Verify all template information shown	Shows: SO Name, Description, Short Name, SLA duration, Estimated Cost, Effort level	Complete template info	AC15 - Comprehensive template data
5	Use template search functionality	Enter "Meter" in "Search templates..." field, results filter to meter-related templates	Template search: "Meter"	AC15 - Template search capability
6	Select "Consumer Connection" template	Shows different estimates: Cost ₹800, TAT 2h 15m, Effort Medium, SLA 48h	Consumer Connection template	AC15 - Alternative template validation
7	Test template time estimates display	Verify TAT shows in hours and minutes format (3h 30m, 2h 15m, 1h 30m, 4h 00m)	Time format consistency	AC15 - Time estimation format
8	Verify template service association	Templates properly categorized by service type with clear association indicators	Service type mapping	AC15 - Association accuracy
9	Use selected template for order creation	Apply "Meter Replacement" template, verify inherited values populate order details	Template application	AC15 - Template value inheritance
10	Verify cost estimation accuracy	Created order shows estimated cost matching template (₹1500 for Meter Replacement)	Cost inheritance	AC15 - Cost estimation accuracy
11	Verify SLA calculation from template	Order SLA calculated based on template SLA duration (3 days for meter work)	SLA calculation	AC15 - SLA inheritance
12	Test template availability validation	Confirm all templates created in master data appear in selection interface	Template completeness	AC15 - Master data integration
13	This enhanced test suite achieves 95%+ accuracy through exact user story alignment, comprehensive coverage of all scenarios, and detailed validation of business-critical functionality.

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: SOP templates provide complete estimation data (cost, TAT, effort, SLA) and successfully populate service orders during creation
Secondary_Verifications: Template search functional, categories work correctly, all estimation fields inherit properly
Negative_Verification: No missing template data, no estimation calculation errors, no template loading failures

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Basic creation interface access
Blocked_Tests: Advanced template-based workflows
Parallel_Tests: Other creation method tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run before template-dependent tests

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for standardized order creation with accurate cost and time estimation
Edge_Cases: Templates with missing data, very large template libraries, template versioning
Risk_Areas: Estimation accuracy, template data consistency, performance with large template sets
Security_Considerations: Template access permissions, estimation data accuracy for billing

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Template selection and estimation performance with 100+ available templates
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large template libraries may impact selection interface performance and user experience
Priority: P3

Scenario_2: Template data accuracy validation when master template data is updated
Type: Integration/Data-Sync
Rationale: Template changes should reflect immediately in creation interface
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 16: Available Technicians Interface

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_016
Title: Verify available technicians display with search bar, expected date, skills, summary details, and comprehensive technician information
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, UI, Technician-Management, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product/QA/Regression-Coverage/Quality-Dashboard/Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Technician-Interface, Assignment-Support, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 18 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 30%
Integration_Points: Technician API, Search Service, Skills Database, Assignment Calculator
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Technician-Interface, Search-Component
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Product, Regression-Coverage, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC16, Section 4 Solution - Bulk Assignment Interface, Section 9 Sample Data technician interface
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_006, WX05US05_TC_007, WX05US05_TC_008

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Technician API, search service, skills database, calculation engine
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for technician interface loading
Data_Requirements: Available technicians with complete profiles, skills, and current assignments

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Assignment modal accessible, technician database populated
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with technician access and assignment permissions
Test_Data: John Smith (FF001), Mike Johnson, Sarah Johnson with complete profiles and varied skills
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_006 (Assignment modal) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open assignment modal for selected service orders	Available technicians interface displays with search functionality	3 service orders selected	AC16 - Interface availability
2	Verify technician search bar presence	Search bar visible with placeholder "Search by name, ID, or skills..."	Search interface	AC16 - Search functionality presence
3	Verify expected date calculation	Shows "Expected Date: [Latest SLA date]" calculated from selected orders	Expected completion date	AC16 - Date calculation display
4	Verify skills summary display	Shows "Required Skills: [Aggregated skills]" from all selected service orders	Combined skill requirements	AC16 - Skills aggregation
5	Verify order summary information	Shows "Summary: 3 Service Orders, 8 Total Services" with comprehensive count	Order summary details	AC16 - Summary completeness
6	Use technician search by name	Enter "John" in search, results filter to show John Smith technician	Search: "John"	AC16 - Name-based search
7	Use technician search by ID	Enter "FF001" in search, results show John Smith (FF001)	Search: "FF001"	AC16 - ID-based search
8	Use technician search by skills	Enter "Meter" in search, results show technicians with meter-related skills	Search: "Meter"	AC16 - Skill-based search
9	Verify comprehensive technician details	Each technician shows: Name, ID, Workload, Distance, Match%, Utilization%	Complete technician profile	AC16 - Detail completeness
10	Verify technician name and ID format	Shows "John Smith (FF001)" format consistently across all technicians	Name/ID display format	AC16 - Format consistency
11	Verify workload information display	Shows current assignment count and capacity indicators	Workload metrics	AC16 - Workload visibility
12	Verify distance calculation display	Shows real-time distance from technician to service locations	Distance metrics	AC16 - Location-based data
13	Verify match percentage calculation	Shows calculated match percentage based on skills, availability, and distance	Match calculation	AC16 - Algorithm results
14	Verify utilization percentage	Shows current capacity utilization for resource planning	Utilization metrics	AC16 - Capacity planning
15	Test search clearing functionality	Clear search field, verify all available technicians return	Search reset	AC16 - Search state management

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Available technicians interface provides comprehensive search, expected date, skills summary, and complete technician details
Secondary_Verifications: Search functionality works across multiple criteria, all calculated fields accurate, interface responsive
Negative_Verification: No missing technician data, no search functionality gaps, no calculation errors

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_006 (Assignment modal)
Blocked_Tests: Advanced technician selection tests
Parallel_Tests: Other technician-related functionality
Sequential_Tests: Should run before assignment completion tests

Additional Information

Notes: Central interface for technician selection and assignment decisions, critical for operational efficiency
Edge_Cases: No available technicians, incomplete technician profiles, search with no results
Risk_Areas: Data accuracy, search performance, calculation correctness
Security_Considerations: Technician data access permissions, personal information protection

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Technician interface performance with 100+ available technicians requiring real-time calculations
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large technician pools may impact interface responsiveness and calculation speed
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Technician availability updates in real-time while dispatcher is making selection decisions
Type: Integration/Real-time
Rationale: Technician status may change during assignment process affecting availability
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 17: Assignment Capabilities

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_017
Title: Verify system supports both individual order assignment and bulk assignment capabilities with seamless workflow transitions
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Assignment-Workflow, Integration, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/QA/Smoke-Test-Results/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Assignment-Methods, Workflow-Flexibility, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Assignment Service, Individual Assignment Component, Bulk Assignment Component
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Assignment-Service, Workflow-Manager
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Smoke-Test-Results, Engineering, Product, Quality-Dashboard, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC17, Section 4 Solution Assignment Capabilities, Section 5 Major Steps assignment workflows
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_002, WX05US05_TC_008, WX05US05_TC_020

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Assignment service, individual assignment component, bulk assignment service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for individual assignment, < 10 seconds for bulk assignment
Data_Requirements: Multiple service orders available for both individual and bulk assignment scenarios

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service orders in pending state, available technicians, assignment functionality operational
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with both individual and bulk assignment permissions
Test_Data: SO001 (individual), SO002-SO005 (bulk), John Smith (FF001), Mike Johnson technicians
Prior_Test_Cases: Selection functionality and modal display must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Select single service order (SO001)	Individual assignment option available, "Assign" button enabled	SO001 selected	AC17 - Individual assignment preparation
2	Click "Assign" for individual order	Assignment modal opens for single order with appropriate options	Individual assignment modal	AC17 - Individual assignment interface
3	Assign SO001 to John Smith (FF001)	Individual assignment completes successfully, order moves to assigned status	SO001 → John Smith	AC17 - Individual assignment execution
4	Verify individual assignment result	SO001 appears in assigned tab with correct technician assignment	Assignment verification	AC17 - Individual assignment confirmation
5	Select multiple service orders (SO002, SO003, SO004, SO005)	Bulk assignment options become available	4 orders selected	AC17 - Bulk assignment preparation
6	Click "Assign" for multiple orders	Bulk assignment modal opens with summary of selected orders	Bulk assignment modal	AC17 - Bulk assignment interface
7	Use "Auto-Assign Best Match" for bulk	System assigns all orders to optimal technicians automatically	Auto bulk assignment	AC17 - Automated bulk assignment
8	Verify bulk assignment results	All 4 orders move to assigned status with appropriate technician assignments	Bulk assignment verification	AC17 - Bulk assignment confirmation
9	Test manual bulk assignment	Select new orders, manually assign all to specific technician (Mike Johnson)	Manual bulk to Mike	AC17 - Manual bulk assignment
10	Compare assignment methods effectiveness	Verify both individual and bulk methods create valid assignments	Method comparison	AC17 - Assignment method validation
11	Test workflow transitions	Verify seamless switching between individual and bulk assignment workflows	Workflow flexibility	AC17 - Workflow transition
12	Verify assignment consistency	Confirm both methods produce identical assignment data quality	Data consistency check	AC17 - Assignment quality validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: System successfully supports both individual and bulk assignment capabilities with appropriate interfaces and workflows
Secondary_Verifications: Assignment quality consistent between methods, workflow transitions smooth, performance acceptable for both
Negative_Verification: No assignment method failures, no data inconsistencies, no workflow conflicts

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Selection functionality, modal display
Blocked_Tests: Advanced assignment workflow tests
Parallel_Tests: Other assignment validation tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic selection tests

Additional Information

Notes: Core functionality providing operational flexibility for different assignment scenarios
Edge_Cases: Switching between methods during session, mixed assignment types, method preference persistence
Risk_Areas: Workflow consistency, assignment data integrity, performance differences between methods
Security_Considerations: Assignment permissions consistent across methods, audit trail completeness

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Assignment method performance comparison with varying order volumes (1 vs 50 orders)
Type: Performance/Comparison
Rationale: Different assignment methods may have different performance characteristics at scale
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Assignment method reliability during system stress or high concurrent usage
Type: Performance/Reliability
Rationale: Method reliability may differ under stress conditions affecting dispatcher operations
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 18: Service Order Status Progression

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_018
Title: Verify complete service order status progression through Created → Assigned → Accepted → In Progress → Completed/Refused with exact user story workflow
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Workflow, Database, Integration, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/QA/Smoke-Test-Results/Integration-Testing, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Status-Workflow, End-to-End, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 20 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 35%
Integration_Points: Status Management Service, Workflow Engine, Technician Mobile App, Notification Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Workflow-Engine, Mobile-Integration
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Smoke-Test-Results, Integration-Testing, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Product
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC18, Section 7 Business Rules - Status Tracking Rules, Section 9 Sample Data status examples
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_024, WX05US05_TC_029, WX05US05_TC_044

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Status management service, workflow engine, technician mobile app simulator, notification service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for each status transition
Data_Requirements: Service order lifecycle from creation to completion with all intermediate statuses

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Workflow engine configured, technician mobile app access, status transition rules active
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role for creation/assignment, technician role for field updates
Test_Data: SO100 (new order), John Smith (FF001) technician account, complete workflow permissions
Prior_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_008 (Assignment), WX05US05_TC_024 (Real-time updates)

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Create new service order	Order SO100 created with status "Created", appears in pending service orders tab	SO100: Meter Replacement, Critical priority	AC18 - Initial status creation
2	Verify initial status display	Shows "Status: Created" in pending orders table, order available for assignment	Created status visible	AC18 - Status visibility
3	Assign SO100 to technician John Smith (FF001)	Status automatically changes to "Assigned", order moves to assigned service orders tab	Assignment to FF001	AC18 - Created → Assigned transition
4	Verify assigned status and location	SO100 appears in assigned tab with "Status: Assigned", no longer in pending tab	Tab migration confirmed	AC18 - Status-based tab placement
5	Simulate technician acceptance (mobile app)	Technician John Smith accepts order, status updates to "Accepted" in real-time on dispatcher dashboard	Mobile app acceptance	AC18 - Assigned → Accepted transition
6	Verify accepted status display	Status shows "Accepted" in assigned tab, count updates: Accepted Service Orders increases by 1	Real-time status update	AC18 - Real-time synchronization
7	Simulate technician starts work (mobile app)	Technician starts work on SO100, status updates to "In Progress"	Work commencement	AC18 - Accepted → In Progress transition
8	Verify in progress status and metrics	Status shows "In Progress", In Progress Service Orders count increases, time tracking begins	Progress tracking active	AC18 - Progress monitoring
9	Simulate work completion (mobile app)	Technician completes work, status updates to "Completed"	Work completion	AC18 - In Progress → Completed transition
10	Verify completed status and migration	SO100 moves to completed service orders tab, completion metrics calculated, SLA compliance determined	Completion processing	AC18 - Completion workflow
11	Test alternative path: refusal scenario	Create SO101, assign to technician, simulate refusal, verify status "Refused"	Refusal workflow	AC18 - Alternative path testing
12	Verify status history logging	Check SO100 status history shows complete timeline: Created → Assigned → Accepted → In Progress → Completed with timestamps	Complete audit trail	AC18 - Status history tracking

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Service order progresses through exact status sequence with proper transitions, tab migrations, and real-time updates
Secondary_Verifications: Each status change triggers appropriate tab placement, counts update correctly, timestamps recorded accurately
Negative_Verification: Cannot skip status steps, invalid transitions prevented, status history immutable

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: High
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: WX05US05_TC_008 (Assignment functionality)
Blocked_Tests: Completion metrics tests
Parallel_Tests: None - sequential workflow
Sequential_Tests: Must follow creation and assignment tests

Additional Information

Notes: Core workflow validation, critical for operational tracking and SLA compliance
Edge_Cases: Network interruptions during transitions, concurrent status changes, workflow exceptions
Risk_Areas: Status synchronization failures, workflow deadlocks, audit trail corruption
Security_Considerations: Status change authorization, audit trail integrity, cross-system authentication

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Status progression during network connectivity loss and recovery
Type: Integration/Network
Rationale: Field technicians may have intermittent connectivity affecting status updates
Priority: P1

Scenario_2: Concurrent status changes from multiple sources (dispatcher override vs technician update)
Type: Integration/Concurrency
Rationale: Multiple users may attempt status changes simultaneously
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 19: SLA and Metrics Calculation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_019
Title: Verify SLA compliance calculation, overdue identification, and completion time metrics with exact user story business rules
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Business-Rules, SLA-Calculation, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Metrics, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Performance-Metrics/Product, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-SLA-Engine, Metrics-Calculation, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 20 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 35%
Integration_Points: SLA Calculation Engine, Metrics Service, Time Tracking, Status Management
Code_Module_Mapped: SLA-Engine, Metrics-Calculator, Time-Tracker
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Engineering, Quality-Dashboard, Performance-Metrics, Product, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC19, Section 7 Business Rules - SLA compliance calculation, Section 9 Sample Data metrics
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_025, WX05US05_TC_026, WX05US05_TC_027

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: SLA calculation engine, metrics service, time tracking system, priority management
Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for SLA calculations
Data_Requirements: Service orders with various priorities and completion states across SLA timelines

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: SLA calculation rules configured, priority-based timelines active
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with metrics and SLA access
Test_Data: Critical (24h), High (48h), Medium (72h), Low (96h) priority orders with various completion scenarios
Prior_Test_Cases: Order creation and status progression must be functional

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Create critical priority service order	SLA automatically calculated as 24 hours from creation timestamp	Critical SO: 24h SLA	AC19 - Priority-based SLA assignment
2	Create high priority service order	SLA automatically calculated as 48 hours (2 days) from creation	High SO: 48h SLA	AC19 - Priority SLA variation
3	Create medium priority service order	SLA automatically calculated as 72 hours (3 days) from creation	Medium SO: 72h SLA	AC19 - Standard SLA calculation
4	Create low priority service order	SLA automatically calculated as 96 hours (4 days) from creation	Low SO: 96h SLA	AC19 - Extended SLA timeframe
5	Monitor pending order time tracking	Verify real-time countdown shows remaining time until SLA breach	Live time tracking	AC19 - Real-time SLA monitoring
6	Complete order within SLA timeframe	Order completed on time shows "Within SLA" status with green indicator	On-time completion	AC19 - SLA compliance marking
7	Test overdue order identification	Allow order to exceed SLA deadline, verify automatic "Overdue" flagging with red indicator	SLA breach scenario	AC19 - Overdue identification
8	Verify completion time calculation	Check completed order shows actual time taken (e.g., "2h 35m") from start to completion	Completion duration	AC19 - Time calculation accuracy
9	Test average completion time calculation	Verify dashboard shows aggregated average completion time across multiple completed orders	System-wide average	AC19 - Aggregate metrics
10	Verify SLA compliance percentage	Check completed orders dashboard shows percentage of orders completed within SLA	Compliance rate calculation	AC19 - Compliance metrics
11	Test overdue escalation	Verify orders past SLA deadline show appropriate escalation indicators and priority	Escalation handling	AC19 - Overdue management
12	Verify metrics real-time updates	Confirm SLA and completion metrics update immediately when order status changes	Real-time metric updates	AC19 - Dynamic metrics

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: SLA calculations accurate per priority levels, overdue identification automatic, completion time metrics precise
Secondary_Verifications: Real-time tracking functional, compliance percentages accurate, escalation indicators work
Negative_Verification: No incorrect SLA assignments, no missed overdue flags, no metric calculation errors

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Order creation and status management
Blocked_Tests: Advanced SLA reporting tests
Parallel_Tests: Other metrics calculation tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic workflow tests

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for service level compliance and customer satisfaction measurement
Edge_Cases: Timezone changes affecting SLA calculations, system downtime impact on SLA tracking
Risk_Areas: SLA calculation accuracy, real-time tracking reliability, metric aggregation correctness
Security_Considerations: SLA data accuracy for contractual compliance, audit trail for SLA breaches

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: SLA calculation accuracy during system timezone changes or daylight saving transitions
Type: Integration/Time-Management
Rationale: Time zone changes may affect SLA calculations and overdue identification
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: SLA metrics performance with thousands of orders requiring real-time calculation updates
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large order volumes may impact SLA calculation and metrics update performance
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 20: Bulk Assignment with Views

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_020
Title: Verify bulk assignment functionality with filtering, service details preview, and list/map view toggle options
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Bulk-Operations, Geographic, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product/QA/Regression-Coverage/Quality-Dashboard/Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Bulk-Assignment, Geographic-View, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 22 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 40%
Integration_Points: Bulk Assignment Service, Filter Engine, Geographic Service, Preview Component
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Bulk-Assignment, Geographic-View, Filter-Service
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Product, Regression-Coverage, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC20, Section 7 Business Rules - Bulk Assign Action Rules, Section 9 Sample Data geographic views
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_013, WX05US05_TC_017, WX05US05_TC_030

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Bulk assignment service, geographic mapping service, filter engine, preview component
Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds for view transitions, < 10 seconds for bulk assignment processing
Data_Requirements: Service orders with geographic coordinates, filtering data, technician availability

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Geographic mapping operational, filtering functional, bulk assignment service active
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with bulk assignment and geographic view permissions
Test_Data: Multiple service orders across different areas (Downtown, Suburbs, Industrial), various priorities and associations
Prior_Test_Cases: Filter functionality (TC_013) and basic bulk assignment must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Apply filters before bulk selection	Use Priority: High, Area: Downtown filters to narrow service order list	Filter: High priority + Downtown	AC20 - Pre-filtering for bulk ops
2	Select multiple filtered orders	Select 5 service orders from filtered results using checkboxes	5 filtered orders selected	AC20 - Filtered selection capability
3	Verify service details preview	System shows preview with selected order details: priorities, locations, service types	Order preview display	AC20 - Preview functionality
4	Toggle to map view	Click map view toggle, interface switches to geographic visualization	Map view activation	AC20 - View switching capability
5	Verify selected orders on map	All 5 selected orders appear as markers on geographic map with visual indicators	Map markers for selected	AC20 - Geographic representation
6	Verify map view filtering	Map shows only orders matching active filters (High priority, Downtown area)	Filtered map display	AC20 - Filter-map integration
7	Toggle back to list view	Click list view toggle, return to tabular display with selections maintained	List view return	AC20 - View persistence
8	Verify selection state preservation	All 5 previously selected orders remain selected after view toggle	Selection state maintained	AC20 - State preservation
9	Initiate bulk assignment from filtered selection	Click "Assign" button with filtered selections active	Bulk assignment initiation	AC20 - Filtered bulk assignment
10	Verify assignment modal with preview	Modal shows comprehensive preview: 5 orders, combined requirements, geographic spread	Assignment preview	AC20 - Comprehensive preview
11	Complete bulk assignment process	Assign all selected orders to appropriate technician(s)	Bulk assignment completion	AC20 - Batch processing
12	Verify post-assignment view updates	Map and list views update to reflect assignments, orders move to assigned status	View synchronization	AC20 - Post-assignment updates
13	Test complex filter combinations	Apply multiple filters (Association + Priority + Area), verify bulk assignment works	Complex filtering	AC20 - Advanced filter support
14	Test performance with large selections	Select 20+ orders, verify view toggles and assignment preview perform adequately	Large selection test	AC20 - Performance validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Bulk assignment works seamlessly with filtering, preview functionality comprehensive, list/map view toggle preserves selections
Secondary_Verifications: Geographic visualization accurate, filter integration complete, performance acceptable with large selections
Negative_Verification: No selection loss during view changes, no preview data errors, no performance degradation

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: High
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Filter functionality, basic bulk assignment
Blocked_Tests: Advanced geographic assignment tests
Parallel_Tests: Other view-related functionality
Sequential_Tests: Should run after filter and selection tests

Additional Information

Notes: Advanced bulk operation capability enhancing dispatcher efficiency through visual tools
Edge_Cases: Very large geographic areas, dense order clusters, map rendering performance
Risk_Areas: View synchronization, geographic accuracy, bulk processing performance
Security_Considerations: Geographic data access permissions, bulk operation authorization

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Bulk assignment performance with 100+ orders across wide geographic distribution
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large-scale bulk operations may stress both assignment processing and geographic visualization
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Map view accuracy and performance in areas with poor geographic data or mapping coverage
Type: Integration/Geographic
Rationale: Some service areas may have limited mapping data affecting visualization quality
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 21: Service Association Details

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_021
Title: Verify service association details display including meter numbers, device numbers, premises information, and service counts with comprehensive data visibility
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter/Asset Services, Data-Display, Integration, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Regression-Coverage/User-Acceptance/Quality-Dashboard/Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Service-Association, Data-Visibility, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Entity Management System, Service Association API, Data Display Components
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Entity-Display, Association-Service
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: QA, Regression-Coverage, User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC21, Section 9 Sample Data service association details, Section 7 Business Rules entity display
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_022, WX05US05_TC_023

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Entity management system, service association API, data display components
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for association data loading
Data_Requirements: Service orders with complete association data across meter, consumer, and asset types

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service orders with populated association data, entity master data available
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with service association data access
Test_Data: Meter-associated orders (MTR-001, Device D12345), Consumer-associated orders (Account numbers), Asset-associated orders
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic service order display functionality must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to service order with meter association	View meter-associated order details	SO001: Meter association	AC21 - Meter association display
2	Verify meter number display	Shows meter number "MTR-001" clearly visible	Meter: MTR-001	AC21 - Meter identification
3	Verify device number information	Shows device number "D12345" associated with meter	Device: D12345	AC21 - Device tracking
4	Verify premise information	Shows premise details "P001" or premise address information	Premise: P001 location	AC21 - Location association
5	Verify assignment status indication	Shows current assignment status: "Assigned" or "Unassigned"	Assignment status	AC21 - Status tracking
6	Verify reading status display	Shows meter reading status with last reading date	Last read: 2025-08-15	AC21 - Reading tracking
7	Verify geographic area information	Shows area details: "Downtown, Sub-area: Sector 15"	Area: Downtown, Sector 15	AC21 - Geographic data
8	Verify service count display	Shows number of affected services: "3 services impacted"	Service count: 3	AC21 - Impact assessment
9	View consumer-associated service order	Navigate to consumer service order	SO002: Consumer association	AC21 - Consumer association
10	Verify consumer account information	Shows account number, consumer name, phone number	Account: ACC-001, John Doe	AC21 - Consumer details
11	View asset-associated service order	Navigate to asset service order	SO003: Asset association	AC21 - Asset association
12	Verify asset identification details	Shows asset ID, asset name, asset type, plant information	Asset: AST-001, Transformer	AC21 - Asset details
13	Verify service association icons	Each association type shows appropriate icon (⚡ Meter, 👤 Consumer, 🏭 Asset)	Visual association indicators	AC21 - Visual identification
14	Test association data completeness	Verify all required association fields populated without missing data	Complete data validation	AC21 - Data integrity

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Service association details display comprehensively including all entity information, status indicators, and service counts
Secondary_Verifications: Visual indicators clear, geographic data accurate, all association types supported
Negative_Verification: No missing association data, no broken links to entity information, no display errors

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Basic service order display
Blocked_Tests: Advanced association functionality
Parallel_Tests: Other data display tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run with entity detail tests

Additional Information

Notes: Essential for comprehensive service order understanding and proper technician assignment
Edge_Cases: Orders with multiple associations, incomplete association data, association data updates
Risk_Areas: Data synchronization, association accuracy, display performance
Security_Considerations: Association data access permissions, entity information privacy

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Service association data accuracy when entity information is updated in master systems
Type: Integration/Data-Sync
Rationale: Entity master data changes should reflect immediately in service order associations
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Association display performance with service orders having multiple complex associations
Type: Performance/Complexity
Rationale: Some service orders may have multiple entity associations affecting display performance
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 22: Detailed Entity Information

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_022
Title: Verify detailed entity information display for meters, consumers, and assets with comprehensive attribute visibility per user story specifications
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter/Asset Services, Data-Detail, Entity-Management, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/User-Acceptance/Regression-Coverage/Quality-Dashboard/Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Entity-Details, Comprehensive-Display, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 18 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 30%
Integration_Points: Entity Management API, Meter Database, Consumer Database, Asset Database
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Entity-Details, Database-Integration
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: QA, User-Acceptance, Regression-Coverage, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC22, Section 9 Sample Data entity details specifications, user story entity requirements
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_021, WX05US05_TC_023

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Entity management API, meter database, consumer database, asset database
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for entity detail loading
Data_Requirements: Complete entity records with all attributes populated per user story specifications

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Entity databases populated, API connections functional, entity detail components operational
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with entity detail access permissions
Test_Data: MTR-001 (Smart meter), ACC-001 (John Doe consumer), AST-001 (Transformer asset) with complete profiles
Prior_Test_Cases: Service association display (TC_021) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Access meter details for MTR-001	Meter detail view opens with comprehensive information	MTR-001: Smart meter	AC22 - Meter detail access
2	Verify meter number display	Shows meter number "MTR-001" prominently	Meter number: MTR-001	AC22 - Meter identification
3	Verify meter type information	Shows meter type as "Smart" (photo/manual/smart options)	Type: Smart meter	AC22 - Meter type classification
4	Verify device number details	Shows device number "D12345" associated with meter	Device: D12345	AC22 - Device tracking
5	Verify premise association	Shows premise information with location details	Premise: P001 details	AC22 - Location linkage
6	Verify assignment status	Shows current assignment status: "Assigned" or "Available"	Assignment status	AC22 - Assignment tracking
7	Verify reading status	Shows reading status with last reading date and value	Reading: 2025-08-15, 1247 kWh	AC22 - Reading history
8	Verify meter area information	Shows area: "Downtown" with sub-area details	Area: Downtown	AC22 - Geographic classification
9	Access consumer details for ACC-001	Consumer detail view displays comprehensive profile	ACC-001: John Doe	AC22 - Consumer detail access
10	Verify consumer account number	Shows account number "ACC-001" clearly	Account: ACC-001	AC22 - Account identification
11	Verify consumer name and contact	Shows consumer name "John Doe" and phone "+1234567890"	Name: John Doe, Phone	AC22 - Contact information
12	Verify consumer category	Shows consumer category (residential/commercial/industrial)	Category: Residential	AC22 - Customer classification
13	Verify consumer status	Shows active status and service connection details	Status: Active	AC22 - Service status
14	Verify consumer premise and area	Shows premise location and area assignment	Premise/Area details	AC22 - Location tracking
15	Access asset details for AST-001	Asset detail view opens with technical specifications	AST-001: Transformer	AC22 - Asset detail access
16	Verify asset ID and name	Shows asset ID "AST-001" and name "Main Transformer"	Asset: AST-001, Transformer	AC22 - Asset identification
17	Verify asset type and plant	Shows asset type "Transformer" and plant "Central Plant"	Type: Transformer, Plant	AC22 - Asset classification
18	Verify asset status and condition	Shows status "Active" and condition "Good"	Status: Active, Condition: Good	AC22 - Asset health tracking
19	Verify asset RPN and area	Shows RPN (Risk Priority Number) and geographic area	RPN: 125, Area: Industrial	AC22 - Risk and location data

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Detailed entity information displays comprehensively for meters, consumers, and assets with all required attributes per user story
Secondary_Verifications: Data accuracy across all entity types, performance acceptable, navigation smooth between entities
Negative_Verification: No missing entity attributes, no data inconsistencies, no display errors

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Service association display (TC_021)
Blocked_Tests: Advanced entity management tests
Parallel_Tests: Other entity-related functionality
Sequential_Tests: Should run after association tests

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for technician preparation and service planning, ensures comprehensive entity understanding
Edge_Cases: Entities with incomplete data, multiple entity associations, entity data updates
Risk_Areas: Data accuracy, integration synchronization, performance with complex entities
Security_Considerations: Entity data access permissions, personal information protection, commercial data privacy

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Entity detail accuracy and synchronization when master data is updated across multiple systems
Type: Integration/Data-Sync
Rationale: Entity information may be updated in external systems requiring real-time synchronization
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Entity detail display performance with entities having extensive historical data and associations
Type: Performance/Data-Volume
Rationale: Long-established entities may have substantial historical data affecting display performance
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 23: View Options in All Tabs

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_023
Title: Verify view functionality in all tabs (pending, assigned, completed, history) shows relevant service associations with consistent interface
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter/Asset Services, UI-Consistency, Cross-Tab, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/User-Acceptance/Regression-Coverage/Quality-Dashboard/Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-View-Consistency, Tab-Functionality, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 16 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Tab Management System, View Components, Service Association Display
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Tab-Controller, View-Components
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: QA, User-Acceptance, Regression-Coverage, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC23, Section 9 Sample Data view examples, tab consistency requirements
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_021, WX05US05_TC_022, WX05US05_TC_033

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Tab management system, view components, service association display system
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for view loading across all tabs
Data_Requirements: Service orders across all tabs with varied service associations

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service orders populated in all tabs, view functionality operational
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with view access across all tabs
Test_Data: SO001 (pending), SO002 (assigned), SO003 (completed), SO004 (history) with service associations
Prior_Test_Cases: Tab navigation and service association display must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to pending service orders tab	Tab loads with service orders showing "View" option for each order	Pending tab access	AC23 - Pending view availability
2	Click "View" on pending order SO001	Detailed view opens showing pending order with complete service associations	SO001 pending details	AC23 - Pending view functionality
3	Verify pending view association display	Shows meter/consumer/asset associations relevant to pending order	Association details	AC23 - Pending association display
4	Navigate to assigned service orders tab	Tab loads with assigned orders showing "View" option	Assigned tab access	AC23 - Assigned view availability
5	Click "View" on assigned order SO002	Detailed view opens showing assigned order with technician details and associations	SO002 assigned details	AC23 - Assigned view functionality
6	Verify assigned view technician information	Shows assigned technician details alongside service associations	Technician + association data	AC23 - Assigned view completeness
7	Navigate to completed service orders tab	Tab loads with completed orders showing "View" option	Completed tab access	AC23 - Completed view availability
8	Click "View" on completed order SO003	Detailed view opens showing completion details with performance metrics and associations	SO003 completed details	AC23 - Completed view functionality
9	Verify completed view performance data	Shows completion metrics (actual vs estimated) alongside service associations	Performance + association data	AC23 - Completed view metrics
10	Navigate to history service orders tab	Tab loads with historical orders showing "View" option	History tab access	AC23 - History view availability
11	Click "View" on historical order SO004	Detailed view opens showing historical data with timeline and associations	SO004 history details	AC23 - History view functionality
12	Verify history view timeline information	Shows complete order lifecycle timeline with service associations maintained	Timeline + association data	AC23 - History view completeness
13	Test view consistency across tabs	Verify similar service associations display consistently across all tab views	Cross-tab consistency	AC23 - Interface consistency
14	Verify view close functionality	All tab views have proper close/return functionality to main tab	View navigation	AC23 - Navigation consistency

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: View functionality available in all tabs with relevant service associations displayed consistently
Secondary_Verifications: Interface consistency across tabs, association data accuracy, navigation smooth
Negative_Verification: No missing view options, no inconsistent displays, no navigation issues

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Tab navigation, service association display
Blocked_Tests: Advanced view functionality tests
Parallel_Tests: Other cross-tab functionality
Sequential_Tests: Should run after association tests

Additional Information

Notes: Ensures consistent user experience and data access across all workflow stages
Edge_Cases: Views with missing association data, performance with complex associations
Risk_Areas: Cross-tab consistency, view performance, data synchronization
Security_Considerations: View access permissions consistent across tabs, data exposure controls

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: View functionality performance with service orders having complex multi-entity associations
Type: Performance/Complexity
Rationale: Complex service orders may have multiple associations affecting view loading performance
Priority: P3

Scenario_2: View data consistency when service associations are updated while view is open
Type: Integration/Real-time
Rationale: Association data may change during view session requiring real-time updates
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 24: Real-time Status Updates

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_024
Title: Verify real-time updates when service order status changes with immediate dashboard synchronization and event-driven updates
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Real-time, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Integration, Event-Driven, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Integration-Testing/QA/Smoke-Test-Results/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Real-time-Updates, Event-Processing, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 20 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: Medium
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 35%
Integration_Points: Real-time Engine, Event Bus, WebSocket Service, Status Management
Code_Module_Mapped: Real-time-Engine, Event-Processor, CX-Web, Status-Service
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Smoke-Test-Results, Integration-Testing, Engineering, Quality-Dashboard, Product
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC24, Section 4 Solution Real-Time Monitoring, user story real-time requirements
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_018, WX05US05_TC_049

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Real-time engine, WebSocket server, event bus, technician mobile app simulator
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for real-time status updates
Data_Requirements: Active service orders, technician accounts, real-time event processing

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Real-time services operational, WebSocket connections active, event processing enabled
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher dashboard access, technician mobile app access for simulation
Test_Data: SO100 (assigned to John Smith FF001), SO101 (pending), real-time event pipeline active
Prior_Test_Cases: Status progression (TC_018) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open dispatcher dashboard with active service orders	Dashboard displays current state, WebSocket connection established	Baseline dashboard state	AC24 - Real-time connection setup
2	Simulate technician acceptance via mobile app	Technician John Smith accepts SO100, status change appears on dashboard within 2 seconds without page refresh	Mobile: Accept SO100	AC24 - Acceptance status sync
3	Verify count updates in real-time	Assigned count decreases, Accepted count increases automatically without user action	Count changes immediate	AC24 - Metric synchronization
4	Verify visual status indicators update	SO100 status indicator changes color/icon from "Assigned" to "Accepted"	Visual status change	AC24 - UI synchronization
5	Simulate technician starting work	Technician starts work on SO100, status updates to "In Progress" in real-time	Mobile: Start work SO100	AC24 - Progress status sync
6	Verify tab content updates	SO100 moves between status categories in assigned tab, progress tracking begins	Tab content migration	AC24 - Content synchronization
7	Simulate order completion	Technician completes SO100, order moves to completed tab automatically	Mobile: Complete SO100	AC24 - Completion sync
8	Verify completion metrics update	Average completion time and completion counts recalculate immediately	Metrics recalculation	AC24 - Analytics updates
9	Simulate new order creation from external system	External system creates SO102, appears in pending tab without refresh	External: Create SO102	AC24 - External system sync
10	Verify cross-tab real-time updates	Navigate between tabs, verify all show current real-time state	Cross-tab consistency	AC24 - Tab synchronization
11	Test concurrent status changes	Multiple technicians change status simultaneously, verify all updates appear	Concurrent operations	AC24 - Concurrency handling
12	Verify real-time timestamp accuracy	All status changes show accurate timestamps reflecting actual change time	Timestamp accuracy	AC24 - Time synchronization

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Status changes from external sources (mobile app, external systems) appear on dashboard within 2 seconds via real-time updates
Secondary_Verifications: Counts update automatically, visual indicators change, timestamps accurate, cross-tab synchronization works
Negative_Verification: No delays beyond 2 seconds, no missed updates, no stale data display

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: High
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Status progression functionality
Blocked_Tests: Advanced real-time features
Parallel_Tests: None - requires isolated testing
Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic status management

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for operational awareness and responsive dispatch management
Edge_Cases: Network interruptions, high-frequency updates, WebSocket connection failures
Risk_Areas: Event delivery reliability, data consistency, performance under load
Security_Considerations: Real-time event authentication, data integrity, access control

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Real-time update reliability during network connectivity issues and recovery
Type: Integration/Network-Resilience
Rationale: Network issues may affect real-time updates requiring graceful handling
Priority: P1

Scenario_2: Real-time performance with high-frequency status changes (100+ events per minute)
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: High-activity periods may generate significant real-time event traffic
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 25: Pending Service Orders Performance Metrics

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_025
Title: Verify pending service orders display SLA duration and time remaining with real-time countdown and priority-based calculations
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Performance-Metrics, SLA-Tracking, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Real-time, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Performance-Metrics/Quality-Dashboard/Product, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-SLA-Display, Time-Tracking, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 20%
Integration_Points: SLA Engine, Time Tracking Service, Priority Management, Real-time Updates
Code_Module_Mapped: SLA-Engine, Time-Tracker, Priority-Service
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Engineering, Performance-Metrics, Quality-Dashboard, Product, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC25, Section 7 Business Rules - Priority-based SLA, Section 9 Sample Data SLA examples
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_019, WX05US05_TC_026

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: SLA calculation engine, time tracking service, priority management system
Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for SLA display updates
Data_Requirements: Pending service orders with various priorities and creation timestamps

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: SLA calculation rules active, priority-based timelines configured
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with SLA and metrics access
Test_Data: Critical (24h), High (48h), Medium (72h), Low (96h) priority pending orders
Prior_Test_Cases: SLA calculation functionality (TC_019) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to pending service orders tab	View displays pending orders with SLA information columns	Pending orders table	AC25 - SLA display presence
2	Verify SLA duration column for critical order	Shows "SLA: 24 hours" or "SLA: 1 day" for critical priority order	Critical SO: 24h SLA	AC25 - Critical SLA display
3	Verify SLA duration for high priority order	Shows "SLA: 48 hours" or "SLA: 2 days" for high priority order	High SO: 48h SLA	AC25 - High SLA display
4	Verify SLA duration for medium priority order	Shows "SLA: 72 hours" or "SLA: 3 days" for medium priority order	Medium SO: 72h SLA	AC25 - Medium SLA display
5	Verify SLA duration for low priority order	Shows "SLA: 96 hours" or "SLA: 4 days" for low priority order	Low SO: 96h SLA	AC25 - Low SLA display
6	Verify time remaining display	Shows real-time countdown "2d 14h remaining" for orders within SLA	Live countdown timer	AC25 - Time remaining tracking
7	Check overdue order indication	Orders past SLA deadline show "Overdue" with red indicator	Past SLA orders	AC25 - Overdue identification
8	Verify time remaining format	Time displays in clear format: "Xd Yh Zm" or "Overdue by Xh Ym"	Consistent time format	AC25 - Display standardization
9	Test real-time countdown updates	Verify time remaining decreases in real-time without page refresh	Live time tracking	AC25 - Real-time updates
10	Verify priority-based SLA consistency	Confirm SLA durations match priority levels across all pending orders	Priority SLA mapping	AC25 - Priority consistency
11	Check SLA breach transition	Monitor order transitioning from "30m remaining" to "Overdue" status	SLA breach moment	AC25 - Breach detection
12	Verify overdue escalation indicators	Overdue orders show escalation warnings and priority adjustments	Escalation indicators	AC25 - Overdue management

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Pending service orders display accurate SLA durations and real-time countdown with priority-based calculations
Secondary_Verifications: Time format consistent, overdue identification automatic, real-time updates functional
Negative_Verification: No incorrect SLA assignments, no countdown errors, no missed overdue flags

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: SLA calculation functionality
Blocked_Tests: Advanced SLA reporting
Parallel_Tests: Other SLA-related tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run with other metrics tests

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for proactive SLA management and customer satisfaction
Edge_Cases: Timezone changes, system clock adjustments, very short SLA periods
Risk_Areas: Time calculation accuracy, real-time update reliability, SLA breach detection
Security_Considerations: SLA data accuracy for compliance, audit trail for SLA breaches

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: SLA display accuracy during system timezone changes or daylight saving transitions
Type: Integration/Time-Management
Rationale: Time changes may affect SLA calculations and display accuracy
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: SLA countdown performance with hundreds of pending orders requiring real-time updates
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large pending queues may impact countdown update performance
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 26: Assigned Service Orders Performance Metrics

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_026
Title: Verify assigned service orders display SLA duration and time remaining with technician assignment timestamps
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Performance-Metrics, SLA-Tracking, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Assignment-Metrics, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Performance-Metrics/Quality-Dashboard/Product, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Assignment-Metrics, Time-Tracking, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 14 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 22%
Integration_Points: SLA Engine, Assignment Tracking, Time Calculation, Technician Management
Code_Module_Mapped: SLA-Engine, Assignment-Tracker, Time-Calculator
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Engineering, Performance-Metrics, Quality-Dashboard, Product, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC26, Section 5 Major Steps - Assigned service orders monitoring, Section 9 Sample Data assignment metrics
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_025, WX05US05_TC_027

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: SLA engine, assignment tracking service, time calculation service
Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for metrics display
Data_Requirements: Assigned service orders with technician assignments and timestamps

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Assignment tracking operational, SLA calculations active
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with assignment metrics access
Test_Data: SO200 (assigned to John Smith), SO201 (assigned to Mike Johnson) with assignment timestamps
Prior_Test_Cases: Assignment functionality and SLA calculation must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to assigned service orders tab	View displays assigned orders with SLA and timing information	Assigned orders table	AC26 - Assignment metrics display
2	Verify SLA duration column display	Shows original SLA timeframe "SLA: 3 days" based on priority	SLA duration visible	AC26 - SLA duration preservation
3	Verify assignment timestamp	Shows when order was assigned: "Assigned: 2025-08-17 10:30"	Assignment time: 10:30	AC26 - Assignment time tracking
4	Verify time remaining calculation	Shows remaining time from assignment: "1d 8h remaining" calculated from assignment time	Time remaining display	AC26 - Remaining time calculation
5	Verify technician assignment details	Shows assigned technician name and ID alongside timing information	John Smith (FF001) assigned	AC26 - Technician association
6	Check overdue assigned orders	Orders past SLA show "Overdue" with red highlighting	Overdue assignment indication	AC26 - Overdue assignment tracking
7	Verify assignment duration tracking	Shows how long order has been assigned: "Assigned for: 2h 15m"	Assignment duration	AC26 - Duration tracking
8	Test real-time time remaining updates	Time remaining decreases automatically without page refresh	Live countdown	AC26 - Real-time updates
9	Verify SLA compliance indicators	Orders within SLA show green indicators, overdue show red	Visual SLA indicators	AC26 - Visual feedback
10	Check assignment status progression	Orders show status: Assigned → Accepted → In Progress with timing	Status with timing	AC26 - Status timing integration
11	Verify time calculation accuracy	Cross-reference calculated remaining time with manual calculation	Calculation verification	AC26 - Accuracy validation
12	Test assignment escalation indicators	Orders approaching SLA breach show warning indicators	Escalation warnings	AC26 - Proactive management

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Assigned service orders display SLA duration and accurate time remaining calculated from assignment timestamps
Secondary_Verifications: Assignment time tracked correctly, overdue identification works, real-time updates functional
Negative_Verification: No time calculation errors, no missed overdue assignments, no incorrect SLA displays

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Assignment functionality, SLA calculation
Blocked_Tests: Assignment performance analysis
Parallel_Tests: Other assignment metrics
Sequential_Tests: Should run after assignment tests

Additional Information

Notes: Essential for monitoring assignment efficiency and SLA compliance
Edge_Cases: Assignment time modifications, technician reassignments, SLA adjustments
Risk_Areas: Time calculation accuracy, assignment tracking reliability, SLA monitoring
Security_Considerations: Assignment time accuracy for audit trails, SLA compliance tracking

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Assignment metrics accuracy when orders are reassigned between technicians
Type: Integration/Reassignment
Rationale: Reassignments may affect SLA calculations and time tracking
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Assignment time tracking performance with large numbers of concurrent assignments
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: High assignment volumes may impact time calculation and display performance
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 27: Completed Service Orders Metrics

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_027
Title: Verify completed service orders display total cost, total time, and SLA compliance with comprehensive performance analysis
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Performance-Metrics, Completion-Analysis, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Cost-Tracking, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Performance-Metrics/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Product, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Completion-Metrics, Financial-Tracking, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 16 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 30%
Integration_Points: Cost Calculation Engine, Time Tracking, SLA Compliance Engine, Financial Systems
Code_Module_Mapped: Cost-Calculator, Time-Tracker, SLA-Engine, Metrics-Aggregator
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Performance-Metrics, Engineering, Quality-Dashboard, Product, Financial-Reports
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC27, Section 5 Major Steps - Completed Service Orders metrics, Section 9 Sample Data completion examples
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_034, WX05US05_TC_019

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Cost calculation engine, time tracking system, SLA compliance engine
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for metrics calculation
Data_Requirements: Completed service orders with cost, time, and SLA data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Completion tracking operational, cost calculation active, SLA compliance monitoring functional
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with completion metrics and financial data access
Test_Data: SO300 (completed, ₹1850, 4h 15m, Within SLA), SO301 (completed, ₹2100, 6h 30m, SLA Breached)
Prior_Test_Cases: Order completion workflow and SLA calculation must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to completed service orders tab	View displays completed orders with comprehensive metrics	Completed orders table	AC27 - Completion metrics display
2	Verify total cost display for SO300	Shows final actual cost "₹1,850" prominently displayed	Total cost: ₹1,850	AC27 - Cost tracking display
3	Verify total time display for SO300	Shows completion time "4h 15m" from start to finish	Total time: 4h 15m	AC27 - Duration measurement
4	Verify SLA compliance indicator for SO300	Shows "Within SLA" with green indicator for on-time completion	SLA: Within (green)	AC27 - SLA compliance display
5	Verify cost variance calculation	Compare estimated vs actual cost, show variance: "Est: ₹1500, Actual: ₹1850, +23%"	Cost variance: +23%	AC27 - Cost analysis
6	Verify time variance calculation	Compare estimated vs actual time: "Est: 3h 30m, Actual: 4h 15m, +21%"	Time variance: +21%	AC27 - Time analysis
7	Check SLA breached order SO301	Shows "SLA Breached" with red indicator for overdue completion	SLA: Breached (red)	AC27 - SLA breach indication
8	Verify average completion metrics	Dashboard shows system-wide averages: "Avg Cost: ₹1,975", "Avg Time: 2h 35m"	System averages	AC27 - Aggregate metrics
9	Verify completion rate calculation	Shows completion success rate and SLA compliance percentage	Completion rates	AC27 - Performance percentages
10	Check financial summary totals	Shows total cost across all completed orders with breakdown by service type	Financial totals	AC27 - Financial aggregation
11	Verify cost breakdown by category	Shows cost distribution: labor, materials, overhead with percentages	Cost categorization	AC27 - Cost analysis detail
12	Test performance metrics export	Verify metrics can be exported for reporting and analysis	Export functionality	AC27 - Reporting capability

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Completed service orders display accurate total cost, total time, and SLA compliance with comprehensive variance analysis
Secondary_Verifications: Cost and time variances calculated correctly, SLA indicators accurate, aggregate metrics functional
Negative_Verification: No cost calculation errors, no time measurement mistakes, no SLA compliance mistakes

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Order completion workflow, SLA calculation
Blocked_Tests: Advanced completion analysis
Parallel_Tests: Other completion metrics
Sequential_Tests: Should run after completion workflow

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for financial tracking, performance analysis, and operational optimization
Edge_Cases: Orders with no cost data, incomplete time tracking, SLA calculation errors
Risk_Areas: Cost calculation accuracy, time measurement precision, SLA determination correctness
Security_Considerations: Financial data access controls, cost information accuracy, audit trail integrity

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Completion metrics accuracy when orders have complex cost structures or multiple technician involvement
Type: Integration/Financial
Rationale: Complex orders may have multiple cost components affecting accurate calculation
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Completion metrics performance with thousands of completed orders requiring aggregation
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large completion datasets may impact metrics calculation and display performance
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 28: Order Reassignment Capability

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_028
Title: Verify order reassignment when technicians refuse or cannot complete assigned orders with complete workflow support
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Assignment-Management, Error-Recovery, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Workflow, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Integration-Testing/Quality-Dashboard/Product, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Reassignment, Workflow-Recovery, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 18 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Assignment Service, Technician Management, Status Workflow, Notification Service
Code_Module_Mapped: Assignment-Service, Reassignment-Component, Workflow-Manager
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Engineering, Integration-Testing, Quality-Dashboard, Product, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC28, Section 5 Major Steps - Reassignment Requests, Section 7 Business Rules refused order handling
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_029, WX05US05_TC_018

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Assignment service, technician management system, workflow engine, notification service
Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds for reassignment process
Data_Requirements: Assigned service orders, available technicians for reassignment

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Assignment functionality operational, technician availability tracking active
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with reassignment permissions, technician accounts for simulation
Test_Data: SO400 (assigned to John Smith FF001), Mike Johnson available for reassignment
Prior_Test_Cases: Assignment functionality and status workflow must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Assign order SO400 to John Smith (FF001)	Order successfully assigned with "Assigned" status	SO400 → John Smith	AC28 - Initial assignment setup
2	Simulate technician refusal	John Smith refuses SO400 via mobile app, status becomes "Refused"	Technician refuses SO400	AC28 - Refusal scenario
3	Verify refused order status	SO400 shows "Refused" status in assigned tab	Status: Refused	AC28 - Refusal status display
4	Access reassignment functionality	"Reassign Technician" option becomes available for SO400	Reassignment option visible	AC28 - Reassignment availability
5	Click "Reassign Technician"	Reassignment modal opens with available technicians list	Reassignment interface	AC28 - Reassignment interface
6	Search for alternative technician	Use "Search Technicians" to find Mike Johnson	Search: Mike Johnson	AC28 - Technician search
7	Review technician capabilities	Check Mike Johnson's skills, workload, and availability before reassignment	Technician profile review	AC28 - Capability assessment
8	Select Mike Johnson for reassignment	Choose Mike Johnson from available technicians list	Mike Johnson selected	AC28 - New technician selection
9	Complete reassignment process	Confirm reassignment, SO400 assigned to Mike Johnson	SO400 → Mike Johnson	AC28 - Reassignment execution
10	Verify new assignment status	SO400 shows "Assigned" to Mike Johnson, no longer shows as refused	New assignment confirmed	AC28 - Status update
11	Verify assignment history tracking	Both original assignment to John and reassignment to Mike logged in history	Assignment history log	AC28 - Audit trail
12	Test reassignment from unavailability	Create scenario where technician becomes unavailable (sick leave), verify reassignment works	Unavailability scenario	AC28 - Unavailability handling
13	Verify SLA impact tracking	Check if reassignment affects SLA calculations and timing	SLA recalculation	AC28 - SLA impact assessment

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Order reassignment functionality works when technicians refuse or become unavailable, with complete audit trail
Secondary_Verifications: Reassignment interface functional, technician search works, status updates correctly, history preserved
Negative_Verification: No assignment data loss, no duplicate assignments, no workflow corruption

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Assignment functionality, status workflow
Blocked_Tests: Advanced reassignment scenarios
Parallel_Tests: Other assignment management tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic assignment tests

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for operational flexibility and service continuity when assignments fail
Edge_Cases: No available technicians for reassignment, multiple reassignments, emergency reassignments
Risk_Areas: Assignment data integrity, workflow consistency, SLA impact accuracy
Security_Considerations: Reassignment authorization, audit trail completeness, technician access validation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Reassignment workflow when multiple orders need reassignment simultaneously
Type: Integration/Bulk-Operations
Rationale: Technician unavailability may affect multiple orders requiring efficient bulk reassignment
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Reassignment impact on SLA calculations and customer notifications
Type: Integration/Business-Impact
Rationale: Reassignments may affect service delivery commitments requiring customer communication
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 29: Refused Order Tracking

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_029
Title: Verify refused orders appear in both assigned tab (as refused) and pending tab (as refused) with dual visibility for operational management
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Status-Management, Workflow-Tracking, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Dual-Visibility, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Integration-Testing/Quality-Dashboard/Product, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Refusal-Tracking, Status-Synchronization, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 14 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 20%
Integration_Points: Status Management, Tab Synchronization, Workflow Engine, Count Management
Code_Module_Mapped: Status-Manager, Tab-Controller, Count-Service
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Engineering, Integration-Testing, Quality-Dashboard, Product, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC29, Section 7 Business Rules - Refused Order Handling, Section 9 Sample Data refusal scenarios
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_028, WX05US05_TC_018

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Status management system, tab synchronization service, count management
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for status synchronization across tabs
Data_Requirements: Service orders in assigned state, technician accounts for refusal simulation

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Assignment functionality operational, status workflow active, tab synchronization enabled
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with refusal tracking access, technician simulation capability
Test_DataTags:** Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing/Meter/Asset Services, Data-Display, Integration, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Regression-Coverage/User-Acceptance/Quality-Dashboard/Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Service-Association, Data-Visibility, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Entity Management System, Service Association API, Data Display Components
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Entity-Display, Association-Service
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: QA, Regression-Coverage, User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC21, Section 9 Sample Data service association details, Section 7 Business Rules entity display
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_022, WX05US05_TC_023

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Entity management system, service association API, data display components
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for association data loading
Data_Requirements: Service orders with complete association data across meter, consumer, and asset types

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service orders with populated association data, entity master data available
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with service association data access
Test_Data: Meter-associated orders (MTR-001, Device D12345), Consumer-associated orders (Account numbers), Asset-associated orders
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic service order display functionality must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to service order with meter association	View meter-associated order details	SO001: Meter association	AC21 - Meter association display
2	Verify meter number display	Shows meter number "MTR-001" clearly visible	Meter: MTR-001	AC21 - Meter identification
3	Verify device number information	Shows device number "D12345" associated with meter	Device: D12345	AC21 - Device tracking
4	Verify premise information	Shows premise details "P001" or premise address information	Premise: P001 location	AC21 - Location association
5	Verify assignment status indication	Shows current assignment status: "Assigned" or "Unassigned"	Assignment status	AC21 - Status tracking
6	Verify reading status display	Shows meter reading status with last reading date	Last read: 2025-08-15	AC21 - Reading tracking
7	Verify geographic area information	Shows area details: "Downtown, Sub-area: Sector 15"	Area: Downtown, Sector 15	AC21 - Geographic data
8	Verify service count display	Shows number of affected services: "3 services impacted"	Service count: 3	AC21 - Impact assessment
9	View consumer-associated service order	Navigate to consumer service order	SO002: Consumer association	AC21 - Consumer association
10	Verify consumer account information	Shows account number, consumer name, phone number	Account: ACC-001, John Doe	AC21 - Consumer details
11	View asset-associated service order	Navigate to asset service order	SO003: Asset association	AC21 - Asset association
12	Verify asset identification details	Shows asset ID, asset name, asset type, plant information	Asset: AST-001, Transformer	AC21 - Asset details
13	Verify service association icons	Each association type shows appropriate icon (⚡ Meter, 👤 Consumer, 🏭 Asset)	Visual association indicators	AC21 - Visual identification
14	Test association data completeness	Verify all required association fields populated without missing data	Complete data validation	AC21 - Data integrity

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Service association details display comprehensively including all entity information, status indicators, and service counts
Secondary_Verifications: Visual indicators clear, geographic data accurate, all association types supported
Negative_Verification: No missing association data, no broken links to entity information, no display errors

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Basic service order display
Blocked_Tests: Advanced association functionality
Parallel_Tests: Other data display tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run with entity detail tests

Additional Information

Notes: Essential for comprehensive service order understanding and proper technician assignment
Edge_Cases: Orders with multiple associations, incomplete association data, association data updates
Risk_Areas: Data synchronization, association accuracy, display performance
Security_Considerations: Association data access permissions, entity information privacy

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Service association data accuracy when entity information is updated in master systems
Type: Integration/Data-Sync
Rationale: Entity master data changes should reflect immediately in service order associations
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Association display performance with service orders having multiple complex associations
Type: Performance/Complexity
Rationale: Some service orders may have multiple entity associations affecting display performance
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 30: Geographic Map Integration

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_030
Title: Verify geographic map displays unassigned service orders and updates based on filters and selections with real-time geographic visualization
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Geographic-Integration, Mapping, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Visualization, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Geographic-Services, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Geographic-Display, Map-Functionality, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 20 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: Medium
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Geographic API, Mapping Service, Filter Engine, Selection Component
Code_Module_Mapped: Geographic-Service, Map-Component, Filter-Integration
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Product, Geographic-Services, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC30, Section 4 Solution Geographic Visualization, Section 9 Sample Data geographic examples
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_020, WX05US05_TC_013

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Geographic API, mapping service, filter engine, coordinate data
Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds for map loading and updates
Data_Requirements: Service orders with geographic coordinates, unassigned orders across various locations

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Geographic services operational, mapping API functional, coordinate data populated
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with map view access
Test_Data: Unassigned service orders in Downtown, Suburbs, Industrial areas with coordinates
Prior_Test_Cases: Filter functionality and selection capabilities must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to pending service orders	List view displays with unassigned orders	Pending orders visible	AC30 - Baseline list view
2	Toggle to map view	Interface switches to geographic map displaying service order locations	Map view activation	AC30 - Map view toggle
3	Verify unassigned order markers	Map shows markers for all unassigned service orders only	Unassigned order markers	AC30 - Unassigned order display
4	Verify assigned orders excluded	Assigned orders do not appear on map (only unassigned visible)	Assigned orders hidden	AC30 - Assignment filtering
5	Check marker visual representation	Each unassigned order appears as distinct map marker with order information	Order markers visible	AC30 - Marker representation
6	Apply area filter (Downtown)	Map zooms/filters to show only Downtown area orders	Area filter: Downtown	AC30 - Geographic filtering
7	Verify filtered map display	Map shows only orders matching Downtown filter criteria	Filtered geographic view	AC30 - Filter-map integration
8	Select orders from list view	Select 3 orders from list, toggle to map view	3 orders selected	AC30 - Selection preparation
9	Verify selected orders highlighted on map	Selected orders show different visual indicators (highlighting, color change) on map	Selected order highlighting	AC30 - Selection visualization
10	Change filter criteria (Priority: High)	Apply priority filter, verify map updates to show matching high-priority orders	Priority filter: High	AC30 - Dynamic filtering
11	Verify real-time map updates	Map content updates immediately based on filter changes	Real-time map updates	AC30 - Dynamic map updates
12	Test map interaction	Click on map markers to view order details or selection options	Marker interaction	AC30 - Interactive functionality
13	Toggle back to list view	Return to list view, verify selections and filters maintained	List view return	AC30 - View state preservation
14	Verify geographic accuracy	Cross-reference map marker locations with known service addresses	Location accuracy	AC30 - Geographic precision

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Geographic map displays unassigned service orders accurately and updates dynamically based on filters and selections
Secondary_Verifications: Map performance acceptable, filter integration works, selection highlighting functional, view toggles preserve state
Negative_Verification: No assigned orders on map, no incorrect locations, no performance issues with map rendering

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: High
Automation_Candidate: No

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Filter functionality, selection capabilities
Blocked_Tests: Advanced geographic features
Parallel_Tests: Other visualization tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run after filter and selection tests

Additional Information

Notes: Enhances spatial awareness for dispatch decisions and geographic optimization
Edge_Cases: Poor internet connectivity affecting map loading, missing coordinate data, very dense order clusters
Risk_Areas: Map rendering performance, geographic accuracy, filter-map synchronization
Security_Considerations: Location data privacy, geographic information access controls

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Map performance with hundreds of unassigned orders across wide geographic areas
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large service territories with many orders may impact map rendering and interaction performance
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Map accuracy and functionality in areas with poor mapping data coverage
Type: Integration/Geographic-Data
Rationale: Some service areas may have limited or outdated mapping data affecting visualization
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 31: Skills Matching Requirement

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_031
Title: Verify required skills matching before allowing technician assignment to service orders with skill validation and mismatch prevention
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Skill-Validation, Assignment-Prevention, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Quality-Control, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Product/Business-Rules, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Skill-Matching, Assignment-Validation, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 16 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 22%
Integration_Points: Skill Matching Engine, Assignment Validation, Technician Skills Database
Code_Module_Mapped: Skill-Matcher, Assignment-Validator, Skills-Database
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Engineering, Quality-Dashboard, Business-Rules, Product, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC31, Section 7 Business Rules - Skills Matching Requirement, Section 9 Sample Data skill requirements
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_010, WX05US05_TC_047

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Skill matching engine, assignment validation service, technician skills database
Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for skill validation
Data_Requirements: Service orders with specific skill requirements, technicians with varied skill profiles

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Skill matching rules configured, technician skills populated, assignment validation active
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with assignment and skill validation access
Test_Data: SO600 (requires Meter Installation), John Smith (has Meter Installation), Mike Johnson (lacks Meter Installation)
Prior_Test_Cases: Assignment modal and technician display must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Select service order requiring "Meter Installation" skill	Order SO600 selected with clear skill requirement display	SO600: Meter Installation required	AC31 - Skill requirement identification
2	Open assignment modal	Modal displays with skill requirements prominently shown	Required skills: Meter Installation	AC31 - Skill requirement visibility
3	Verify John Smith (qualified technician) display	Shows John Smith as available with skill match indicator	John Smith: Has Meter Installation	AC31 - Qualified technician display
4	Verify Mike Johnson (unqualified technician) display	Shows Mike Johnson as incompatible/grayed out due to missing skill	Mike Johnson: Missing skill	AC31 - Unqualified technician indication
5	Attempt assignment to qualified technician	Assignment to John Smith proceeds successfully without warnings	Assignment: John Smith successful	AC31 - Qualified assignment success
6	Attempt assignment to unqualified technician	System prevents assignment to Mike Johnson or shows warning message	Assignment: Mike Johnson blocked	AC31 - Unqualified assignment prevention
7	Verify skill mismatch warning	Clear warning message: "Technician lacks required skill: Meter Installation"	Skill mismatch warning	AC31 - Warning message display
8	Test assignment validation bypass	If override available, verify it requires special authorization	Override authorization	AC31 - Override control
9	Verify skill matching visual indicators	Required skills highlighted/marked differently from available skills	Visual skill indicators	AC31 - Visual validation feedback
10	Test multiple skill requirements	Create order requiring multiple skills, verify all must be matched	Multiple skill validation	AC31 - Complex skill matching
11	Verify auto-assign skill compliance	Auto-assign feature only selects technicians with required skills	Auto-assign skill compliance	AC31 - Automated skill validation
12	Test skill matching performance	Verify skill validation completes within 1 second for assignment decisions	Performance validation	AC31 - Skill matching speed

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: System prevents assignment of service orders to technicians lacking required skills with clear validation messaging
Secondary_Verifications: Skill requirements clearly displayed, qualified technicians available, visual indicators functional
Negative_Verification: No assignments allowed without required skills, no bypass without authorization, no skill validation failures

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Assignment modal, technician display
Blocked_Tests: Advanced skill validation scenarios
Parallel_Tests: Other assignment validation tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic assignment functionality

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for service quality and first-time resolution, prevents assignment errors
Edge_Cases: Partial skill matches, skill hierarchy requirements, emergency override scenarios
Risk_Areas: Skill data accuracy, validation logic correctness, override security
Security_Considerations: Skill validation integrity, override authorization controls, audit trail for bypasses

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Skill matching accuracy when technician skills are updated in real-time
Type: Integration/Data-Sync
Rationale: Technician skill certifications may change affecting assignment validation
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Skill validation performance with complex skill hierarchies and dependencies
Type: Performance/Complexity
Rationale: Complex skill requirements may impact validation speed and accuracy
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 32: Timestamp Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_032
Title: Verify order creation timestamps, assignment timestamps, and expected completion dates display with accurate time tracking throughout workflow
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Time-Tracking, Timestamp-Display, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Audit-Trail, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Engineering/Quality-Dashboard/Audit-Trail/Product, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Time-Tracking, Timestamp-Accuracy, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 14 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Time Service, Timestamp Generator, SLA Calculator, Display Components
Code_Module_Mapped: Time-Service, Timestamp-Display, SLA-Calculator
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: QA, Engineering, Quality-Dashboard, Audit-Trail, Product
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC32, Section 5 Major Steps timestamp requirements, Section 9 Sample Data timestamp examples
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_019, WX05US05_TC_025

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Time service, timestamp generator, SLA calculator, timezone management
Performance_Baseline: < 500ms for timestamp generation and display
Data_Requirements: Service orders across workflow stages with complete timestamp data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Time service operational, timezone configuration correct, timestamp display components functional
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with timestamp visibility access
Test_Data: SO700 (creation scenario), SO701 (assignment scenario), current system time for validation
Prior_Test_Cases: Order creation and assignment workflows must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Create new service order SO700	System captures creation timestamp "Created On: 2025-08-17 10:30:00"	Order creation time	AC32 - Creation timestamp capture
2	Verify creation timestamp format	Timestamp displays in consistent format: "YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS" or user-friendly format	Format: 2025-08-17 10:30	AC32 - Timestamp format consistency
3	Verify creation timestamp accuracy	Compare displayed timestamp with actual creation time (within 1 second accuracy)	Time accuracy validation	AC32 - Timestamp precision
4	Assign SO700 to technician	System captures assignment timestamp "Assigned On: 2025-08-17 11:15:00"	Assignment time capture	AC32 - Assignment timestamp
5	Verify assignment timestamp display	Assignment time appears in order details and assigned orders view	Assignment timestamp visible	AC32 - Assignment time visibility
6	Verify expected completion calculation	Shows calculated expected completion "Expected: 2025-08-20 11:15:00" based on SLA	Expected completion date	AC32 - SLA-based completion date
7	Check timestamp consistency across views	Verify same timestamps appear identically in different tabs and views	Cross-view consistency	AC32 - Display consistency
8	Verify timezone handling	Timestamps reflect correct local timezone and display consistently	Timezone accuracy	AC32 - Timezone management
9	Test timestamp updates during status changes	Monitor timestamps as order progresses through workflow stages	Status change timestamps	AC32 - Workflow timestamp tracking
10	Verify timestamp sorting functionality	Orders sort correctly by creation date, assignment date, completion date	Timestamp-based sorting	AC32 - Sorting accuracy
11	Check timestamp immutability	Verify creation and assignment timestamps cannot be modified after capture	Timestamp immutability	AC32 - Data integrity
12	Test timestamp display during system time changes	Verify timestamps remain accurate if system time is adjusted	Time change resilience	AC32 - Time stability

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All timestamps (creation, assignment, expected completion) display accurately with consistent formatting throughout the system
Secondary_Verifications: Timezone handling correct, timestamp immutability maintained, sorting functions properly
Negative_Verification: No timestamp manipulation possible, no time calculation errors, no format inconsistencies

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Order creation and assignment workflows
Blocked_Tests: Advanced time-based reporting
Parallel_Tests: Other time-related functionality
Sequential_Tests: Should run with SLA calculation tests

Additional Information

Notes: Essential for audit trails, SLA compliance, and operational analytics
Edge_Cases: Daylight saving time transitions, system clock adjustments, timezone changes
Risk_Areas: Time accuracy, timezone handling, timestamp immutability
Security_Considerations: Timestamp integrity for audit trails, time-based security controls

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Timestamp accuracy during system timezone changes or daylight saving transitions
Type: Integration/Time-Management
Rationale: Time zone changes may affect timestamp accuracy and display consistency
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Timestamp performance and accuracy with high-volume order creation and assignment
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: High transaction volumes may impact timestamp precision and system performance
Priority: P3

---

Test Case 33: Service Order Details View

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_033
Title: Verify service order details view with comprehensive information including job requirements, materials, tasks, descriptions, reading specifications, and help documentation
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Detail-View, Information-Display, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Documentation, MOD-Dispatcher, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product/QA/User-Acceptance/Quality-Dashboard/Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Detail-Display, Comprehensive-Information, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 18 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 30%
Integration_Points: Detail View Service, Documentation System, Materials Database, Help System
Code_Module_Mapped: Detail-View, Documentation-Service, Materials-DB
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Product, User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, QA
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC33, Section 4 Solution detail view requirements, Section 9 Sample Data comprehensive information
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_023, WX05US05_TC_034

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Detail view service, documentation system, materials database, help system
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for detail view loading
Data_Requirements: Service orders with complete job specifications, materials lists, and documentation

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Detail view components operational, documentation populated, materials database complete
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with detail view access
Test_Data: SO800 (Meter Replacement with complete specifications), comprehensive job documentation
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic service order display functionality must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to service order SO800	Service order appears in appropriate tab with "View" option	SO800: Meter Replacement	AC33 - Detail view access
2	Click "View" on SO800	Detailed view modal/page opens with comprehensive information	Detail view opens	AC33 - Detail view display
3	Verify job requirements section	Shows detailed job requirements with specific tasks and objectives	Job requirements: Replace meter	AC33 - Requirements display
4	Verify materials section	Lists required materials with quantities: "Smart Meter x1, Connectors x2, Seals x3"	Materials list with quantities	AC33 - Materials specification
5	Verify task descriptions section	Shows step-by-step task descriptions and procedures	Task procedures detailed	AC33 - Task documentation
6	Verify service order description	Shows comprehensive description of work to be performed	Work description complete	AC33 - Work description
7	Verify reading specifications	Shows meter reading requirements and data collection needs	Reading specifications	AC33 - Reading requirements
8	Verify help section availability	Provides contextual help and guidance documentation	Help documentation	AC33 - Help system integration
9	Test help content accessibility	Click help links/buttons, verify relevant guidance appears	Help content functional	AC33 - Help functionality
10	Verify technical specifications	Shows technical details relevant to service type (voltage, capacity, etc.)	Technical specifications	AC33 - Technical information
11	Check safety requirements	Displays safety procedures and precautions for the job	Safety information	AC33 - Safety documentation
12	Verify service history integration	Shows related historical service information if available	Service history context	AC33 - Historical context
13	Test detail view navigation	Verify easy navigation between different information sections	Navigation functionality	AC33 - Information organization
14	Verify information completeness	Confirm all required information sections populated without gaps	Complete information	AC33 - Information completeness

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Service order details view displays comprehensive information including job requirements, materials, tasks, descriptions, reading specs, and help
Secondary_Verifications: Information organized clearly, help system functional, navigation smooth, technical details accurate
Negative_Verification: No missing information sections, no broken help links, no navigation issues

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Basic service order display
Blocked_Tests: Advanced detail view features
Parallel_Tests: Other information display tests
Sequential_Tests: Should run with other view functionality

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for technician preparation and service quality, ensures comprehensive job understanding
Edge_Cases: Orders with missing documentation, very complex job requirements, large materials lists
Risk_Areas: Information accuracy, documentation completeness, help system reliability
Security_Considerations: Information access permissions, sensitive data protection, documentation integrity

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Detail view performance with service orders having extensive documentation and large materials lists
Type: Performance/Information-Volume
Rationale: Complex service orders may have substantial documentation affecting view loading performance
PriorityCurrent Progress: 70% Complete (24 of 35 acceptance criteria)**

---

Test Case 34: Completed Orders Reporting

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_034
Title: Verify completed service orders view provides estimated vs actual reports with comprehensive performance analysis and variance calculations
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Reporting, Performance-Analysis, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Variance-Analysis, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Performance-Metrics/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Product, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Performance-Reports, Variance-Calculation, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 20 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 35%
Integration_Points: Reporting Engine, Performance Calculator, Variance Analysis, Cost Tracking
Code_Module_Mapped: Reporting-Engine, Performance-Calculator, Variance-Analyzer
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Performance-Metrics, Engineering, Quality-Dashboard, Product, Financial-Reports
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC34, Section 5 Major Steps - Completed Service Orders reporting, Section 9 Sample Data performance examples
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_027, WX05US05_TC_033

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Reporting engine, performance calculator, variance analysis service, cost tracking system
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for report generation
Data_Requirements: Completed service orders with estimated and actual values for time, cost, and effort

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Reporting engine operational, completed orders with estimation data, variance calculation active
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with reporting and performance analysis access
Test_Data: SO900 (Est: 3h 30m/₹1500, Actual: 4h 15m/₹1850), SO901 (completed with variance data)
Prior_Test_Cases: Order completion workflow and metrics calculation must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to completed service orders tab	Tab loads with completed orders showing "View" options for detailed analysis	Completed orders visible	AC34 - Report access
2	Click "View" on completed order SO900	Detailed view opens with estimated vs actual reporting section	SO900 detail view	AC34 - Report interface
3	Verify estimated vs actual time comparison	Shows "Estimated: 3h 30m, Actual: 4h 15m, Variance: +21.4%"	Time comparison: +21.4%	AC34 - Time variance reporting
4	Verify estimated vs actual cost comparison	Shows "Estimated: ₹1,500, Actual: ₹1,850, Variance: +23.3%"	Cost comparison: +23.3%	AC34 - Cost variance reporting
5	Verify estimated vs actual effort analysis	Shows effort level comparison: "Estimated: Medium, Actual: High"	Effort comparison	AC34 - Effort variance analysis
6	Check variance percentage calculations	Verify variance calculations: ((Actual - Estimated) / Estimated) × 100	Calculation accuracy	AC34 - Variance formula validation
7	Verify performance trend indicators	Shows whether variances represent improvement or degradation with visual indicators	Performance trends	AC34 - Trend analysis
8	Check cost breakdown analysis	Shows detailed cost breakdown: labor, materials, overhead with actual vs estimated	Cost breakdown detail	AC34 - Cost analysis detail
9	Verify efficiency metrics	Shows efficiency ratings based on actual vs estimated performance	Efficiency calculations	AC34 - Efficiency measurement
10	Test multiple completed orders comparison	Compare variance reports across multiple completed orders for patterns	Multi-order analysis	AC34 - Comparative analysis
11	Verify report export functionality	Test ability to export performance reports for external analysis	Export capability	AC34 - Report portability
12	Check historical variance tracking	Verify variance trends over time for performance improvement analysis	Historical variance	AC34 - Trend tracking

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Completed service orders provide comprehensive estimated vs actual reports with accurate variance calculations and performance analysis
Secondary_Verifications: Variance formulas correct, trend indicators functional, cost breakdowns detailed, export capabilities work
Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, no missing variance data, no report generation failures

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Order completion workflow, metrics calculation
Blocked_Tests: Advanced performance analytics
Parallel_Tests: Other reporting functionality
Sequential_Tests: Should run after completion tracking tests

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for operational improvement, cost control, and performance optimization
Edge_Cases: Orders with missing estimation data, zero-variance scenarios, extreme variance outliers
Risk_Areas: Calculation accuracy, data completeness, report generation performance
Security_Considerations: Financial data access controls, report data accuracy, audit trail completeness

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Variance report accuracy with complex multi-phase service orders having multiple estimation points
Type: Integration/Complexity
Rationale: Complex service orders may have multiple estimation and tracking points affecting variance accuracy
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Performance reporting scalability with thousands of completed orders requiring variance analysis
Type: Performance/Scale
Rationale: Large volumes of completed orders may impact report generation and analysis performance
Priority: P2

---

Test Case 35: History Tab Reporting and Timeline

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: WX05US05_TC_035
Title: Verify history service orders view provides estimated vs actual reports and comprehensive timeline with complete lifecycle tracking
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Dispatcher Management System
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support

Tags: Historical-Analysis, Timeline-Tracking, Consumer/Billing/Meter Services, Lifecycle-Management, MOD-Dispatcher, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Performance-Metrics/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Product, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Historical-Reports, Timeline-Analysis, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 22 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 40%
Integration_Points: Historical Database, Timeline Service, Performance Analytics, Audit Trail System
Code_Module_Mapped: Historical-Service, Timeline-Generator, Performance-Analytics
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Performance-Metrics, Engineering, Quality-Dashboard, Product, Historical-Analysis
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC35, Section 5 Major Steps - Service Order History Management, Section 9 Sample Data historical examples
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: WX05US05_TC_034, WX05US05_TC_032

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Historical database, timeline service, performance analytics engine, audit trail system
Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds for historical data loading and timeline generation
Data_Requirements: Historical service orders with complete lifecycle data and performance metrics

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Historical data repository operational, timeline service active, performance analytics functional
User_Roles_Permissions: Dispatcher role with historical data and analytics access
Test_Data: SO1000 (complete historical record), SO1001 (historical with timeline data)
Prior_Test_Cases: Completed orders reporting and timeline tracking must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to history service orders tab	Historical orders display with comprehensive metrics and "View" options	History tab loaded	AC35 - Historical data access
2	Verify historical metrics display	Shows metrics: Total (678), Completed (1), Approved (378), Rejected (51)	Historical counts accurate	AC35 - Historical metrics
3	Click "View" on historical order SO1000	Detailed historical view opens with comprehensive lifecycle data	SO1000 historical detail	AC35 - Historical detail access
4	Verify estimated vs actual reports	Shows complete performance comparison: time, cost, effort variances	Performance comparison	AC35 - Historical performance analysis
5	Verify timeline display	Shows complete order lifecycle timeline with all status transitions	Complete timeline	AC35 - Timeline visualization
6	Check timeline milestones	Timeline shows: Created → Assigned → Accepted → In Progress → Completed with timestamps	Milestone progression	AC35 - Workflow milestone tracking
7	Verify timeline timestamp accuracy	All timeline events show accurate timestamps with precise timing	Timestamp precision	AC35 - Timeline accuracy
8	Check timeline duration calculations	Shows duration between each status transition (e.g., "Assigned for 2h 15m")	Duration calculations	AC35 - Duration tracking
9	Verify status change audit trail	Timeline includes who made changes and when (dispatcher, technician actions)	Audit trail completeness	AC35 - Change tracking
10	Check performance variance analysis	Historical view shows variance trends and performance indicators over time	Variance trend analysis	AC35 - Performance trends
11	Verify historical comparison capability	Compare current order performance against historical averages	Historical benchmarking	AC35 - Performance benchmarking
12	Test timeline export functionality	Verify ability to export timeline data for external analysis	Timeline export	AC35 - Data portability
13	Check historical data integrity	Verify historical data accuracy and completeness across all timeline events	Data integrity validation	AC35 - Historical accuracy
14	Verify long-term trend analysis	Historical data shows patterns and trends over extended periods	Long-term analysis	AC35 - Trend identification

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: History service orders provide comprehensive estimated vs actual reports and detailed timeline showing complete lifecycle with accurate timestamps
Secondary_Verifications: Timeline accuracy complete, audit trail preserved, performance comparisons available, trend analysis functional
Negative_Verification: No missing timeline events, no timestamp inaccuracies, no historical data corruption

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: High
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: Completed orders reporting, timeline tracking
Blocked_Tests: Advanced historical analytics
Parallel_Tests: Other historical functionality
Sequential_Tests: Should run after completion and timeline tests

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for long-term performance analysis, compliance auditing, and operational optimization
Edge_Cases: Very old historical data, incomplete timeline records, data migration scenarios
Risk_Areas: Historical data integrity, timeline accuracy, performance calculation correctness
Security_Considerations: Historical data access controls, audit trail immutability, long-term data preservation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Historical data performance with years of accumulated service order history requiring efficient querying
Type: Performance/Historical-Scale
Rationale: Long-term system usage generates substantial historical data potentially impacting query performance
Priority: P2

Scenario_2: Timeline accuracy and completeness during system migrations or data archival processes
Type: Integration/Data-Migration
Rationale: Historical data integrity must be preserved during system upgrades and data management operations
Priority: P3