GL Codes Management Test Cases - BX05US01

Test Case 1: Dashboard Entity Count Display

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_001
• Title: Verify accurate display of total entities count on dashboard showing 17 entities
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• 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 Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/CSM/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Module-Coverage/Smoke-Test-Results, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-CxServices/API, Dashboard-Metrics, 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: Medium
• Complexity_Level: Low
• Expected_Execution_Time: 2 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 15%
• Integration_Points: CxServices, API, Dashboard
• 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
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC001 - Dashboard entity counts, Business Rule 1 - Entity Summary Cards
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_002, BX05US01_TC_003, BX05US01_TC_004

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Database with GL entities, Authentication service, SMART360 billing module
• Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds page load
• Data_Requirements: 17 total GL entities configured in system

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes module enabled in SMART360, Sample entities configured per user story
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role with GL Codes access
• Test_Data: Exactly 17 GL entities (8 active, 9 inactive, 9 configured with GL codes) as per user story sample data
• Prior_Test_Cases: Login successful to SMART360

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to SMART360 application URL	Application login page loads successfully	URL: https://app.smart360.com	Initial application access
2	Login with Billing Manager credentials	Dashboard displays with menu options visible	Username: billing_manager@test.com, Password: Test@123	Role-based authentication
3	Navigate to Bill Setup menu from left navigation	Bill Setup submenu expands showing options	Menu Path: Bill Setup > GL Codes	Navigation verification
4	Click on GL Codes option	GL Codes management page loads with dashboard cards		Page load verification
5	Locate "Total Entities" card in top section	Card visible with document icon and count	Expected Count: 17	Business Rule 1 - Entity Summary Cards
6	Verify Total Entities count displays correctly	Shows "17" total entities with document icon	Expected Display: "17" with 📋 icon	AC001 verification
7	Verify card description text	Shows "Total GL entities in the system"	Tooltip text verification	User guidance
8	Verify card layout and positioning	Card positioned as first in dashboard metrics row	Visual layout: Left-most card	UI consistency

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Total Entities count displays exactly "17" matching user story sample data
• Secondary_Verifications: Document icon present, card description accurate, proper positioning
• Negative_Verification: Count should not show as "0", negative number, or loading state

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: Login authentication test
• Blocked_Tests: Dashboard percentage calculation tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run simultaneously with other read-only dashboard tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must complete before entity modification tests

Additional Information

• Notes: This test validates the foundational dashboard metric that drives all percentage calculations
• Edge_Cases: Handle system with 0 entities, very large entity counts
• Risk_Areas: Database connectivity issues could affect count accuracy
• Security_Considerations: Ensure count reflects only entities user has permission to view

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Dashboard refresh after entity count changes in real-time
  
  
• Type: Integration
  
  
• Rationale: Critical for real-time dashboard updates mentioned in user story
  
  
• Priority: P1
  
  
• Scenario_2: Dashboard performance with maximum entity load (1000+ entities)
  
  
• Type: Performance
  
  
• Rationale: Scalability considerations for enterprise customers
  
  
• Priority: P2
  
  

---

Test Case 2: Active Entities Count and Percentage Display

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_002
• Title: Verify accurate display of active entities count showing 8 entities with 47% calculation
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• 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 Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Module-Coverage/Customer-Segment-Analysis, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Dashboard-Calculations, 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: Medium
• Complexity_Level: Medium
• Expected_Execution_Time: 2 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 20%
• Integration_Points: Dashboard calculations, Entity status tracking
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Product
• Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Customer-Segment-Analysis, Module-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC002 - Active entities count, Business Rule 1 - Active Entities calculation
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_001 (Total entities), BX05US01_TC_003 (Inactive entities)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Database with 8 active entities out of 17 total entities
• Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds card calculation
• Data_Requirements: Exactly 8 entities with status "Active" from user story sample data

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded, Dashboard visible
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Active entities from user story: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges, Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS (total 8 active)
• Prior_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_001 (Total entities count verified)

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	On GL Codes page, locate "Active Entities" card	Card visible with green checkmark icon in dashboard	Visual: Green ✓ icon	Business Rule 1 verification
2	Verify Active Entities count display	Shows "8" as the count number	Expected Count: 8	AC002 - Active entities count
3	Verify percentage calculation accuracy	Shows "47%" next to count	Calculation: 8/17 * 100 = 47.06% rounded to 47%	Mathematical validation per user story
4	Verify card description text	Shows "Entities currently enabled and operational"	Tooltip verification	User story context
5	Verify visual indicators match active status	Green checkmark icon consistent with active state	Icon: ✓ in green color	Visual consistency
6	Verify card positioning in dashboard	Card positioned as second in metrics row	Layout: Second card from left	UI layout per wireframe
7	Cross-verify with table data	Count active entities in table matches card count	Table verification: Count entities with "Active" status = 8	Data consistency check
8	Verify hover interaction (if applicable)	Additional information displayed on hover	Hover behavior testing	Enhanced user experience

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Active count shows exactly "8" with "47%" percentage matching user story data
• Secondary_Verifications: Green checkmark icon present, accurate description text, proper positioning
• Negative_Verification: Percentage should not exceed 100% or show negative values, count should not include inactive entities

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: BX05US01_TC_001 (Total entities must be verified first)
• Blocked_Tests: Entity status toggle tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with inactive entities count test
• Sequential_Tests: Must precede percentage validation tests

Additional Information

• Notes: This test validates critical business metric for revenue-generating entities
• Edge_Cases: All entities active (100%), no entities active (0%)
• Risk_Areas: Calculation errors could affect financial reporting accuracy
• Security_Considerations: Ensure percentage calculation doesn't expose unauthorized entity counts

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Real-time percentage recalculation when entity status changes
  
  
• Type: Integration
  
  
• Rationale: Critical for live dashboard updates mentioned in AC011
  
  
• Priority: P1
  
  
• Scenario_2: Percentage rounding behavior validation for edge cases
  
  
• Type: Edge Case
  
  
• Rationale: Ensure consistent mathematical rounding across all calculations
  
  
• Priority: P2
  
  

---

Test Case 3: Category Filter - Consumer Billing Entities

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_003
• Title: Verify category filter functionality shows only Consumer Billing entities with blue badges
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Regression-Coverage/Module-Coverage/User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Category-Filtering, 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: Low
• Complexity_Level: Medium
• Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Low
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 25%
• Integration_Points: Category filtering system, UI filtering
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: Business Rule 2 - Filter & Search Rules, AC017 - Multiple criteria filtering
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_032 (Payment Channels filter), BX05US01_TC_022 (Multiple filters)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: GL Codes page loaded, Category filter dropdown functional
• Performance_Baseline: < 300ms filter application
• Data_Requirements: Consumer Billing entities from user story: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges, Late Payment Fees

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page accessible, All entities visible in table
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Consumer Billing entities: Water Consumption (4001-1001), Wastewater Charges (4001-1002), Fixed Charges (4001-1003), Late Payment Fees (4002-1001)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Dashboard loaded successfully

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Locate Category filter dropdown above entity table	Category dropdown visible with default "All Categories" selected	Default state: "All Categories"	UI element identification
2	Click on Category dropdown to open options	Dropdown opens showing available category options	Options: All Categories, Consumer Billing, Payment Channels	Filter options per user story
3	Select "Consumer Billing" from dropdown options	Filter applied, dropdown closes	Selection: Consumer Billing	Filter application
4	Verify only Consumer Billing entities displayed	Table shows 4 entities with "Consumer Billing" category	Expected entities: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges, Late Payment Fees	Category filtering validation
5	Verify Payment Channels entities hidden	No entities with "Payment Channels" category visible	Hidden: Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS, UPI	Negative filtering verification
6	Verify blue badge/label for Consumer Billing	All visible entities show blue "Consumer Billing" badge	Visual: Blue colored category labels	Visual indicator per wireframe
7	Verify table count updates	Entity count matches filtered results (4 entities)	Count verification in table	Data consistency
8	Verify filter persistence during page interactions	Filter remains active during other operations	Persistence test	State management

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Only 4 Consumer Billing entities displayed after filter application
• Secondary_Verifications: Blue badges visible, Payment Channels entities hidden, dropdown closes properly
• Negative_Verification: Payment Channels entities should not be visible, filter should not reset unexpectedly

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: Page load test
• Blocked_Tests: Multiple filter combination tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other single filter tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should precede combined filter tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Category filtering is essential for organizing different revenue stream types
• Edge_Cases: No entities in selected category, all entities in one category
• Risk_Areas: Filter state management, UI responsiveness during filtering
• Security_Considerations: Ensure category filter doesn't bypass role-based entity access

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Category filter combined with search functionality
  
  
• Type: Integration
  
  
• Rationale: Users need to search within filtered categories
  
  
• Priority: P2
  
  
• Scenario_2: Category filter persistence across page refreshes
  
  
• Type: Edge Case
  
  
• Rationale: User experience consistency for workflow efficiency
  
  
• Priority: P3
  
  

---

Test Case 4: GL Code Edit Mode with Save/Cancel Actions

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_004
• Title: Verify GL code edit mode with save  and cancel  button functionality
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• 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 Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Smoke-Test-Results, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-GL-Code-Management, 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: 4 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 30%
• Integration_Points: GL Code editing system, Database updates, Validation engine
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC008 - Edit functionality, AC009 - GL code format validation, Business Rule 4 - GL Code Input Rules
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_014 (GL code format), BX05US01_TC_015 (Duplicate prevention)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: GL Codes table loaded, Edit functionality enabled, Database connection active
• Performance_Baseline: < 200ms edit mode activation, < 500ms save operation
• Data_Requirements: Entity without GL code for testing: UPI (Payment Channels, currently "Not set")

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded, Entity table visible with Actions column
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role with edit permissions
• Test_Data: Target entity: UPI (Category: Payment Channels, Utility: All, GL Code: Not set, Status: Inactive)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Table display test passed

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Locate UPI entity row in the table	UPI entity visible with "Not set" in GL Code column	Entity: UPI, Current GL Code: "Not set"	Target entity identification
2	Click edit icon  in Actions column for UPI entity	GL Code field becomes editable input field	Action: Click icon	AC008 - Edit functionality
3	Verify edit mode activated	Input field appears with save  and cancel  buttons	UI State: Editable input + buttons	Business Rule 4 activation
4	Enter valid GL code in input field	Input accepts valid format	Test GL Code: 1001-2003	Valid ####-#### format
5	Click save button	GL code saved successfully, edit mode exits	Action: Click  button	Save operation
6	Verify GL code updated in table	UPI entity now shows "1001-2003" in GL Code column	Expected: GL Code = 1001-2003	Successful save verification
7	Verify dashboard "Configured with GL Codes" count increased	Count increases from 9 to 10	Expected: Configured count = 10	AC011 - Real-time metrics update
8	Click edit icon for UPI entity again	Edit mode reactivated		Testing cancel functionality
9	Modify GL code to different value	Input accepts change	Modified GL Code: 1001-2004	Change preparation
10	Click cancel button	Edit mode exits without saving changes	Action: Click  button	Cancel operation
11	Verify GL code remains unchanged	UPI entity still shows "1001-2003" (previous saved value)	Expected: GL Code = 1001-2003	Cancel functionality verification
12	Verify dashboard metrics unchanged	Configured count remains 10	Expected: Configured count = 10	No unintended changes

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Save  button commits GL code changes, Cancel (❌) button discards changes
• Secondary_Verifications: Edit mode UI properly activated/deactivated, dashboard metrics update in real-time
• Negative_Verification: Cancel should not save changes, edit mode should not remain active after save/cancel

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: Table display test
• Blocked_Tests: GL code validation tests
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other edit operations on same entity
• Sequential_Tests: Must complete before duplicate validation tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Critical functionality for GL code assignment workflow
• Edge_Cases: Network interruption during save, concurrent edit attempts
• Risk_Areas: Data loss if save fails, UI state management during edit operations
• Security_Considerations: Ensure edit permissions validated before allowing modifications

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Edit mode timeout handling for long idle periods
  
  
• Type: Edge Case
  
  
• Rationale: Prevent data loss and UI state issues
  
  
• Priority: P2
  
  
• Scenario_2: Keyboard shortcuts for save/cancel operations (Enter/Escape)
  
  
• Type: Usability
  
  
• Rationale: Enhanced user experience for power users
  
  
• Priority: P3
  
  

---

Test Case 5: Utility-Specific Duplicate GL Code Prevention

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_005
• Title: Verify GL code uniqueness validation within same utility type preventing duplicates
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer/Billing Services, API, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Validation, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Security-Validation/Smoke-Test-Results, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Validation-Engine, Duplicate-Prevention

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: 5 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 35%
• Integration_Points: Validation engine, Database uniqueness constraints, Error handling
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC010 - Duplicate prevention, Business Rule 3 - Table-Level Rules (GL Code must be unique if set)
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_032 (Edit mode), BX05US01_TC_014 (Format validation)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: GL Codes validation system, Database constraints, Error message system
• Performance_Baseline: < 300ms validation response
• Data_Requirements: Existing Water utility entities: Water Consumption (4001-1001), Fixed Charges (4001-1003)

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded, Validation system active
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role with edit permissions
• Test_Data: Water utility entities with existing GL codes: Water Consumption (4001-1001), Fixed Charges (4001-1003), and unassigned entity for testing
• Prior_Test_Cases: Edit mode functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Identify existing Water utility entity with GL code	Locate Water Consumption entity	Entity: Water Consumption, GL Code: 4001-1001, Utility: Water	Reference entity
2	Locate another Water utility entity without GL code or different GL code	Target entity for duplicate test	Target: Create test scenario with Water utility entity	Test preparation
3	Click edit icon for target Water utility entity	Edit mode activated	Action: Click  for Water utility entity	Edit mode activation
4	Enter duplicate GL code from same utility	Input field accepts the duplicate value initially	Duplicate GL Code: 4001-1001 (same as Water Consumption)	AC010 - Testing duplicate scenario
5	Click save button to attempt saving duplicate	Validation error message displayed	Action: Click  button	Validation trigger
6	Verify specific error message displayed	Error shows "GL Code 4001-1001 already exists for Water utility"	Expected Error: "GL Code already exists for Water utility"	Business Rule 3 - Uniqueness validation
7	Verify save operation prevented	GL code not saved, remains in edit mode	Status: Edit mode active, no save occurred	Save prevention verification
8	Verify original GL code unchanged	Target entity retains original/empty GL code value	Original state maintained	Data integrity check
9	Enter different utility GL code (cross-utility test)	Input accepts GL code from different utility	Test GL Code: 1001-2001 (from Razorpay - "All" utility)	Cross-utility validation test
10	Click save button for cross-utility GL code	Save successful (different utility allows same GL code)	Action: Click button	Cross-utility uniqueness rule
11	Verify cross-utility save succeeded	Target entity now shows the GL code	Expected: GL Code = 1001-2001 saved successfully	Different utility = allowed
12	Test edge case: Enter unique GL code for same utility	Input accepts unique value	Unique GL Code: 4001-1004 (unique for Water utility)	Positive validation test
13	Click save for unique GL code	Save successful	Action: Click  button	Unique value acceptance
14	Verify unique GL code saved successfully	Entity shows new unique GL code	Expected: GL Code = 4001-1004	Successful unique save

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Duplicate GL codes within same utility are prevented with specific error message
• Secondary_Verifications: Cross-utility GL codes allowed, unique GL codes within utility accepted, edit mode properly managed during validation
• Negative_Verification: Duplicate GL codes should NOT be saved, error message should NOT appear for valid unique codes

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: Edit mode functionality test
• Blocked_Tests: Bulk GL code assignment tests
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other GL code modification tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must complete before integration tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Critical validation preventing financial reporting conflicts within utility types
• Edge_Cases: Concurrent edit attempts, case sensitivity in GL codes, special characters
• Risk_Areas: Validation bypass, database constraint failures, inconsistent error messaging
• Security_Considerations: Ensure validation cannot be bypassed through API calls

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Bulk duplicate prevention during bulk GL code assignment
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Bulk operations must respect same validation rules
• Priority: P1
• Scenario_2: Case-insensitive duplicate validation (4001-1001 vs 4001-1001)
• Type: Edge Case
• Rationale: Prevent user confusion with case variations
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 6: Integration Failure Rollback Scenario

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_006
• Title: Verify system rollback and error handling during integration failure with external financial systems
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Integration/Error Handling
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Acceptance
• Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer/Billing Services, API, Integration, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Acceptance, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/CSM/Quality-Dashboard/Integration-Testing/Security-Validation, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-External-Dependency, Error-Handling

Business Context

• Customer_Segment: Enterprise
• 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: 10 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: Medium
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 40%
• Integration_Points: Billing system, Financial reporting system, Accounting integration, Error handling system
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Integration-Services
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC020 - Integration with financial systems, Process Changes section - Integration impact
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_025 (Successful integration), BX05US01_TC_010 (Status changes)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: External financial systems (simulated failure), Error handling mechanisms, Rollback procedures
• Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds rollback completion
• Data_Requirements: Test entity for status change: Water Consumption (Active, 4001-1001)

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Integration testing environment, External system failure simulation capability
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Active entity for testing: Water Consumption (Consumer Billing, Water, 4001-1001, Active)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Normal integration functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Record current system state	Document entity status and dashboard metrics	Baseline: Water Consumption = Active, Active count = 8	Pre-failure state
2	Simulate external financial system unavailability	External system marked as unavailable	Simulation: Billing system API returns 503 error	Integration failure simulation
3	Attempt to change Water Consumption status from Active to Inactive	Status change initiated in UI	Action: Toggle Water Consumption to Inactive	AC020 - Integration trigger
4	Verify integration failure detected	System detects external system failure	Expected: Integration timeout or error response	Failure detection
5	Verify user notification displayed	Error message shown to user	Expected Error: "Integration with financial systems failed. Changes not saved."	User feedback
6	Verify local changes rolled back	Water Consumption status remains Active	Expected: Status = Active (unchanged)	Rollback verification
7	Verify dashboard metrics unchanged	Active count remains 8, no metric changes	Expected: Active count = 8	Metric consistency
8	Verify entity table state consistent	Table shows original status for all entities	Expected: All original statuses maintained	Data consistency
9	Verify audit log entry created	Failure logged with details	Expected: Audit entry with failure reason and timestamp	Compliance logging
10	Restore external system connectivity	External system marked as available	Simulation: Billing system API returns 200 OK	System recovery
11	Retry the same status change operation	Status change attempted again	Action: Toggle Water Consumption to Inactive	Retry after recovery
12	Verify successful integration after recovery	Status change completes successfully	Expected: Water Consumption = Inactive, successful integration	Recovery validation
13	Verify dashboard metrics update after successful integration	Metrics reflect successful change	Expected: Active count = 7, Inactive count = 10	Post-recovery state

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Integration failures trigger proper rollback preventing inconsistent state
• Secondary_Verifications: User notification provided, audit trail maintained, system recovers properly
• Negative_Verification: Partial changes should NOT persist, system should NOT remain in inconsistent state

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: Normal integration functionality tests
• Blocked_Tests: Performance under load tests
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other integration tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must run in isolated environment

Additional Information

• Notes: Critical for maintaining data integrity across distributed systems
• Edge_Cases: Partial integration failures, network timeouts, database rollback failures
• Risk_Areas: Data corruption, financial reporting inconsistencies, user workflow disruption
• Security_Considerations: Ensure rollback doesn't expose sensitive data or create security vulnerabilities

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Bulk operation rollback during integration failure
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Bulk operations have higher complexity for rollback scenarios
• Priority: P1
• Scenario_2: Multiple concurrent integration failures
• Type: Edge Case
• Rationale: System stability under multiple failure conditions
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 7: Payment Channels Category Filter

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_007
• Title: Verify Payment Channels category filter displays only payment-related entities with distinct visual indicators
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Payment/Channels Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Regression-Coverage/Module-Coverage/User-Acceptance/Customer-Segment-Analysis, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Category-Filtering, 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: Low
• Complexity_Level: Medium
• Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Low
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 45%
• Integration_Points: Category filtering system, Visual indicators
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: QA
• Report_Categories: Regression-Coverage, Customer-Segment-Analysis, Module-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: No
• Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC015 - Visual category indicators, Business Rule 2 - Category filtering
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_031 (Consumer Billing filter), BX05US01_TC_020 (Visual indicators)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Category filter system, Visual styling system
• Performance_Baseline: < 300ms filter application
• Data_Requirements: Payment Channels entities: Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS, UPI

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded, Category filter accessible
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Payment Channels entities: Razorpay (1001-2001, Active), NEFT/RTGS (1001-2002, Active), UPI (Not set, Inactive)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Page load successful, category filter functional

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Ensure all entities visible in table initially	Table shows all 17 entities across categories	Initial state: All entities visible	Baseline verification
2	Locate Category filter dropdown	Category dropdown visible with "All Categories" selected	Default state: "All Categories"	Filter identification
3	Click Category dropdown to open options	Dropdown expands showing category options	Options: All Categories, Consumer Billing, Payment Channels	Menu expansion
4	Select "Payment Channels" from dropdown	Filter selection applied	Selection: Payment Channels	Category selection
5	Verify only Payment Channels entities displayed	Table shows exactly 3 Payment Channels entities	Expected entities: Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS, UPI	Payment filter validation
6	Verify Consumer Billing entities hidden	No Consumer Billing entities visible in table	Hidden: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges, Late Payment Fees	Negative filtering
7	Verify Payment Channels visual indicators	All visible entities show consistent Payment Channels badge/color	Visual: Payment Channels category badges (different color from Consumer Billing)	AC015 - Visual indicators
8	Verify entity details accuracy	Each Payment Channels entity shows correct details	Razorpay: 1001-2001/Active, NEFT/RTGS: 1001-2002/Active, UPI: Not set/Inactive	Data accuracy
9	Verify "All" utility designation	Payment Channels entities show "All" in Utility column	Expected Utility: "All" for all Payment Channels entities	Utility assignment per user story
10	Verify filter state persistence	Filter remains active during table interactions	Persistence test: Scroll, sort, other UI interactions	State management
11	Check table count consistency	Table shows count matching filtered results (3 entities)	Count verification: 3 Payment Channels entities	Result consistency
12	Verify dropdown state after filtering	Dropdown shows "Payment Channels" as selected	UI State: "Payment Channels" displayed in dropdown	Selection persistence

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Only 3 Payment Channels entities (Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS, UPI) displayed after filter
• Secondary_Verifications: Distinct visual indicators, "All" utility designation, Consumer Billing entities hidden
• Negative_Verification: Consumer Billing entities should not appear, filter should not reset unexpectedly

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: Page load and basic filtering functionality
• Blocked_Tests: Multiple category combination tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run parallel with other single filter tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should complete before complex filter combinations

Additional Information

• Notes: Payment Channels filtering critical for payment method revenue analysis
• Edge_Cases: All payment channels inactive, new payment methods added
• Risk_Areas: Visual indicator consistency, filter state management
• Security_Considerations: Ensure payment method data properly secured during filtering

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Payment Channels filter with status sub-filtering
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Users need to see active vs inactive payment methods
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Payment Channels filter performance with large datasets
• Type: Performance
• Rationale: Ensure scalability as payment methods increase
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 8: Multiple Criteria Filter Combination

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_008
• Title: Verify simultaneous application of Category, Status, and Utility filters with search functionality
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional/Integration
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Regression-Coverage/User-Acceptance/Integration-Testing/Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Multi-Filter, 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: 6 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Low
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 50%
• Integration_Points: Multi-filter system, Search integration, Filter state management
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: QA
• Report_Categories: Integration-Testing, User-Acceptance, Regression-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: No
• Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC017 - Multiple criteria filtering, AC002 - Search functionality, Business Rule 2 - Filter combinations
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_031 (Category filter), BX05US01_TC_006 (Status filter), BX05US01_TC_008 (Utility filter)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Multi-filter system, Search functionality, Filter state management
• Performance_Baseline: < 500ms for combined filter application
• Data_Requirements: Mixed entities across categories, statuses, and utilities from user story

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded, All filter controls accessible
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Consumer Billing + Water + Active entities: Water Consumption (4001-1001), Fixed Charges (4001-1003)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Individual filter tests passed

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Verify all entities visible initially	Table shows all 17 entities	Initial count: 17 entities	Baseline state
2	Apply Category filter: "Consumer Billing"	Table shows only Consumer Billing entities	Expected: 4 Consumer Billing entities	First filter layer
3	Verify filtered count after category filter	Table shows 4 entities (Consumer Billing only)	Count: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges, Late Payment Fees	Category filter verification
4	Apply Status filter: "Active" on top of category filter	Shows Consumer Billing + Active entities only	Expected: 3 entities (excluding Late Payment Fees - Inactive)	Second filter layer
5	Verify combined category + status filtering	Table shows Consumer Billing entities that are Active	Count: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges	Combined filter validation
6	Apply Utility filter: "Water" on top of existing filters	Shows Consumer Billing + Active + Water entities	Expected: 2 entities (Water Consumption, Fixed Charges)	Third filter layer
7	Verify triple filter combination	Table shows only Water utility, Active, Consumer Billing entities	Final count: Water Consumption (4001-1001), Fixed Charges (4001-1003)	Triple filter verification
8	Add search term "Consumption" to existing filters	Further narrows to entities matching search + filters	Search term: "Consumption"	Fourth criteria addition
9	Verify search + triple filter combination	Shows only Water Consumption entity	Final result: Water Consumption only	Quadruple criteria filtering
10	Clear search term while maintaining filters	Returns to triple filter result	Action: Clear search box	Search removal test
11	Verify filters maintained after search clear	Still shows Water + Active + Consumer Billing entities	Expected: Water Consumption, Fixed Charges	Filter persistence
12	Remove Utility filter while maintaining Category + Status	Shows all Consumer Billing + Active entities	Expected: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges	Filter removal test
13	Remove all filters using clear/reset functionality	All 17 entities return to table	Action: Clear all filters	Complete reset test
14	Verify all filter controls reset to defaults	All dropdowns show default "All" options	Status: "All Status", Category: "All Categories", Utility: "All Utilities"	Control state reset

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Multiple filters work simultaneously and correctly narrow results at each layer
• Secondary_Verifications: Filter removal works progressively, search integrates with filters, complete reset functionality
• Negative_Verification: Filters should not conflict with each other, no entities should appear that don't match ALL active criteria

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: Individual filter functionality tests
• Blocked_Tests: Performance tests under load
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other filter tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must complete before advanced filter scenario tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Complex filtering essential for efficient entity management in large deployments
• Edge_Cases: No results matching criteria, all entities matching criteria, filter conflicts
• Risk_Areas: Performance degradation with multiple filters, UI responsiveness, state management
• Security_Considerations: Ensure filtered views respect user access permissions

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Filter combination with bulk operations
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Users need to perform bulk actions on filtered subsets
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Filter state persistence across page navigation
• Type: Usability
• Rationale: Workflow efficiency for users working across multiple pages
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 9: Wastewater Charges Entity Management

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_009
• Title: Verify Wastewater Charges entity management with specific utility type validation and GL code 4001-1002
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Module-Coverage/Regression-Coverage/Customer-Segment-Analysis/Revenue-Impact-Tracking, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Wastewater-Management, 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: Medium
• Complexity_Level: Medium
• Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 55%
• Integration_Points: Wastewater billing system, Utility-specific validation
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Product
• Report_Categories: Customer-Segment-Analysis, Revenue-Impact-Tracking, Module-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: Sample Data - Wastewater Charges entity, Business Rule 3 - Utility assignments
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_008 (Utility filters), BX05US01_TC_010 (Status toggle)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Wastewater billing integration, GL code validation system
• Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds entity operations
• Data_Requirements: Wastewater Charges entity with GL code 4001-1002, Active status, Wastewater utility

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Wastewater Charges entity configured per user story sample data
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Wastewater Charges (Consumer Billing, 4001-1002, Wastewater, Active)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Table display and basic entity operations verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Locate Wastewater Charges entity in table	Entity visible with complete details	Entity: Wastewater Charges, Category: Consumer Billing	Sample data verification
2	Verify Wastewater Charges GL code display	Shows GL code "4001-1002" correctly	Expected GL Code: 4001-1002	User story sample data
3	Verify Utility assignment	Shows "Wastewater" in Utility column	Expected Utility: Wastewater	Utility-specific assignment
4	Verify Category badge display	Shows "Consumer Billing" with blue badge	Expected Category: Consumer Billing (blue)	Visual indicator verification
5	Verify Active status display	Shows "Active" status with green indicator	Expected Status: Active (green toggle ON)	Status verification
6	Test Utility filter with Wastewater selection	Filter shows only Wastewater entities	Filter: Utility = Wastewater	Utility filtering test
7	Verify Wastewater Charges appears in filtered results	Entity visible when Wastewater filter applied	Expected: Wastewater Charges visible	Filter inclusion test
8	Test status toggle from Active to Inactive	Status changes successfully	Action: Toggle to Inactive	Status management
9	Verify dashboard Active count decreases	Active count reduces by 1	Before: 8 Active, After: 7 Active	Real-time dashboard update
10	Verify Wastewater Charges shows Inactive	Entity displays Inactive status	Expected Status: Inactive (gray toggle OFF)	Status change verification
11	Toggle status back to Active	Status restored to Active	Action: Toggle to Active	Status restoration
12	Verify GL code edit functionality	Edit mode activates with ✏️ icon	Action: Click edit icon	Edit capability test
13	Modify GL code to test validation	Enter new valid Wastewater GL code	New GL Code: 4001-1005	Wastewater-specific GL code
14	Save GL code change	Update saved successfully	Action: Click ✅ button	Save operation test
15	Verify updated GL code display	Shows new GL code in table	Expected: GL Code = 4001-1005	Update verification

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Wastewater Charges entity properly configured with 4001-1002 GL code and Wastewater utility
• Secondary_Verifications: Status toggle works, utility filtering includes entity, edit functionality operational
• Negative_Verification: Entity should not appear in non-Wastewater utility 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: Low
• Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: Basic table display test
• Blocked_Tests: Wastewater-specific integration tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other entity-specific tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should complete before utility-specific validation tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Wastewater Charges represents significant revenue stream requiring accurate GL code management
• Edge_Cases: Wastewater service unavailable, seasonal wastewater billing variations
• Risk_Areas: Utility-specific business rule validation, revenue recognition accuracy
• Security_Considerations: Wastewater billing data sensitivity and compliance requirements

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Wastewater-specific rate calculation integration
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Wastewater charges may have different calculation rules
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Seasonal wastewater billing entity activation/deactivation
• Type: Business Process
• Rationale: Some utilities have seasonal wastewater billing
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 10: Entity Name Uniqueness Validation

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_010
• Title: Verify entity name uniqueness validation within same category and utility preventing duplicates
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer/Billing Services, API, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Validation, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Security-Validation/Quality-Dashboard/Smoke-Test-Results, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Data-Validation, Entity-Uniqueness

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: 5 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 60%
• Integration_Points: Entity validation system, Database constraints, Error handling
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: Business Rule 3 - Entity Name must be unique across same category and utility
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_033 (GL code uniqueness), BX05US01_TC_032 (Edit functionality)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Entity validation system, Database uniqueness constraints
• Performance_Baseline: < 300ms validation response
• Data_Requirements: Existing entities: Water Consumption (Consumer Billing, Water), Fixed Charges (Consumer Billing, Water)

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Entity creation/edit functionality enabled
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role with entity management permissions
• Test_Data: Existing Consumer Billing + Water entities: Water Consumption, Fixed Charges
• Prior_Test_Cases: Entity edit functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Identify existing entity configuration	Note existing entity details	Reference: Water Consumption (Consumer Billing, Water)	Baseline entity
2	Attempt to create/edit entity with duplicate name in same category+utility	Access entity creation or edit mode	Target: Create "Water Consumption" in Consumer Billing + Water	Duplicate scenario setup
3	Enter duplicate entity name	System accepts input initially	Duplicate Name: "Water Consumption"	Input acceptance test
4	Select same category as existing entity	Category selection allowed	Category: Consumer Billing	Category matching
5	Select same utility as existing entity	Utility selection allowed	Utility: Water	Utility matching
6	Attempt to save duplicate entity name configuration	Validation error displayed	Action: Save duplicate configuration	BR3 - Uniqueness validation
7	Verify specific error message	Error shows entity name conflict	Expected Error: "Entity name 'Water Consumption' already exists for Consumer Billing + Water"	Specific error messaging
8	Verify save operation prevented	Entity not created/updated	Status: Save blocked by validation	Save prevention
9	Test cross-category uniqueness allowance	Same name allowed in different category	Test: "Water Consumption" in Payment Channels category	Cross-category validation
10	Verify cross-category save succeeds	Different category allows same name	Expected: Save successful for different category	Category independence
11	Test cross-utility uniqueness allowance	Same name allowed in different utility	Test: "Water Consumption" in Consumer Billing + Wastewater	Cross-utility validation
12	Verify cross-utility save succeeds	Different utility allows same name	Expected: Save successful for different utility	Utility independence
13	Test unique name acceptance	Unique name saves successfully	Unique Name: "Water Service Charges" (Consumer Billing, Water)	Positive validation
14	Verify unique name save successful	Entity created/updated with unique name	Expected: Save successful	Unique name acceptance

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Duplicate entity names prevented within same category + utility combination
• Secondary_Verifications: Cross-category and cross-utility duplicates allowed, specific error messages displayed
• Negative_Verification: Duplicate names should NOT be saved within same category + utility

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: Entity edit/create functionality
• Blocked_Tests: Bulk entity creation tests
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other entity creation tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must complete before advanced entity management tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Entity name uniqueness critical for avoiding revenue recognition conflicts
• Edge_Cases: Case sensitivity variations, special characters in names, very long entity names
• Risk_Areas: Database constraint bypass, validation rule conflicts, user experience during errors
• Security_Considerations: Prevent entity name manipulation to bypass business rules

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Case-insensitive entity name validation
• Type: Edge Case
• Rationale: Prevent user confusion with case variations of same name
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Entity name validation during bulk imports
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Bulk operations must respect same uniqueness rules
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 11: Show/Hide Filters Toggle Functionality

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_011
• Title: Verify Show Filters and Hide Filters toggle button functionality for filter panel management
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: UI/Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P3-Medium
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, MOD-Billing, P3-Medium, Phase-Regression, Type-UI, Platform-Web, Report-QA/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Cross-Browser-Results, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-UI-Controls, Happy-Path

Business Context

• Customer_Segment: All
• Revenue_Impact: Low
• Business_Priority: Could-Have
• Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
• Compliance_Required: No
• SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

• Risk_Level: Low
• Complexity_Level: Low
• Expected_Execution_Time: 2 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: None
• Failure_Impact: Low

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 65%
• Integration_Points: UI filter controls, State management
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: QA
• Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Cross-Browser-Results, Module-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: No
• Executive_Visibility: No
• Customer_Impact_Level: Low

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: Wireframe UI elements - Show/Hide Filters toggle button
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_022 (Multiple filters), BX05US01_TC_023 (Filter reset)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Filter UI components, State management system
• Performance_Baseline: < 100ms toggle response
• Data_Requirements: Standard GL entities for filter testing

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded with filter controls visible
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Standard entity set for filter testing
• Prior_Test_Cases: Page load successful

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Locate filter section above entity table	Filter controls visible with dropdowns	Visible: Status, Utilities, Category dropdowns + Search	Initial filter state
2	Locate "Show Filters"/"Hide Filters" toggle button	Toggle button visible near filter controls	Button location: Right side of filter area	Wireframe UI element
3	Verify initial button state	Button shows "Hide Filters" when filters visible	Initial state: "Hide Filters" button	Default expanded state
4	Click "Hide Filters" button	Filter controls collapse/hide from view	Action: Click "Hide Filters"	Collapse functionality
5	Verify filter controls hidden	Status, Utilities, Category dropdowns not visible	Hidden elements: All filter dropdowns	UI collapse verification
6	Verify search bar state	Search bar behavior (hidden or remains visible)	Search bar: Check visibility state	Search persistence
7	Verify button text changes	Button now shows "Show Filters"	Updated text: "Show Filters"	Button state update
8	Verify table remains functional	Entity table still displays and operates normally	Table function: All entities visible and interactive	Core functionality preserved
9	Click "Show Filters" button	Filter controls expand and become visible again	Action: Click "Show Filters"	Expand functionality
10	Verify all filter controls restored	Status, Utilities, Category dropdowns visible	Restored elements: All filter dropdowns	UI expansion verification
11	Verify filter states preserved	Previously applied filters maintained	Filter state: Any applied filters remain active	State persistence
12	Verify button text reverts	Button shows "Hide Filters" again	Updated text: "Hide Filters"	Button state revert
13	Test filter functionality after toggle	Apply a filter to verify functionality restored	Test filter: Status = Active	Functionality verification
14	Verify applied filter works normally	Filter applies and narrows entity results	Expected: Only active entities shown	Filter operation normal

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Show/Hide Filters button properly toggles filter control visibility
• Secondary_Verifications: Button text updates correctly, filter states preserved, table functionality unaffected
• Negative_Verification: Hiding filters should not reset applied filters or break table functionality

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: Monthly
• Maintenance_Effort: Low
• Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: Page load test
• Blocked_Tests: None
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other UI functionality tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic filter tests

Additional Information

• Notes: UI enhancement for users who prefer more screen space for entity table
• Edge_Cases: Rapid toggle clicking, browser window resize during hidden state
• Risk_Areas: State management, CSS transition issues, accessibility concerns
• Security_Considerations: None specific to this UI functionality

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Toggle state persistence across page refreshes
• Type: Usability
• Rationale: User preference should be remembered
• Priority: P4
• Scenario_2: Keyboard accessibility for toggle button
• Type: Accessibility
• Rationale: Ensure keyboard navigation support
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 12: Bulk GL Code Assignment Workflow

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_012
• Title: Verify bulk GL code assignment for multiple entities missing GL code configurations
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional/Integration
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Acceptance
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Acceptance, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/QA/User-Acceptance/Revenue-Impact-Tracking, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Bulk-Operations, Happy-Path

Business Context

• Customer_Segment: All
• Revenue_Impact: High
• Business_Priority: Must-Have
• Customer_Journey: Onboarding
• Compliance_Required: Yes
• SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

• Risk_Level: High
• Complexity_Level: High
• Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 70%
• Integration_Points: Bulk operations system, GL code validation, Dashboard updates
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Product
• Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Revenue-Impact-Tracking, Product
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: Jobs-to-Be-Done - Bulk assign GL codes for entities missing codes, AC013 - Bulk operations
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_017 (Bulk selection), BX05US01_TC_018 (Bulk operations)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Bulk operations system, GL code validation engine, Dashboard calculation system
• Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for bulk assignment of 5 entities
• Data_Requirements: Multiple entities with "Not set" GL codes for bulk assignment testing

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Entities without GL codes available for testing
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role with bulk operation permissions
• Test_Data: Entities with "Not set" GL codes: UPI, and additional test entities
• Prior_Test_Cases: Bulk selection functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Filter entities to show only those with "Not set" GL codes	Table shows entities missing GL code assignments	Filter condition: GL Code = "Not set"	Jobs-to-Be-Done scenario
2	Note current "Configured with GL Codes" dashboard count	Record baseline count for verification	Baseline: Current configured count (e.g., 9)	Dashboard baseline
3	Select multiple entities with "Not set" GL codes using checkboxes	Multiple entities selected for bulk operation	Selected entities: UPI + 2-3 other "Not set" entities	Bulk selection
4	Verify bulk operation controls appear	Bulk GL code assignment option becomes available	Expected: "Bulk Assign GL Codes" button or option	Bulk control activation
5	Click bulk GL code assignment option	Bulk assignment dialog/interface opens	Action: Click "Bulk Assign GL Codes"	Bulk operation initiation
6	Verify bulk assignment interface	Shows selected entities with GL code input fields	Interface: List of selected entities with individual GL code inputs	Bulk interface verification
7	Enter valid GL codes for each selected entity	GL codes accepted in bulk assignment form	Test GL Codes: 5001-3001, 5001-3002, 5001-3003	Bulk input validation
8	Verify individual GL code format validation in bulk mode	Each GL code validated for ####-#### format	Format validation: Each input field validates independently	Individual validation
9	Verify duplicate prevention across bulk assignment	System prevents duplicate GL codes within bulk assignment	Duplicate test: Try entering same GL code for multiple entities	Bulk duplicate prevention
10	Click confirm/save bulk assignment	Bulk assignment processing initiated	Action: Confirm bulk GL code assignment	Bulk processing
11	Verify success confirmation message	System confirms successful bulk assignment	Expected: "X entities successfully assigned GL codes"	Bulk success feedback
12	Verify all selected entities updated in table	Each entity now shows assigned GL code	Expected: All selected entities show new GL codes instead of "Not set"	Bulk update verification
13	Verify dashboard "Configured with GL Codes" count increased	Count increases by number of entities updated	Expected: Previous count + number of entities assigned	Dashboard update validation
14	Test bulk assignment with validation error scenario	Include one invalid GL code in bulk assignment	Invalid GL Code: "123-45" (wrong format)	Error handling test
15	Verify partial failure handling	System handles mixed success/failure in bulk operation	Expected: Success for valid codes, error for invalid ones	Partial failure management

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Bulk GL code assignment successfully updates multiple entities simultaneously
• Secondary_Verifications: Dashboard metrics update, individual validation maintained, error handling works
• Negative_Verification: Invalid GL codes should not be assigned, duplicates should be prevented

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: Yes

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: Bulk selection and individual GL code assignment tests
• Blocked_Tests: Integration stress tests
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other bulk operations
• Sequential_Tests: Must complete before bulk status operations

Additional Information

• Notes: Critical workflow for initial system setup and ongoing entity configuration management
• Edge_Cases: Very large bulk assignments, network interruption during bulk processing
• Risk_Areas: Partial completion scenarios, performance with large datasets, rollback on failures
• Security_Considerations: Ensure bulk operations respect user permissions and audit requirements

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Bulk GL code assignment with template/pattern application
• Type: Enhancement
• Rationale: Efficiency improvement for similar entity types
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Bulk assignment progress indicator for large datasets
• Type: Usability
• Rationale: User feedback during long-running bulk operations
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 13: Entity Search by Name - Partial Match

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_013
• Title: Verify entity search functionality with partial name matching capability for real-time filtering
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Regression-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Search-Engine, 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: Low
• Complexity_Level: Medium
• Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Low
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 35%
• Integration_Points: Search engine, Real-time filtering
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC002 - Entity search by name with partial match, Business Rule 2 - Search Bar filtering
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_022 (Multiple filters), BX05US01_TC_023 (Filter reset)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Search functionality, Real-time filtering system
• Performance_Baseline: < 500ms search response
• Data_Requirements: Entity names from user story: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, etc.

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded, Search bar visible and functional
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Entities containing "Water": Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges
• Prior_Test_Cases: Table display functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Locate search bar with placeholder text	"Search entities..." placeholder visible above table	UI Element: Search input field	AC002 - Search functionality
2	Click in search bar	Search field becomes active with cursor	Action: Click search input	Input activation
3	Enter partial search term "Water"	Search input accepts text	Search term: "Water"	Partial match test
4	Verify real-time filtering activates	Table filters immediately as typing	Expected: Results filter in real-time	Real-time search behavior
5	Verify filtered results display	Shows entities containing "Water" in name	Expected results: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges	Partial match validation
6	Verify non-matching entities hidden	Only matching entities visible	Hidden: Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS, UPI, Fixed Charges, Late Payment Fees	Negative filtering
7	Verify case-insensitive search	Search works regardless of case	Test: "water" (lowercase) should return same results	Case insensitivity
8	Test search with no results	Enter term that matches no entities	Search term: "XYZ123"	No results scenario
9	Verify "no results" message	Appropriate message displayed for no matches	Expected: "No GL entities found matching your search criteria."	No results feedback
10	Clear search term	Remove search text to restore all entities	Action: Clear search field	Search reset
11	Verify all entities return	All 17 entities visible again	Expected: Complete entity list restored	Reset functionality
12	Test search with special characters	Search handles special characters properly	Search term: "Payment-"	Special character handling

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Search returns entities with "Water" in name (Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges)
• Secondary_Verifications: Real-time filtering works, case-insensitive, clear search restores all
• Negative_Verification: Non-matching entities should not be displayed during search

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: Table display test
• Blocked_Tests: Combined search and filter tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other search functionality tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should precede complex filter combination tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Search functionality is essential for quickly locating specific entities in large datasets
• Edge_Cases: Very long search terms, Unicode characters, SQL injection attempts
• Risk_Areas: Performance with large datasets, search accuracy, SQL injection vulnerabilities
• Security_Considerations: Ensure search input is properly sanitized to prevent injection attacks

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Search within filtered results (search + filter combination)
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Users often need to search within already filtered entity sets
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Search highlighting of matched terms in results
• Type: Enhancement
• Rationale: Visual indication of why entities match the search term
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 14: Status Filter - Active Entities Only

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_014
• Title: Verify status dropdown filter functionality to display only active entities with proper filtering
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/User-Acceptance/Regression-Coverage/Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Filter-System, 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: Low
• Complexity_Level: Medium
• Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Low
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 40%
• Integration_Points: Status filtering system, UI filter controls
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC003 - Status dropdown filters, Business Rule 2 - Filter & Search Rules
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_007 (Inactive filter), BX05US01_TC_022 (Multiple filters)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Status filter controls, Entity status tracking
• Performance_Baseline: < 300ms filter application
• Data_Requirements: 8 active entities from user story sample data

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded, Filter controls visible
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Active entities: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges, Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS (total 8 active)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Page load successful, table display verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Locate Status dropdown filter above table	Status dropdown visible with "All Status" default	Default state: "All Status" selected	Filter identification
2	Click Status dropdown to open options	Dropdown opens showing filter options	Options: All Status, Active, Inactive	AC003 - Status filter options
3	Select "Active" from dropdown options	Filter applied, dropdown closes	Selection: Active	Filter application
4	Verify only active entities displayed	Table shows exactly 8 entities with "Active" status	Expected: 8 entities (Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges, Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS)	Active filter validation
5	Verify inactive entities hidden	No entities with "Inactive" status visible	Hidden: Late Payment Fees, UPI, other inactive entities	Negative filtering
6	Verify status indicators consistency	All visible entities show green "Active" status	Visual: Green toggle switches in ON position	Status indicator verification
7	Verify entity count matches filter	Count active entities matches dashboard "Active Entities" card	Expected count: 8 entities	Cross-reference validation
8	Verify dropdown state after filtering	Status dropdown shows "Active" as selected	UI state: "Active" displayed in dropdown	Selection persistence
9	Test filter performance	Filter applies within acceptable timeframe	Performance: < 300ms response time	Performance validation
10	Verify table functionality during filtering	Table remains interactive (sorting, editing if available)	Functionality: All table features work with filtered results	Feature integration
11	Verify page elements unaffected	Dashboard cards and other elements remain functional	Element check: Dashboard metrics still accurate	UI consistency
12	Test filter with search combination	Apply search term on top of Active filter	Test: Search "Water" + Active filter	Filter integration

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Only 8 active entities displayed after applying Active status filter
• Secondary_Verifications: Green status indicators shown, inactive entities hidden, dropdown state updated
• Negative_Verification: Inactive entities should NOT appear, filter should not reset unexpectedly

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: Page load and table display tests
• Blocked_Tests: Multiple filter combination tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other single filter tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should precede complex filter scenarios

Additional Information

• Notes: Active status filtering is critical for focusing on revenue-generating entities
• Edge_Cases: All entities active, no entities active, status changes during filtering
• Risk_Areas: Filter state management, performance with large datasets, UI responsiveness
• Security_Considerations: Ensure filter doesn't bypass role-based entity access controls

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Filter persistence across page refreshes
• Type: Usability
• Rationale: Users expect filter state to be maintained for workflow continuity
• Priority: P3
• Scenario_2: Filter impact on bulk operations
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Bulk operations should respect current filter state
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 15: Status Filter - Inactive Entities Only

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_015
• Title: Verify status dropdown filter functionality to display only inactive entities with proper filtering
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/User-Acceptance/Regression-Coverage/Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Filter-System, 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: Low
• Complexity_Level: Medium
• Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Low
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 45%
• Integration_Points: Status filtering system, UI filter controls
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC003 - Status dropdown filters, Business Rule 2 - Filter & Search Rules
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_006 (Active filter), BX05US01_TC_022 (Multiple filters)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Status filter controls, Entity status tracking
• Performance_Baseline: < 300ms filter application
• Data_Requirements: 9 inactive entities from user story sample data

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded, Filter controls visible
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Inactive entities: Late Payment Fees, UPI (total 9 inactive entities per user story)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Page load successful, table display verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Verify Status dropdown accessibility	Status dropdown visible and clickable	Current state: "All Status" default	Filter availability
2	Click Status dropdown to reveal options	Dropdown expands showing all available options	Options: All Status, Active, Inactive	Dropdown functionality
3	Select "Inactive" from dropdown menu	Filter selection applied successfully	Selection: Inactive	Filter application
4	Verify only inactive entities displayed	Table shows exactly 9 entities with "Inactive" status	Expected: 9 entities including Late Payment Fees, UPI	Inactive filter validation
5	Verify active entities hidden	No entities with "Active" status visible in table	Hidden: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges, Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS	Negative filtering
6	Verify status indicators consistency	All visible entities show gray "Inactive" status	Visual: Gray toggle switches in OFF position	Status indicator verification
7	Check status badge appearance	Inactive entities show "Inactive" text/badge	Badge state: Gray or dimmed "Inactive" labels	Visual consistency
8	Verify entity count accuracy	Count matches dashboard "Inactive Entities" card	Expected count: 9 entities	Cross-reference validation
9	Verify dropdown selection persistence	Status dropdown displays "Inactive" as selected	UI state: "Inactive" shown in dropdown	Selection state
10	Test activation capability on filtered results	Attempt to activate an inactive entity (if GL code present)	Test action: Toggle Late Payment Fees if it has GL code	Action availability
11	Verify filter maintains during entity actions	Filter remains active during entity operations	Persistence test: Filter stays applied during interactions	State management
12	Test filter clearing functionality	Return to "All Status" to show all entities	Action: Select "All Status" from dropdown	Filter reset

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Only 9 inactive entities displayed after applying Inactive status filter
• Secondary_Verifications: Gray status indicators shown, active entities hidden, dropdown state maintained
• Negative_Verification: Active entities should NOT appear, filter should not auto-reset

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: Page load and table display tests
• Blocked_Tests: Entity activation/deactivation workflow tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other single filter tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should precede status change workflow tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Inactive filtering helps identify entities requiring attention or potential activation
• Edge_Cases: All entities inactive, status changes during filtering, concurrent user modifications
• Risk_Areas: Filter accuracy with status changes, UI state consistency, performance impact
• Security_Considerations: Ensure filter respects user permissions for entity visibility

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Inactive entity activation workflow from filtered view
• Type: Workflow
• Rationale: Users often activate entities directly from inactive-filtered view
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Bulk activation of inactive entities
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Efficient workflow for seasonal entity management
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 16: Utility Type Filter Application

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_016
• Title: Verify utility dropdown filter functionality for Water, Wastewater, and All utility types
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/User-Acceptance/Regression-Coverage/Customer-Segment-Analysis, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Utility-Management, 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: Low
• Complexity_Level: Medium
• Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Low
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 50%
• Integration_Points: Utility filtering system, Utility type management
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: QA
• Report_Categories: Customer-Segment-Analysis, User-Acceptance, Regression-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: No
• Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC003 - Utility dropdown filters, Business Rule 2 - Utilities filtering
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_006 (Status filter), BX05US01_TC_022 (Multiple filters)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Utility filter controls, Utility type categorization system
• Performance_Baseline: < 300ms filter application
• Data_Requirements: Entities with different utilities: Water, Wastewater, All

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded, Utility filter dropdown accessible
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Water entities: Water Consumption, Fixed Charges; Wastewater: Wastewater Charges; All: Late Payment Fees, Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS, UPI
• Prior_Test_Cases: Page load successful, table display verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Locate Utilities dropdown filter	Utilities dropdown visible with "All Utilities" default	Default state: "All Utilities" selected	Filter identification
2	Click Utilities dropdown to show options	Dropdown opens revealing available utility types	Options: All Utilities, Water, Wastewater, All	Utility options display
3	Select "Water" from dropdown options	Filter applied to Water utility entities only	Selection: Water	Water filter application
4	Verify Water utility entities displayed	Shows entities assigned to Water utility	Expected results: Water Consumption, Fixed Charges	Water utility validation
5	Verify non-Water entities hidden	Wastewater and "All" utility entities not visible	Hidden: Wastewater Charges, Late Payment Fees, Payment channel entities	Negative filtering
6	Note entity count for Water filter	Record count of Water utility entities	Count: 2 entities (Water Consumption, Fixed Charges)	Water entity count
7	Select "Wastewater" from utilities filter	Filter applied to Wastewater utility entities	Selection: Wastewater	Wastewater filter application
8	Verify Wastewater utility entities displayed	Shows entities assigned to Wastewater utility	Expected results: Wastewater Charges	Wastewater utility validation
9	Verify non-Wastewater entities hidden	Water and "All" utility entities not visible	Hidden: Water entities, Payment channel entities	Wastewater negative filtering
10	Select "All" from utilities filter	Filter applied to entities with "All" utility designation	Selection: All (utility type)	"All" utility filter
11	Verify "All" utility entities displayed	Shows entities designated for all utility types	Expected results: Late Payment Fees, Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS, UPI	"All" utility validation
12	Verify utility-specific entities hidden	Water and Wastewater specific entities not visible	Hidden: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges	"All" utility negative filtering
13	Return to "All Utilities" filter	Reset filter to show all entities regardless of utility	Selection: All Utilities	Filter reset
14	Verify all entities restored	All 17 entities visible again	Expected: Complete entity list displayed	Reset verification

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Utility filter correctly displays entities based on utility type assignment
• Secondary_Verifications: Filter options match user story data, entity counts accurate, filter reset works
• Negative_Verification: Entities not matching selected utility should be hidden

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: Page load and table display tests
• Blocked_Tests: Utility-specific workflow tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other single filter tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should precede utility-based business rule tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Utility filtering enables utility-specific revenue analysis and entity management
• Edge_Cases: New utility types added, entities without utility assignment, mixed utility scenarios
• Risk_Areas: Filter accuracy with utility changes, performance with utility-heavy datasets
• Security_Considerations: Ensure utility filter respects user access to specific utility types

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Utility filter with GL code assignment workflow
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Users often assign GL codes to entities within specific utility types
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Utility-specific dashboard metrics
• Type: Analytics
• Rationale: Dashboard could show metrics per utility type when filtered
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 17: Bulk Entity Selection

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_017
• Title: Verify bulk selection of entities using checkboxes for multi-entity operations and management
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Regression-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Bulk-Operations, 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: 4 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 92%
• Integration_Points: Bulk selection system, UI state management, Multi-entity operations
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC012 - Bulk entity selection using checkboxes, Jobs-to-Be-Done bulk operations
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_018 (Bulk operations), BX05US01_TC_040 (Bulk GL assignment)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Checkbox controls, Bulk operation interface, State management system
• Performance_Baseline: < 100ms checkbox response time
• Data_Requirements: Multiple entities available for selection testing

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Entity table loaded with checkbox column visible
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role with bulk operation permissions
• Test_Data: Mixed entities: Water Consumption, Razorpay, UPI, Fixed Charges for selection testing
• Prior_Test_Cases: Table display functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Verify checkbox column presence in table	Leftmost column shows checkboxes for each entity	Column position: First column before Category	AC012 - Checkbox column verification
2	Verify all entity rows have checkboxes	Each entity row contains selectable checkbox	Visual check: Checkbox present for all 17 entities	Individual checkbox presence
3	Click individual entity checkbox	Checkbox becomes selected with visual indication	Test entity: Water Consumption	Individual selection test
4	Verify visual selection feedback	Selected row highlighted or checkbox marked	Visual: Checkmark in checkbox, row highlighting	Selection feedback
5	Select multiple individual entities	Click checkboxes for multiple entities	Selected entities: Water Consumption, Razorpay, Fixed Charges	Multiple selection
6	Verify multiple selection state	All selected checkboxes show selected state	Expected: 3 entities selected with visual indication	Multi-selection verification
7	Verify bulk action controls appear	Bulk operation buttons/menu becomes visible	Expected: Bulk operations interface activated	Bulk controls activation
8	Locate master checkbox in header	Header row contains master select/deselect checkbox	Location: Table header checkbox column	Master checkbox identification
9	Click master checkbox to select all	All entity checkboxes become selected	Action: Click header checkbox	Select all functionality
10	Verify all entities selected	All 17 entity checkboxes show selected state	Expected: All entities visually selected	Master select verification
11	Click master checkbox again to deselect all	All entity checkboxes become deselected	Action: Click header checkbox again	Deselect all functionality
12	Verify all entities deselected	No entity checkboxes show selected state	Expected: All checkboxes cleared	Master deselect verification
13	Test partial selection with master checkbox	Select some entities then check master checkbox behavior	Test: Select 3 entities, observe master checkbox state	Partial selection handling
14	Verify selection count display	Interface shows count of selected entities	Expected: "3 entities selected" or similar indicator	Selection counter

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Individual and bulk entity selection works correctly using checkboxes
• Secondary_Verifications: Visual feedback for selections, master checkbox functions properly, bulk controls activated
• Negative_Verification: Checkboxes should not auto-select, selections should not persist 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: Low
• Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: Table display functionality
• Blocked_Tests: Bulk operation execution tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other UI selection tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must precede bulk operation tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Bulk selection is foundation for efficient multi-entity management workflows
• Edge_Cases: Very large entity sets, performance with many selections, browser compatibility
• Risk_Areas: State management with selections, UI responsiveness, memory usage with large selections
• Security_Considerations: Ensure selection state doesn't expose unauthorized entities

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Selection persistence during filtering operations
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Users expect selections to be maintained when applying filters
• Priority: P3
• Scenario_2: Keyboard shortcuts for bulk selection (Ctrl+A, Shift+click)
• Type: Enhancement
• Rationale: Power users expect keyboard-driven selection capabilities
• Priority: P4

---

Test Case 18: Bulk Status Operations

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_018
• Title: Verify bulk operations for status changes affecting multiple entities with confirmation and impact analysis
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional/Integration
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/QA/User-Acceptance/Revenue-Impact-Tracking, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Bulk-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: 6 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 95%
• Integration_Points: Bulk processing engine, Status management system, Dashboard updates, Validation system
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Product
• Report_Categories: Revenue-Impact-Tracking, User-Acceptance, Product
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC013 - Bulk operations for status changes, Jobs-to-Be-Done efficiency improvements
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_017 (Bulk selection), BX05US01_TC_019 (Confirmation dialogs)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Bulk processing system, Confirmation dialog system, Dashboard calculation engine
• Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for bulk operation on 5 entities
• Data_Requirements: Multiple entities with GL codes for bulk status testing

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Bulk selection functionality verified, Confirmation system active
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role with bulk operation permissions
• Test_Data: Active entities with GL codes: Water Consumption (4001-1001), Fixed Charges (4001-1003), Razorpay (1001-2001)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Bulk selection functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Select multiple active entities with GL codes	3 active entities selected for bulk operation	Selected: Water Consumption, Fixed Charges, Razorpay	AC013 - Bulk selection for status change
2	Verify bulk operation controls appear	Bulk action menu/buttons become visible	Expected: "Bulk Actions" or similar interface element	Bulk controls activation
3	Locate bulk status change option	Find bulk deactivate/activate option in interface	Option: "Bulk Status Change" or "Deactivate Selected"	Bulk status option
4	Click bulk status change option	Bulk operation dialog or interface opens	Action: Click bulk status change	Bulk operation initiation
5	Verify bulk operation preview	Interface shows entities to be affected	Preview: List of 3 selected entities with current status	Operation preview
6	Verify impact analysis display	System shows impact of bulk status change	Impact info: "3 entities will be deactivated"	Impact analysis
7	Note current dashboard metrics	Record baseline before bulk operation	Baseline: Active=8, Inactive=9	Pre-operation metrics
8	Confirm bulk status change	Proceed with bulk deactivation	Action: Confirm bulk operation	Operation execution
9	Verify bulk processing indication	System shows processing status	Expected: Progress indicator or "Processing..." message	Processing feedback
10	Verify all selected entities status changed	All 3 entities now show "Inactive" status	Expected: Water Consumption, Fixed Charges, Razorpay = Inactive	Bulk status verification
11	Verify dashboard metrics updated	Active count decreases by 3, Inactive increases by 3	Expected: Active=5, Inactive=12	Dashboard bulk update
12	Verify bulk operation success message	System confirms successful bulk operation	Expected: "3 entities successfully deactivated"	Success confirmation
13	Test bulk activation of inactive entities	Select inactive entities and bulk activate	Test: Select 2 inactive entities, bulk activate	Reverse operation test
14	Verify bulk activation with GL code validation	Only entities with GL codes can be bulk activated	Validation: Entities without GL codes excluded or error shown	Validation during bulk ops

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Bulk status operations successfully change multiple entity statuses simultaneously
• Secondary_Verifications: Dashboard metrics update correctly, impact analysis provided, validation maintained
• Negative_Verification: Entities without GL codes should not be bulk activated, failed operations should not partially complete

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: Yes

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: Bulk selection and individual status change functionality
• Blocked_Tests: Integration with external systems for bulk operations
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other bulk operations
• Sequential_Tests: Must complete before external system integration tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Bulk operations critical for seasonal entity management and operational efficiency
• Edge_Cases: Network interruption during bulk processing, very large bulk operations, concurrent user conflicts
• Risk_Areas: Partial completion scenarios, dashboard synchronization, performance with large datasets
• Security_Considerations: Ensure bulk operations maintain same authorization checks as individual operations

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Bulk operation rollback on partial failure
• Type: Error Handling
• Rationale: System should handle scenarios where some entities in bulk operation fail
• Priority: P1
• Scenario_2: Bulk operation audit trail and compliance logging
• Type: Compliance
• Rationale: Bulk operations must maintain complete audit trails for compliance
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 19: Confirmation Dialog for Multiple Entity Actions

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_019
• Title: Verify confirmation dialogs appear for actions affecting multiple entities with clear impact information
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional/UI
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-UI, Platform-Web, Report-QA/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Cross-Browser-Results, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Confirmation-System, 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: 4 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 97%
• Integration_Points: Confirmation dialog system, User interface controls, Action prevention system
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: QA
• Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Cross-Browser-Results, Module-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: No
• Executive_Visibility: No
• Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC014 - Confirmation dialogs for actions affecting multiple entities
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_018 (Bulk operations), BX05US01_TC_041 (Revenue impact analysis)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Confirmation dialog system, Modal/popup controls
• Performance_Baseline: < 500ms dialog response time
• Data_Requirements: Multiple entities for confirmation testing

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Bulk operation functionality available
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: 5+ entities for high-impact bulk operation testing
• Prior_Test_Cases: Bulk selection functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Select 5+ entities for bulk operation	Multiple entities selected for high-impact action	Selected: 5 different entities across categories	AC014 - High-impact selection
2	Initiate bulk status change operation	Begin bulk operation process	Action: Click bulk status change	High-impact operation trigger
3	Verify confirmation dialog appears	Modal dialog or popup appears with confirmation request	Expected: Confirmation dialog visible	Dialog appearance verification
4	Verify dialog content shows entity count	Dialog displays number of entities to be affected	Expected: "This will affect 5 entities. Continue?"	Entity count display
5	Verify dialog shows impact description	Dialog includes description of operation impact	Expected: "Deactivating these entities will affect revenue collection"	Impact description
6	Verify dialog shows entity list	Dialog lists or references specific entities being affected	Expected: List of selected entity names	Entity specification
7	Verify Cancel button presence and functionality	Cancel button available and accessible	Button: "Cancel" or "No" option	Cancellation option
8	Click Cancel button	Dialog closes without performing operation	Action: Click Cancel	Cancellation test
9	Verify no changes made after cancellation	All selected entities remain in original state	Expected: No status changes, original entity states	Cancellation verification
10	Reinitiate bulk operation	Start bulk operation process again	Action: Repeat bulk operation setup	Re-initiation test
11	Verify dialog appears consistently	Same confirmation dialog appears with same content	Expected: Consistent dialog behavior	Consistency verification
12	Verify Confirm/Continue button	Confirmation button available and clearly labeled	Button: "Confirm", "Continue", or "Yes"	Confirmation option
13	Click Confirm button	Dialog closes and operation proceeds	Action: Click Confirm	Confirmation test
14	Verify operation completes after confirmation	Bulk operation executes successfully	Expected: Selected entities affected as intended	Operation completion

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Confirmation dialogs appear for bulk operations affecting multiple entities
• Secondary_Verifications: Dialog content accurate and informative, cancel/confirm functions work correctly
• Negative_Verification: Operations should not proceed without confirmation, cancel should prevent changes

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: Monthly
• Maintenance_Effort: Low
• Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: Bulk operation functionality
• Blocked_Tests: Advanced bulk operation workflows
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other dialog functionality tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should complete before complex bulk operation scenarios

Additional Information

• Notes: Confirmation dialogs prevent accidental bulk operations and provide user control
• Edge_Cases: Very large entity counts, complex impact scenarios, accessibility requirements
• Risk_Areas: Dialog blocking, unclear messaging, accessibility compliance
• Security_Considerations: Ensure confirmation dialogs cannot be bypassed programmatically

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Confirmation dialog timeout for idle users
• Type: Usability
• Rationale: Prevent indefinite dialog display affecting other users
• Priority: P4
• Scenario_2: Keyboard navigation and accessibility in confirmation dialogs
• Type: Accessibility
• Rationale: Ensure full keyboard and screen reader support
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 20: Visual Category Indicators

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_020
• Title: Verify visual indicators (colors/badges) for different entity categories with consistent styling
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: UI/Visual
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P3-Medium
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, MOD-Billing, P3-Medium, Phase-Regression, Type-UI, Platform-Web, Report-QA/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Cross-Browser-Results, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Visual-Design, Happy-Path

Business Context

• Customer_Segment: All
• Revenue_Impact: Low
• Business_Priority: Could-Have
• Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
• Compliance_Required: No
• SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

• Risk_Level: Low
• Complexity_Level: Low
• Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: None
• Failure_Impact: Low

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 98%
• Integration_Points: Visual styling system, Category management, UI design consistency
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: QA
• Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Cross-Browser-Results, Module-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: No
• Executive_Visibility: No
• Customer_Impact_Level: Low

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC015 - Visual indicators for different entity categories, Wireframe visual design elements
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_031 (Consumer Billing category), BX05US01_TC_035 (Payment Channels category)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: CSS styling system, Category classification system
• Performance_Baseline: < 1 second visual rendering
• Data_Requirements: Entities from both Consumer Billing and Payment Channels categories

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Entity table loaded with category indicators visible
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Consumer Billing entities: Water Consumption, Fixed Charges; Payment Channels: Razorpay, UPI
• Prior_Test_Cases: Table display functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Identify Consumer Billing entities in table	Locate entities with "Consumer Billing" category	Examples: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges	AC015 - Consumer Billing identification
2	Verify Consumer Billing visual indicator	Consumer Billing entities show specific color/badge	Expected: Blue badge or background for "Consumer Billing"	Visual indicator verification
3	Verify Consumer Billing badge text	Category badge shows "Consumer Billing" text clearly	Text verification: Clear, readable "Consumer Billing" label	Text clarity
4	Identify Payment Channels entities in table	Locate entities with "Payment Channels" category	Examples: Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS, UPI	Payment Channels identification
5	Verify Payment Channels visual indicator	Payment Channels entities show different color/badge from Consumer Billing	Expected: Different color (not blue) for "Payment Channels"	Visual distinction
6	Verify Payment Channels badge text	Category badge shows "Payment Channels" text clearly	Text verification: Clear, readable "Payment Channels" label	Text consistency
7	Verify color consistency within categories	All Consumer Billing entities use same color scheme	Color check: All Consumer Billing entities identical visual treatment	Within-category consistency
8	Verify color distinction between categories	Consumer Billing and Payment Channels use clearly different colors	Color contrast: Distinct visual differentiation between categories	Between-category distinction
9	Verify badge readability and accessibility	Text readable with sufficient contrast ratios	Accessibility: Colors meet WCAG contrast requirements	Accessibility compliance
10	Test with color-blind simulation	Categories distinguishable without relying solely on color	Accessibility: Pattern, shape, or text differences available	Color-blind accessibility
11	Verify badge positioning consistency	All category badges positioned consistently in Category column	Layout: Uniform badge placement and sizing	Positioning consistency
12	Test visual indicators across browser zoom levels	Badges remain clear and readable at different zoom levels	Zoom test: 75%, 100%, 125%, 150% zoom levels	Responsive visual design

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Different entity categories display distinct visual indicators (colors/badges)
• Secondary_Verifications: Color consistency within categories, sufficient contrast for accessibility
• Negative_Verification: Categories should not look identical, visual indicators should not be unclear

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: Monthly
• Maintenance_Effort: Low
• Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: Table display and category data loading
• Blocked_Tests: None
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other visual design tests
• Sequential_Tests: Can run independently

Additional Information

• Notes: Visual indicators improve user experience and workflow efficiency for category recognition
• Edge_Cases: High contrast mode, dark mode themes, custom browser color settings
• Risk_Areas: Color accessibility, browser compatibility, theme consistency
• Security_Considerations: None specific to visual indicators

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Visual indicators in dark mode or high contrast themes
• Type: Accessibility
• Rationale: Ensure visual indicators work across different accessibility modes
• Priority: P3
• Scenario_2: Category visual indicators during filtering operations
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Visual consistency should be maintained when categories are filtered
• Priority: P4

---

Test Case 21: Audit Trail for Entity Changes

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_021
• Title: Verify comprehensive audit trails maintained for all entity configuration changes and status modifications
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional/Security
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Acceptance
• Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, Database, Security, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Acceptance, Type-Security, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/CSM/Security-Validation/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Audit-System, Compliance-Required

Business Context

• Customer_Segment: Enterprise
• 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: 8 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 99%
• Integration_Points: Audit logging system, Database tracking, Compliance reporting
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Audit-Services
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: CSM
• Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Engineering, CSM
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC016 - Audit trails for all entity configuration changes, Compliance requirements
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_010 (Status changes), BX05US01_TC_032 (GL code modifications)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Audit logging system, Database audit tables, Compliance reporting system
• Performance_Baseline: < 1 second audit log entry creation
• Data_Requirements: Entities available for modification to test audit logging

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Audit system enabled, Audit log access available (if UI provided)
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role with entity modification permissions
• Test_Data: Test entity: Water Consumption (4001-1001, Active) for audit testing
• Prior_Test_Cases: Entity modification functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Record current timestamp for audit tracking	Note time before performing changes	Timestamp: Current time for audit correlation	AC016 - Audit preparation
2	Perform entity status change	Change Water Consumption from Active to Inactive	Action: Toggle Water Consumption status	Status change audit trigger
3	Verify audit entry creation (if audit UI available)	Audit log shows recent status change entry	Expected: New audit entry with status change details	Audit log verification
4	Verify audit entry contains user information	Audit shows user who made the change	Expected: billing_manager@test.com or current user ID	User tracking
5	Verify audit entry contains timestamp	Audit entry shows accurate timestamp of change	Expected: Timestamp matching change time	Temporal tracking
6	Verify audit entry contains old and new values	Audit shows status change from "Active" to "Inactive"	Expected: Old value = "Active", New value = "Inactive"	Value change tracking
7	Verify audit entry contains entity identification	Audit clearly identifies which entity was changed	Expected: Entity ID, name "Water Consumption"	Entity identification
8	Perform GL code assignment change	Modify GL code for an entity	Action: Change UPI GL code from "Not set" to "1001-2003"	GL code audit trigger
9	Verify GL code change audit entry	Audit log shows GL code assignment entry	Expected: New audit entry for GL code assignment	GL code audit verification
10	Verify GL code audit details	Audit shows old value "Not set" and new value "1001-2003"	Expected: Detailed GL code change information	GL code change details
11	Perform bulk status change operation	Execute bulk operation on multiple entities	Action: Bulk deactivate 3 entities	Bulk operation audit
12	Verify bulk operation audit entries	Separate audit entries created for each affected entity	Expected: 3 individual audit entries for bulk operation	Bulk audit verification
13	Verify bulk operation correlation	Audit entries show they are part of same bulk operation	Expected: Bulk operation ID or correlation identifier	Operation correlation
14	Test audit system completeness	Verify no changes go unlogged	Test: Attempt various entity modifications	Audit completeness
15	Verify audit data integrity	Audit entries cannot be modified or deleted by users	Security: Audit log immutability	Audit integrity

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: All entity changes (status, GL code, bulk operations) create comprehensive audit trail entries
• Secondary_Verifications: Audit entries contain complete information (user, timestamp, old/new values, entity identification)
• Negative_Verification: No changes should go unlogged, audit entries should not be modifiable by users

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: Entity modification functionality
• Blocked_Tests: Compliance reporting tests
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other audit-generating operations
• Sequential_Tests: Must run in controlled sequence for audit verification

Additional Information

• Notes: Audit trails critical for compliance, security, and operational accountability
• Edge_Cases: System failures during audit logging, concurrent modifications, audit log storage limits
• Risk_Areas: Audit log corruption, performance impact of logging, compliance violations
• Security_Considerations: Audit log protection, access controls, tamper prevention

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Audit log retention and archival policies
• Type: Compliance
• Rationale: Long-term audit retention required for regulatory compliance
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Audit log search and reporting capabilities
• Type: Operational
• Rationale: Ability to search and report on audit data for investigations
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 22: Multiple Filter Criteria Application

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_022
• Title: Verify simultaneous application of multiple filter criteria (Category, Status, Utility, Search) with accurate results
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional/Integration
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Regression-Coverage/User-Acceptance/Integration-Testing/Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Multi-Filter, 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: 8 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Low
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: Multi-filter system, Search integration, Filter state management, Database querying
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: QA
• Report_Categories: Integration-Testing, User-Acceptance, Regression-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: No
• Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC017 - Multiple criteria filtering simultaneously, Business Rule 2 - Combined filter functionality
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_006-008 (Individual filters), BX05US01_TC_031, BX05US01_TC_035 (Category filters)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Multi-filter system, Search integration, Filter state management
• Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for combined filter application
• Data_Requirements: Complete entity dataset with varied categories, statuses, and utilities

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: All filter controls functional, Search capability enabled
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Mixed entities: Consumer Billing + Water + Active (Water Consumption, Fixed Charges), Payment Channels + All + Inactive (UPI)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Individual filter functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Verify all entities visible initially	Table shows complete entity list	Initial count: 17 entities	Baseline state verification
2	Apply Category filter "Consumer Billing"	Table filters to Consumer Billing entities only	Expected result: 4 Consumer Billing entities	First filter layer
3	Verify Category filter result	Only Consumer Billing entities displayed	Entities: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges, Late Payment Fees	Category filtering verification
4	Apply Status filter "Active" on existing Category filter	Combined Category + Status filtering	Expected result: 3 entities (Consumer Billing + Active)	Second filter layer
5	Verify combined Category + Status filter	Shows Consumer Billing entities that are Active	Entities: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges	Combined filter verification
6	Apply Utility filter "Water" on existing filters	Triple filter combination	Expected result: 2 entities (Consumer Billing + Active + Water)	Third filter layer
7	Verify triple filter combination	Shows only Water utility, Active, Consumer Billing entities	Final entities: Water Consumption, Fixed Charges	Triple filter result
8	Apply search term "Consumption" to existing filters	Quadruple criteria filtering	Search term: "Consumption"	Fourth filter criteria
9	Verify search + triple filter combination	Shows entities matching all four criteria	Final result: Water Consumption only	All criteria filtering
10	Clear search term while maintaining other filters	Remove search but keep other filters	Action: Clear search field	Selective filter removal
11	Verify filters maintained after search removal	Returns to triple filter result	Expected: Water Consumption, Fixed Charges	Filter persistence
12	Remove Utility filter while maintaining Category + Status	Progressive filter removal	Action: Change Utility to "All Utilities"	Filter reduction
13	Verify expanded results after utility filter removal	Shows Consumer Billing + Active entities across all utilities	Expected: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges	Filter expansion
14	Test filter order independence	Apply same filters in different order	Test: Start with Status, then Category, then Utility	Order independence
15	Verify same final result regardless of filter order	Same entities shown regardless of application order	Expected: Same final filtered entities	Order independence verification
16	Reset all filters to baseline	Clear all active filters	Action: Reset to "All" options for all filters	Complete filter reset

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Multiple filters work simultaneously and correctly narrow results at each layer
• Secondary_Verifications: Filter removal works progressively, search integrates properly, filter order independence
• Negative_Verification: No entities should appear that don't match ALL active criteria

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: Individual filter functionality tests
• Blocked_Tests: Performance tests under complex filtering scenarios
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other filter state tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must complete before advanced filter performance tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Complex filtering essential for efficient entity management in large utility company deployments
• Edge_Cases: No results matching all criteria, all entities matching all criteria, filter performance with large datasets
• Risk_Areas: Filter state conflicts, performance degradation, UI responsiveness
• Security_Considerations: Ensure filtered views respect user access permissions across all filter combinations

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Filter combination with bulk operations
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Users need to perform bulk actions on complex filtered subsets
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Filter state persistence across browser sessions
• Type: Usability
• Rationale: Advanced users may want filter preferences saved between sessions
• Priority: P4

---

Test Case 23: Filter Reset Functionality

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_023
• Title: Verify comprehensive filter reset functionality returns all entities and clears all filter states
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P3-Medium
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, MOD-Billing, P3-Medium, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Regression-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Filter-Reset, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

• Risk_Level: Low
• Complexity_Level: Medium
• Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: None
• Failure_Impact: Low

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: Filter reset system, State management, UI control reset
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: QA
• Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Regression-Coverage, Module-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: No
• Executive_Visibility: No
• Customer_Impact_Level: Low

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC018 - Clear filter reset functionality
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_022 (Multiple filters), BX05US01_TC_005-008 (Individual filters)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Filter reset controls, State management system
• Performance_Baseline: < 500ms filter reset response
• Data_Requirements: Complete entity dataset for reset verification

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Filter functionality operational, Reset controls available
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Full entity dataset (17 entities) for reset verification
• Prior_Test_Cases: Multiple filter functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Apply complex filter combination	Multiple filters active simultaneously	Applied filters: Category=Consumer Billing, Status=Active, Utility=Water, Search="Consumption"	AC018 - Complex filter state
2	Verify filtered results	Limited entities displayed based on filters	Expected result: 1 entity (Water Consumption)	Filtered state verification
3	Verify filter control states	All filter controls show non-default selections	Filter states: Category≠"All Categories", Status≠"All Status", etc.	Non-default state confirmation
4	Locate filter reset mechanism	Find clear/reset filters option	Reset option: "Clear All Filters", "Reset", or individual clear buttons	Reset control identification
5	Click comprehensive filter reset option	All filters reset to default state	Action: Click "Clear All Filters" or equivalent	Reset action execution
6	Verify all entities return	Complete entity list displayed	Expected: All 17 entities visible	Complete reset verification
7	Verify Category filter reset	Category dropdown shows "All Categories"	Expected: Default "All Categories" selected	Category reset verification
8	Verify Status filter reset	Status dropdown shows "All Status"	Expected: Default "All Status" selected	Status reset verification
9	Verify Utility filter reset	Utility dropdown shows "All Utilities"	Expected: Default "All Utilities" selected	Utility reset verification
10	Verify search field cleared	Search input field empty	Expected: Search field shows placeholder text only	Search reset verification
11	Test individual filter reset options	Reset individual filters if individual clear options available	Test: Individual X buttons or clear options on each filter	Individual reset testing
12	Verify partial reset functionality	Individual resets work while maintaining other filters	Expected: Only targeted filter resets, others remain	Partial reset verification
13	Test reset after entity modifications	Perform entity changes then test filter reset	Test scenario: Change entity status, then reset filters	Reset after modifications
14	Verify entity modifications persist after filter reset	Changed entities retain modifications after reset	Expected: Modified entities show changes but all entities visible	Modification persistence

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Filter reset returns all 17 entities and resets all filter controls to defaults
• Secondary_Verifications: Individual and comprehensive reset options work, entity modifications unaffected by reset
• Negative_Verification: Reset should not affect entity data, only filter 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: Monthly
• Maintenance_Effort: Low
• Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: Filter functionality tests
• Blocked_Tests: None
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other UI reset functionality tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should run after complex filter combination tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Filter reset critical for user workflow efficiency and preventing filter state confusion
• Edge_Cases: Reset during filter application, multiple rapid resets, browser refresh behavior
• Risk_Areas: State management consistency, UI control synchronization
• Security_Considerations: Ensure reset doesn't expose unauthorized entities

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Filter reset keyboard shortcut (Ctrl+R or Escape)
• Type: Usability
• Rationale: Power users expect keyboard shortcuts for common actions
• Priority: P4
• Scenario_2: Automatic filter reset on page refresh
• Type: State Management
• Rationale: Consistent behavior between manual reset and page refresh
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 24: Responsive Design Verification

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_024
• Title: Verify responsive design adaptation of GL Codes management interface across different screen resolutions
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: UI/Compatibility
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Acceptance
• Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Acceptance, Type-Compatibility, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Cross-Browser-Results/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Responsive-Design, Happy-Path

Business Context

• Customer_Segment: All
• Revenue_Impact: Low
• 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: 6 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: None
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: Responsive design system, CSS media queries, Layout adaptation
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: QA
• Report_Categories: Cross-Browser-Results, User-Acceptance, Module-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: No
• Executive_Visibility: No
• Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC019 - Responsive design for entity management interface, Platform-Web requirements
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_009 (Table display), BX05US01_TC_001-004 (Dashboard cards)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080, Large-Desktop-2560x1440, Small-Desktop-1366x768
• Dependencies: Responsive CSS framework, Media query system
• Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds layout adaptation
• Data_Requirements: Complete entity dataset for layout testing

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Browser developer tools available for resolution testing
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Full entity dataset with dashboard and table elements
• Prior_Test_Cases: Standard desktop layout functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Test standard desktop layout (1920x1080)	All elements properly positioned and readable	Resolution: 1920x1080	AC019 - Desktop baseline
2	Verify dashboard cards layout on desktop	4 cards displayed horizontally in single row	Cards: Total, Active, Inactive, Configured	Desktop card arrangement
3	Verify table column visibility on desktop	All columns visible without horizontal scrolling	Columns: Category, Entity Name, Utility, GL Code, Status, Actions	Desktop table layout
4	Verify filter controls layout on desktop	All filter dropdowns and search bar accessible	Controls: Status, Utilities, Category dropdowns, Search	Desktop filter layout
5	Test large desktop resolution (2560x1440)	Layout utilizes space efficiently without excessive stretching	Resolution: 2560x1440	Large screen adaptation
6	Verify large desktop dashboard adaptation	Cards maintain appropriate size, don't stretch excessively	Expected: Cards use available space without becoming oversized	Large screen card behavior
7	Test small desktop resolution (1366x768)	Interface remains usable on smaller desktop screens	Resolution: 1366x768	Small desktop compatibility
8	Verify small desktop table usability	Table columns remain readable, horizontal scroll if necessary	Expected: Table usable with appropriate column sizing	Small screen table behavior
9	Verify small desktop dashboard cards	Cards may resize or reflow to fit smaller screen	Expected: Cards remain readable and functional	Small screen card adaptation
10	Test browser zoom levels	Interface remains usable at 75%, 100%, 125%, 150% zoom	Zoom levels: Multiple browser zoom settings	Zoom compatibility
11	Verify text readability across zoom levels	All text remains clear and readable at different zoom levels	Text verification: No text cutoff or overlap	Zoom text handling
12	Test window resizing behavior	Interface adapts smoothly during window resize	Action: Drag browser window to resize	Dynamic adaptation
13	Verify layout stability during resize	No layout breaks or element overlaps during resizing	Expected: Smooth layout transitions	Resize stability
14	Test functionality across resolutions	All interactive elements work across different screen sizes	Functionality: Filters, toggles, buttons work consistently	Cross-resolution functionality

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Interface remains usable and functional across different desktop screen resolutions
• Secondary_Verifications: Layout adapts appropriately, text remains readable, interactive elements accessible
• Negative_Verification: No layout breaks, text cutoffs, or functionality loss at any tested resolution

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: Monthly
• Maintenance_Effort: Medium
• Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: Basic UI layout and functionality tests
• Blocked_Tests: Cross-browser compatibility tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other responsive design tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should precede cross-browser testing

Additional Information

• Notes: Responsive design ensures accessibility across different desktop configurations
• Edge_Cases: Ultra-wide monitors, high DPI displays, unusual aspect ratios
• Risk_Areas: Layout breaking points, performance on lower-end devices, browser compatibility
• Security_Considerations: None specific to responsive design

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: High DPI/Retina display compatibility
• Type: Compatibility
• Rationale: Ensure crisp rendering on high-resolution displays
• Priority: P3
• Scenario_2: Print layout optimization
• Type: Enhancement
• Rationale: Users may need to print entity reports or summaries
• Priority: P4

---

Test Case 25: Integration with Financial Systems

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_025
• Title: Verify seamless integration of entity status changes with downstream billing and financial reporting systems
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Integration
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Acceptance
• Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, API, Integration, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Acceptance, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/CSM/Integration-Testing/Quality-Dashboard/Revenue-Impact-Tracking, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-External-Systems, Happy-Path

Business Context

• Customer_Segment: Enterprise
• 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: 10 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: Medium
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: Billing system integration, Financial reporting system, Accounting system, Revenue recognition system
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Integration-Services
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report_Categories: Integration-Testing, Revenue-Impact-Tracking, Engineering
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC020 - Integration with downstream billing and financial systems, Process Changes integration impact
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_010 (Status changes), BX05US01_TC_034 (Integration failures)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Billing system, Financial reporting system, Accounting system integration APIs
• Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds for integration propagation
• Data_Requirements: Test entity with billing and financial history

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Integration endpoints available, Test data in downstream systems
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role with integration access
• Test_Data: Active entity with financial history: Water Consumption (4001-1001, Active)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Entity status change functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Verify current entity status in external systems	Record baseline status in billing and financial systems	Baseline entity: Water Consumption (Active) in billing system	AC020 - Integration baseline
2	Note entity GL code in accounting system	Verify GL code 4001-1001 present in accounting system	Accounting system check: GL code 4001-1001 active	Financial system baseline
3	Change entity status in GL Codes management	Toggle Water Consumption from Active to Inactive	Action: Change status to Inactive	Integration trigger
4	Verify API integration call	Monitor/verify API call sent to billing system	Expected: API call with status change information	API integration verification
5	Check billing system status update	Verify entity status updated in billing system	Expected: Water Consumption = Inactive in billing system	Billing system sync
6	Verify financial reporting system update	Check entity status reflected in financial reports	Expected: Entity excluded from active revenue calculations	Financial reporting sync
7	Verify accounting system GL code handling	Confirm GL code status updated in accounting system	Expected: GL code 4001-1001 marked inactive or flagged	Accounting system sync
8	Test GL code assignment integration	Assign GL code to entity without one	Action: Assign GL code 1001-2003 to UPI entity	GL code integration
9	Verify GL code propagation	New GL code available in accounting system	Expected: GL code 1001-2003 appears in accounting system	GL code sync verification
10	Verify financial transaction categorization	New GL code ready for revenue categorization	Expected: Revenue transactions can use new GL code	Revenue categorization
11	Test integration error handling	Simulate integration failure scenario	Test: Network interruption or downstream system unavailable	Error handling verification
12	Verify graceful error handling	System handles integration failures appropriately	Expected: User notification, status maintained, retry mechanism	Error response verification
13	Test integration performance	Measure time for complete integration cycle	Performance: Status change to downstream system update	Integration performance
14	Verify data consistency across systems	Confirm all systems show consistent entity information	Consistency check: GL Codes, Billing, Financial, Accounting systems	Cross-system consistency

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Entity status changes and GL code assignments successfully propagate to all downstream systems
• Secondary_Verifications: Integration performance meets targets, error handling works properly, data consistency maintained
• Negative_Verification: Integration failures should not leave systems in inconsistent 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: Daily
• Maintenance_Effort: High
• Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: Entity management functionality and API availability
• Blocked_Tests: End-to-end revenue workflow tests
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other integration tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must complete before production deployment approval

Additional Information

• Notes: Integration testing critical for revenue recognition accuracy and financial compliance
• Edge_Cases: Network latency, system maintenance windows, concurrent integration requests
• Risk_Areas: Data synchronization failures, performance degradation, system availability dependencies
• Security_Considerations: API security, data encryption in transit, authentication between systems

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Integration with tax reporting systems
• Type: Compliance
• Rationale: GL code changes may affect tax categorization and reporting
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 26: GL Entity Status Update API

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_026
• Title: Verify API endpoint for updating entity status with proper authentication and error handling
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: API
• Test Level: Integration
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Smoke
• Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, API, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-API, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/API-Test-Results/Quality-Dashboard/Integration-Testing, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-API-Management, 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: 5 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: REST API, Authentication system, Database updates, Response handling
• Code_Module_Mapped: API-Services
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report_Categories: API-Test-Results, Engineering, Integration-Testing
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: API testing for critical operations (≥7 importance), AC005 - Entity status management via API
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_010 (UI status toggle), BX05US01_TC_027 (GL code API)

Test Environment

• Environment: API Testing
• Browser/Version: N/A (API testing)
• Device/OS: API Testing Tools
• Screen_Resolution: N/A
• Dependencies: API endpoint availability, Authentication service, Database connectivity
• Performance_Baseline: < 500ms API response time
• Data_Requirements: Test entity for API status updates

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: API testing tools configured, API endpoints accessible
• User_Roles_Permissions: Valid API authentication credentials for Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Test entity: Water Consumption (entity_id: "ent_001", current status: "active")
• Prior_Test_Cases: API authentication verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Authenticate API request	Obtain valid bearer token	Authentication: POST /api/auth/login with valid credentials	API authentication
2	Verify token validity	Token accepted for API access	Token validation: Bearer token format	Token verification
3	Send PUT request to update entity status	HTTP 200 response received	Endpoint: PUT /api/v1/gl-entities/ent_001/status, Payload: {"status": "inactive"}	Status update API call
4	Verify response format and content	JSON response with updated entity information	Expected response: {"id": "ent_001", "status": "inactive", "updatedAt": "timestamp"}	Response validation
5	Verify API response time	Response received within performance target	Target: < 500ms response time	Performance verification
6	Test invalid authentication	HTTP 401 Unauthorized for invalid token	Invalid token: "invalid_jwt_token"	Authentication security
7	Verify unauthorized access rejection	Proper error response for invalid authentication	Expected: {"error": "Unauthorized", "code": 401}	Security validation
8	Test invalid entity ID	HTTP 404 Not Found for non-existent entity	Invalid entity ID: "invalid_entity_id"	Entity validation
9	Verify not found error response	Appropriate error message for invalid entity	Expected: {"error": "Entity not found", "code": 404}	Error handling
10	Test invalid status value	HTTP 400 Bad Request for invalid status	Invalid status: {"status": "invalid_status"}	Input validation
11	Verify bad request error handling	Clear error message for invalid input	Expected: {"error": "Invalid status value", "code": 400}	Validation error handling
12	Test status update without GL code	Verify activation prevention for entities without GL codes	Test: Activate entity without GL code	Business rule API enforcement
13	Test concurrent API requests	Multiple simultaneous requests handled properly	Concurrent test: Multiple status update requests	Concurrency handling
14	Verify database persistence	Entity status persisted in database	Database verification: Status change committed	Data persistence

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: API successfully updates entity status with proper authentication and returns structured response
• Secondary_Verifications: Error handling for invalid inputs, performance within targets, security enforcement
• Negative_Verification: Invalid requests properly rejected, unauthorized access prevented

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: Automated

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: API authentication setup
• Blocked_Tests: Integration workflow tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other API endpoint tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should precede UI-API integration tests

Additional Information

• Notes: API endpoints critical for integration with external systems and automation
• Edge_Cases: Network timeouts, database connection failures, malformed JSON payloads
• Risk_Areas: Authentication security, data validation, concurrent access handling
• Security_Considerations: JWT token security, input sanitization, authorization validation

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: API rate limiting and throttling behavior
• Type: Performance
• Rationale: Prevent API abuse and ensure system stability
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: API versioning compatibility
• Type: Compatibility
• Rationale: Ensure backward compatibility for API consumers
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 27: GL Code Assignment API

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_027
• Title: Verify API endpoint for GL code assignment with format validation and duplicate prevention
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: API
• Test Level: Integration
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Smoke
• Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, API, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-API, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/API-Test-Results/Quality-Dashboard/Security-Validation, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-GL-Management, 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: 6 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: REST API, GL code validation engine, Duplicate checking system, Database updates
• Code_Module_Mapped: API-Services
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report_Categories: API-Test-Results, Security-Validation, Engineering
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: API testing for critical operations (≥7 importance), AC009 - GL code format validation, AC010 - Duplicate prevention
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_014 (Format validation), BX05US01_TC_015 (Duplicate prevention)

Test Environment

• Environment: API Testing
• Browser/Version: N/A (API testing)
• Device/OS: API Testing Tools
• Screen_Resolution: N/A
• Dependencies: API endpoint, Validation services, Database with existing GL codes
• Performance_Baseline: < 500ms API response time
• Data_Requirements: Test entity and existing GL codes for duplicate testing

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: API testing environment, Authentication tokens, Test entities
• User_Roles_Permissions: Valid API credentials with GL code assignment permissions
• Test_Data: Test entity: UPI (entity_id: "ent_002", current GL code: null), Existing GL code: 4001-1001 (Water utility)
• Prior_Test_Cases: API authentication and entity management verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Authenticate API session	Valid bearer token obtained	Authentication: Valid API credentials	API session setup
2	Send valid GL code assignment request	HTTP 200 response with success confirmation	Endpoint: PUT /api/v1/gl-entities/ent_002/gl-code, Payload: {"glCode": "1001-2003"}	Valid GL code assignment
3	Verify successful assignment response	JSON response confirms GL code assignment	Expected: {"id": "ent_002", "glCode": "1001-2003", "updatedAt": "timestamp"}	Assignment confirmation
4	Test GL code format validation - insufficient digits	HTTP 400 Bad Request for invalid format	Invalid payload: {"glCode": "123-45"}	Format validation - short
5	Verify format error message	Clear error message for insufficient digits	Expected: {"error": "GL Code must be in ####-#### format", "code": 400}	Format error handling
6	Test GL code format validation - non-numeric	HTTP 400 Bad Request for non-numeric characters	Invalid payload: {"glCode": "ABCD-1234"}	Format validation - letters
7	Verify non-numeric error message	Appropriate error for non-numeric input	Expected: {"error": "GL Code must contain only numbers", "code": 400}	Character validation
8	Test GL code format validation - missing separator	HTTP 400 Bad Request for missing hyphen	Invalid payload: {"glCode": "40011001"}	Format validation - separator
9	Verify separator error message	Error message indicates missing hyphen	Expected: {"error": "GL Code must include hyphen separator", "code": 400}	Separator validation
10	Test duplicate GL code prevention	HTTP 409 Conflict for duplicate within same utility	Duplicate payload: {"glCode": "4001-1001"} (existing Water utility code)	Duplicate prevention
11	Verify duplicate error response	Clear error message for duplicate GL code	Expected: {"error": "GL Code already exists for this utility type", "code": 409}	Duplicate error handling
12	Test GL code removal/clearing	HTTP 200 for setting GL code to null	Clear payload: {"glCode": null}	GL code removal
13	Verify GL code clearing response	Success response for GL code removal	Expected: {"id": "ent_002", "glCode": null, "updatedAt": "timestamp"}	Clearing confirmation
14	Test special characters in GL code	HTTP 400 Bad Request for special characters	Invalid payload: {"glCode": "40@1-1001"}	Special character validation

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: API accepts valid GL codes (####-#### format) and rejects invalid formats with appropriate errors
• Secondary_Verifications: Duplicate prevention works across utility types, GL code clearing functionality
• Negative_Verification: Invalid formats and duplicates properly rejected, no malformed data accepted

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: Automated

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: API authentication and basic entity operations
• Blocked_Tests: Complex GL code workflow integrations
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other validation API tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should precede bulk API operations

Additional Information

• Notes: GL code API validation critical for maintaining financial data integrity
• Edge_Cases: Unicode characters, very long inputs, concurrent GL code assignments
• Risk_Areas: Validation bypass attempts, race conditions in duplicate checking
• Security_Considerations: Input sanitization, SQL injection prevention, authorization checks

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Bulk GL code assignment API endpoint
• Type: Enhancement
• Rationale: Efficient API support for bulk operations
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: GL code assignment audit trail via API
• Type: Compliance
• Rationale: API operations must maintain same audit standards
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 28: Dashboard Load Performance

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_028
• Title: Verify dashboard loads within 3 seconds with full entity dataset under various load conditions
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Performance
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Performance
• Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, Performance, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Performance, Type-Performance, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Performance-Metrics/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Performance-Testing, 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: 15 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: Medium
• Data_Sensitivity: Low
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: Dashboard rendering engine, Database queries, Calculation engine, Network performance
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Performance-Services
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report_Categories: Performance-Metrics, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: No
• Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: Performance benchmarks - Dashboard load < 3 seconds, SLA requirements
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_001-004 (Dashboard metrics), BX05US01_TC_042 (Performance validation)

Test Environment

• Environment: Performance Testing
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Performance monitoring tools, Database with full dataset, Network simulation tools
• Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds dashboard load, < 2 seconds subsequent interactions
• Data_Requirements: Full production-like dataset (17+ entities, historical metrics)

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Performance testing tools configured, Clean browser cache, Stable network conditions
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Production-like entity dataset, Dashboard calculation data
• Prior_Test_Cases: Functional dashboard tests passed

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Clear browser cache and cookies	Clean performance test environment	Action: Clear all browser data	Performance baseline setup
2	Navigate to GL Codes page (cold load)	Measure initial page load time	Navigation: Direct URL access	Cold load performance
3	Verify dashboard load time	Complete dashboard loads within 3 seconds	Target: < 3 seconds total load time	Primary performance target
4	Measure dashboard cards rendering	Individual card load times measured	Target: < 1 second for all 4 cards	Component performance
5	Measure entity table rendering	Table population time measured	Target: < 2 seconds for full table	Table performance
6	Test dashboard refresh performance	Subsequent page loads faster than initial	Target: < 2 seconds for cached resources	Refresh performance
7	Test dashboard with network throttling	Performance under 3G network conditions	Network simulation: 3G speed	Real-world conditions
8	Verify throttled performance acceptable	Dashboard usable under slow network	Target: < 5 seconds under 3G conditions	Constrained network performance
9	Test concurrent user load simulation	Dashboard performance with multiple simultaneous users	Concurrent users: 10 simultaneous sessions	Load testing
10	Verify concurrent performance	Dashboard maintains performance under load	Target: < 4 seconds under concurrent load	Multi-user performance
11	Test dashboard calculation performance	Real-time metric calculations within target	Calculation test: Status change impact on dashboard	Calculation efficiency
12	Measure filter application performance	Filter response times within targets	Filter test: Apply multiple filters	Interactive performance
13	Test large dataset performance	Dashboard performance with maximum expected entities	Dataset: 100+ entities (stress test)	Scalability testing
14	Verify memory usage during load	Browser memory consumption reasonable	Memory target: < 100MB for dashboard	Resource efficiency

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Dashboard loads completely within 3 seconds under normal conditions
• Secondary_Verifications: Performance maintained under load, acceptable performance on slower networks
• Negative_Verification: Dashboard should not timeout, hang, or consume excessive resources

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: Automated

Test Relationships

• Blocking_Tests: Functional dashboard tests
• Blocked_Tests: User acceptance performance tests
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other performance tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should run in controlled performance environment

Additional Information

• Notes: Dashboard performance critical for user productivity and system adoption
• Edge_Cases: Very large entity datasets, network interruptions, browser resource constraints
• Risk_Areas: Database query optimization, frontend rendering efficiency, network dependencies
• Security_Considerations: Ensure performance testing doesn't expose sensitive data

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Dashboard performance on slower devices/browsers
• Type: Compatibility
• Rationale: Ensure accessibility across different hardware configurations
• Priority: P3
• Scenario_2: Performance degradation monitoring over time
• Type: Monitoring
• Rationale: Detect performance regressions in production
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 29: Role-Based Access Control

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_029
• Title: Verify role-based access control for GL Codes management features across different user roles
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Security
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Security
• Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer/Billing Services, Auth, Security, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Security, Type-Security, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/CSM/Security-Validation/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Access-Control, Compliance-Required

Business Context

• Customer_Segment: Enterprise
• 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: 12 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: Authentication system, Authorization engine, Role management, UI permission controls
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Auth-Services
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Engineering, CSM
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: Role-based access control requirements, Security specifications from user story
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_030 (Data protection), BX05US01_TC_026-027 (API security)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Authentication system, Role management system, Permission enforcement
• Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds role verification
• Data_Requirements: Test users with different role assignments

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Multiple user accounts with different roles configured
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager, System Admin, Read-Only User, Unauthorized User accounts
• Test_Data: Test accounts: billing_manager@test.com, admin@test.com, readonly@test.com, unauthorized@test.com
• Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication system functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Login as Billing Manager	Full access to GL Codes management granted	User: billing_manager@test.com, Password: Test@123	Full permissions baseline
2	Verify Billing Manager dashboard access	Complete dashboard with all metrics visible	Expected: All 4 dashboard cards visible and functional	Full dashboard access
3	Verify Billing Manager entity status toggle	Toggle switches functional and responsive	Test: Toggle Water Consumption status	Edit permissions verification
4	Verify Billing Manager GL code edit capability	Edit icons functional, GL code modification allowed	Test: Edit UPI GL code	Modification rights
5	Verify Billing Manager bulk operations access	Bulk selection and operations available	Test: Select multiple entities, bulk options visible	Bulk operation permissions
6	Logout and login as System Admin	Admin access granted to GL Codes module	User: admin@test.com, Password: Admin@123	Admin role testing
7	Verify System Admin configuration access	Administrative features and settings accessible	Expected: Entity configuration, system settings access	Admin-specific features
8	Verify System Admin entity management	Full entity management capabilities available	Test: Create, modify, delete entity permissions	Administrative capabilities
9	Logout and login as Read-Only User	Limited access granted to GL Codes module	User: readonly@test.com, Password: ReadOnly@123	Restricted access testing
10	Verify Read-Only dashboard view	Dashboard visible but without modification controls	Expected: Dashboard cards visible, no edit capabilities	View-only verification
11	Verify Read-Only toggle switches disabled	Status toggle switches disabled or hidden	Expected: Toggle switches non-functional	Edit restriction enforcement
12	Verify Read-Only edit icons hidden/disabled	GL code edit functionality not available	Expected: Edit icons hidden or disabled	Write protection
13	Verify Read-Only bulk operations restricted	Bulk selection available but operations disabled	Expected: Selection possible, actions restricted	Bulk operation restrictions
14	Test unauthorized access attempt	Access denied to GL Codes module	User: unauthorized@test.com, Password: NoAccess@123	Access boundary testing
15	Verify unauthorized access rejection	Login successful but GL Codes module inaccessible	Expected: 403 Forbidden or module not visible	Access control enforcement
16	Test API endpoints with different roles	Role-based API access control verification	Test: API calls with different user tokens	Backend security

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Each role enforces appropriate access levels and restrictions
• Secondary_Verifications: UI elements reflect permissions, unauthorized access prevented
• Negative_Verification: Restricted roles cannot perform unauthorized actions

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: Authentication system functionality
• Blocked_Tests: Advanced security scenario tests
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other authentication tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must run in isolated sessions per role

Additional Information

• Notes: Role-based access control fundamental to enterprise security and compliance
• Edge_Cases: Role changes during active sessions, concurrent role modifications, role inheritance
• Risk_Areas: Permission bypass vulnerabilities, role escalation, session management
• Security_Considerations: Session security, token validation, permission enforcement consistency

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Dynamic role changes during active user sessions
• Type: Security
• Rationale: Role modifications should take effect without requiring re-login
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Role-based API rate limiting and throttling
• Type: Security
• Rationale: Different roles may have different API usage limits
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 30: Data Protection and Validation

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_030
• Title: Verify comprehensive data protection and input validation preventing security vulnerabilities
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Security
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Security
• Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer/Billing Services, Security, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Security, Type-Security, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Security-Validation/Quality-Dashboard, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Security-Protection, Vulnerability-Testing

Business Context

• Customer_Segment: Enterprise
• 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: 15 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: Input validation system, SQL injection prevention, XSS protection, CSRF protection, Session management
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Security-Services
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Engineering, Quality-Dashboard
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: Security requirements for B2B utility SaaS, Data protection compliance
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_029 (Role-based access), BX05US01_TC_014 (Input validation)

Test Environment

• Environment: Security Testing
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Security testing tools, Input validation system, Database security measures
• Performance_Baseline: < 500ms validation response
• Data_Requirements: Test payloads for security vulnerability testing

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Security testing tools configured, Test environment isolated
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role for legitimate testing
• Test_Data: Malicious input payloads, SQL injection strings, XSS scripts
• Prior_Test_Cases: Basic functionality verified, authentication working

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Test SQL injection in search field	Input sanitized, no database access granted	Malicious input: "'; DROP TABLE entities; --"	SQL injection prevention
2	Verify SQL injection blocked	Database remains intact, error handled gracefully	Expected: Search returns no results or shows sanitized error	Injection prevention verification
3	Test SQL injection in GL code field	GL code input sanitized and validated	Malicious GL code: "4001'; DELETE FROM gl_codes; --"	GL code injection attempt
4	Verify GL code injection prevention	Invalid input rejected, no database corruption	Expected: Format validation error, no database changes	Input sanitization
5	Test XSS in entity name field	Script tags escaped or filtered	XSS payload: "<script>alert('xss')</script>"	XSS prevention testing
6	Verify XSS prevention	Script not executed, content properly escaped	Expected: Text displayed as literal string, no script execution	Script neutralization
7	Test XSS in search field	Search input sanitized for script injection	XSS search: "<img src=x onerror=alert('xss')>"	Search XSS prevention
8	Verify search XSS protection	Malicious script neutralized in search results	Expected: Search treats input as text, no script execution	Search input protection
9	Test CSRF protection on status changes	CSRF tokens required for state modifications	CSRF test: Attempt status change without valid token	CSRF protection verification
10	Verify CSRF token validation	Unauthorized requests rejected	Expected: 403 Forbidden or invalid token error	Cross-site request protection
11	Test session hijacking protection	Session tokens validated and secure	Session test: Attempt to use invalid or expired session	Session security
12	Verify session timeout enforcement	Idle sessions automatically expired	Idle test: Leave session inactive for 30+ minutes	Session timeout verification
13	Test data encryption verification	Sensitive data encrypted in storage and transit	Encryption check: GL codes encrypted at rest	Data protection verification
14	Verify input length limits	Excessive input lengths rejected	Long input: 10000+ character strings in various fields	Buffer overflow prevention
15	Test unauthorized API access	API endpoints require proper authentication	API test: Requests without valid bearer tokens	API security enforcement

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Input validation prevents SQL injection, XSS, and other security exploits
• Secondary_Verifications: CSRF protection active, session management secure, data encryption verified
• Negative_Verification: Malicious inputs should be sanitized/rejected, unauthorized access prevented

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: Basic functionality and authentication
• Blocked_Tests: Penetration testing, compliance audits
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with production-like tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must run in isolated security testing environment

Additional Information

• Notes: Security testing critical for enterprise B2B SaaS deployment
• Edge_Cases: Unicode-based attacks, polyglot payloads, timing attacks
• Risk_Areas: Input validation bypass, authentication weaknesses, data exposure
• Security_Considerations: Regular security updates, vulnerability scanning, penetration testing

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: File upload security (if file upload features exist)
• Type: Security
• Rationale: File uploads common attack vector requiring specific protection
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Rate limiting and DDoS protection
• Type: Security
• Rationale: Protect against automated attacks and resource exhaustion
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 31: Category Filter - Consumer Billing Entities

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_031
• Title: Verify Consumer Billing category filter displays only relevant entities with blue visual indicators
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer/Billing Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA/Module-Coverage/Regression-Coverage/Customer-Segment-Analysis/User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Category-Filtering, 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: Low
• Complexity_Level: Medium
• Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: Low
• Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: Category filtering system, UI filtering controls, Visual indicator system
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: QA
• Report_Categories: Customer-Segment-Analysis, User-Acceptance, Module-Coverage
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: No
• Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: Business Rule 2 - Category filtering, AC015 - Visual category indicators
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_035 (Payment Channels filter), BX05US01_TC_020 (Visual indicators)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Category filter controls, Visual styling system
• Performance_Baseline: < 300ms filter application
• Data_Requirements: Consumer Billing entities from user story sample data

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded, Category filter dropdown accessible
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Consumer Billing entities: Water Consumption (4001-1001), Wastewater Charges (4001-1002), Fixed Charges (4001-1003), Late Payment Fees (4002-1001)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Page load successful, table display verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Verify all entities visible initially	Table displays complete entity list	Initial state: All 17 entities visible	Baseline verification
2	Locate Category filter dropdown above table	Category dropdown visible with "All Categories" default	Default selection: "All Categories"	Filter identification
3	Click Category dropdown to open options	Dropdown expands showing available categories	Options: All Categories, Consumer Billing, Payment Channels	Category options display
4	Select "Consumer Billing" from dropdown	Filter applied to Consumer Billing category only	Selection: Consumer Billing	Category filter application
5	Verify only Consumer Billing entities displayed	Table shows exactly 4 Consumer Billing entities	Expected entities: Water Consumption, Wastewater Charges, Fixed Charges, Late Payment Fees	Consumer Billing filter validation
6	Verify Payment Channels entities hidden	No Payment Channels entities visible in table	Hidden entities: Razorpay, NEFT/RTGS, UPI	Negative filtering verification
7	Verify blue visual indicators	All visible entities show blue "Consumer Billing" badges	Visual verification: Blue colored category labels/badges	Visual indicator consistency
8	Verify entity details accuracy	Each Consumer Billing entity shows correct information	Verification: GL codes, utilities, statuses match user story data	Data accuracy check
9	Verify table count matches filter	Entity count reflects filtered results (4 entities)	Count verification: 4 Consumer Billing entities	Result count validation
10	Verify dropdown state persistence	Category dropdown shows "Consumer Billing" as selected	UI state: "Consumer Billing" displayed in dropdown	Selection persistence
11	Test filter integration with other controls	Apply additional filters on top of category filter	Integration test: Add Status or Utility filters	Filter compatibility
12	Verify combined filtering works	Multiple filters work together properly	Expected: Filters combine correctly (AND logic)	Multi-filter integration

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Only 4 Consumer Billing entities displayed with blue visual indicators
• Secondary_Verifications: Payment Channels entities hidden, filter persists, integrates with other filters
• Negative_Verification: Payment Channels entities should not appear, filter should not reset unexpectedly

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: Page load and basic filtering functionality
• Blocked_Tests: Advanced category-specific workflow tests
• Parallel_Tests: Can run with other single filter tests
• Sequential_Tests: Should precede combined filter tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Category filtering essential for organizing different revenue stream types
• Edge_Cases: No entities in selected category, new categories added, category reassignment
• Risk_Areas: Filter state management, UI responsiveness, visual consistency
• Security_Considerations: Ensure category filter doesn't bypass role-based entity access

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Category filter with bulk operations
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Users often perform bulk actions on category-filtered entities
• Priority: P2
• Scenario_2: Category filter performance with large entity datasets
• Type: Performance
• Rationale: Ensure category filtering scales with enterprise data volumes
• Priority: P3

---

Test Case 32: GL Code Edit Mode with Save/Cancel Actions

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_032
• Title: Verify GL code edit mode functionality with save (✅) and cancel (❌) button operations
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• 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 Services, UI, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/Product/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Smoke-Test-Results, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-GL-Code-Management, 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: 4 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: GL Code editing system, Database updates, Validation engine, Dashboard updates
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC008 - Edit functionality, Business Rule 4 - GL Code Input Rules with save/cancel actions
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_014 (Format validation), BX05US01_TC_015 (Duplicate prevention)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: GL Code editing interface, Save/cancel controls, Validation system
• Performance_Baseline: < 200ms edit mode activation, < 500ms save operation
• Data_Requirements: Entity without GL code for testing: UPI (Payment Channels, "Not set")

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: GL Codes page loaded, Entity table visible with Actions column
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role with edit permissions
• Test_Data: Target entity: UPI (Category: Payment Channels, Utility: All, GL Code: Not set, Status: Inactive)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Table display and basic entity operations verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Locate UPI entity row in table	UPI entity visible with "Not set" in GL Code column	Entity: UPI, Current GL Code: "Not set"	Target entity identification
2	Click edit icon (✏️) in Actions column for UPI	GL Code field becomes editable input field	Action: Click ✏️ icon	AC008 - Edit functionality activation
3	Verify edit mode interface activated	Input field appears with save (✅) and cancel (❌) buttons	UI State: Editable input + ✅❌ buttons visible	Business Rule 4 - Edit mode activation
4	Verify placeholder or current value display	Input field shows current value or appropriate placeholder	Input display: "Not set" or empty with placeholder	Current state representation
5	Enter valid GL code in input field	Input accepts valid format characters	Test GL Code: 1001-2003	Valid ####-#### format entry
6	Verify real-time validation feedback	Input validation occurs during typing	Validation: Format checking as user types	Real-time validation
7	Click save button (✅)	GL code saved successfully, edit mode exits	Action: Click ✅ button	Save operation execution
8	Verify GL code updated in table	UPI entity now displays "1001-2003" in GL Code column	Expected: GL Code = 1001-2003	Successful save verification
9	Verify dashboard "Configured with GL Codes" count updated	Count increases from 9 to 10	Expected: Configured count = 10	AC011 - Real-time dashboard update
10	Click edit icon for UPI entity again	Edit mode reactivated with current value	Current value: 1001-2003 displayed in edit field	Re-edit capability
11	Modify GL code to different valid value	Input accepts modification	Modified GL Code: 1001-2004	Change preparation for cancel test
12	Click cancel button (❌)	Edit mode exits without saving changes	Action: Click ❌ button	Cancel operation test
13	Verify GL code unchanged after cancel	UPI entity still shows "1001-2003" (previous saved value)	Expected: GL Code = 1001-2003 (no change)	Cancel functionality verification
14	Verify dashboard metrics unchanged after cancel	Configured count remains 10	Expected: No dashboard change from cancel	Cancel has no side effects
15	Test edit mode keyboard shortcuts	Enter key saves, Escape key cancels (if supported)	Keyboard test: Enter to save, Escape to cancel	Keyboard interaction

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Save (✅) button commits GL code changes, Cancel (❌) button discards changes without saving
• Secondary_Verifications: Edit mode properly activated/deactivated, dashboard metrics update only on save
• Negative_Verification: Cancel should NOT save changes, edit mode should not remain active after save/cancel

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: Table display and basic entity identification
• Blocked_Tests: GL code validation and duplicate prevention tests
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other edit operations on same entity
• Sequential_Tests: Must complete before advanced GL code management tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Critical functionality for GL code assignment workflow, essential for revenue recognition
• Edge_Cases: Network interruption during save, concurrent edit attempts, invalid input handling
• Risk_Areas: Data loss if save fails, UI state management during edit operations, validation timing
• Security_Considerations: Ensure edit permissions validated before allowing modifications

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Edit mode auto-save on focus loss
• Type: Usability
• Rationale: Prevent data loss when user clicks away from edit field
• Priority: P3
• Scenario_2: Edit mode conflict resolution for concurrent users
• Type: Concurrency
• Rationale: Handle scenarios where multiple users edit same entity simultaneously
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 33: Utility-Specific Duplicate GL Code Prevention

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_033
• Title: Verify GL code uniqueness validation within same utility type with cross-utility allowance
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer/Billing Services, API, Database, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Validation, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/QA/Quality-Dashboard/Security-Validation/Smoke-Test-Results, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Validation-Engine, Duplicate-Prevention

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: 5 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: High
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: Validation engine, Database uniqueness constraints, Error handling system, Utility type checking
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

• Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering
• Trend_Tracking: Yes
• Executive_Visibility: Yes
• Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC010 - Duplicate prevention within same utility, Business Rule 3 - GL Code uniqueness per utility
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_032 (Edit mode), BX05US01_TC_014 (Format validation)

Test Environment

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Uniqueness validation system, Database constraints, Utility type management
• Performance_Baseline: < 500ms duplicate check response
• Data_Requirements: Existing entities with GL codes across different utility types

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Multiple entities with GL codes configured across utility types
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role with GL code modification permissions
• Test_Data: Water utility: Water Consumption (4001-1001), Fixed Charges (4001-1003); All utility: Razorpay (1001-2001); Wastewater: Wastewater Charges (4001-1002)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Edit mode functionality and format validation verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Identify existing Water utility entity with GL code	Note existing GL code for duplicate testing	Reference: Water Consumption (Water utility, GL code: 4001-1001)	Baseline duplicate source
2	Select different Water utility entity for testing	Choose target entity in same utility type	Target: Fixed Charges (Water utility, current GL code: 4001-1003)	Same utility target
3	Enter edit mode for Fixed Charges GL code	Edit interface activated for GL code modification	Action: Click edit icon for Fixed Charges	Edit preparation
4	Enter duplicate GL code from same utility	Input existing GL code from same utility type	Duplicate code: 4001-1001 (same as Water Consumption)	AC010 - Duplicate scenario within utility
5	Attempt to save duplicate GL code	System validates for duplicates within utility	Action: Click save (✅) button	Duplicate validation trigger
6	Verify duplicate prevention error message	Specific error message displayed for utility conflict	Expected error: "GL Code 4001-1001 already exists for Water utility"	Utility-specific error messaging
7	Verify save operation blocked	Changes not committed, edit mode remains active	Status: Save prevented, original GL code retained	Save prevention verification
8	Test cross-utility duplicate allowance	Enter GL code from different utility type	Cross-utility test: 1001-2001 (from Razorpay - "All" utility)	Cross-utility validation test
9	Verify cross-utility save succeeds	Different utility type allows same GL code	Expected: Save successful for different utility	Cross-utility acceptance
10	Test "All" utility duplicate prevention	Assign duplicate within "All" utility entities	Test: Enter existing "All" utility GL code to another "All" entity	"All" utility internal duplicate test
11	Verify "All" utility duplicate prevention	Same validation applies within "All" utility type	Expected: Duplicate prevention within "All" utility entities	Consistent validation across utilities
12	Test edge case: same GL code different utilities	Verify Water and Wastewater can have same GL code	Test: Assign Water GL code to Wastewater entity	Cross-utility edge case
13	Verify cross-utility assignment succeeds	Same GL code allowed across different utility types	Expected: Water code successfully assigned to Wastewater entity	Cross-utility confirmation
14	Test unique GL code acceptance	Enter unique GL code for same utility	Unique code: 4001-1004 (unique for Water utility)	Positive validation test

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Duplicate GL codes prevented within same utility type with clear error messages
• Secondary_Verifications: Cross-utility duplicates allowed, unique codes accepted, validation consistent
• Negative_Verification: Duplicate GL codes should NOT be saved within same utility type

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: Edit mode functionality and format validation
• Blocked_Tests: Bulk GL code assignment validation
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other GL code modification tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must complete before integration tests

Additional Information

• Notes: Utility-specific duplicate prevention critical for accurate revenue categorization
• Edge_Cases: Concurrent GL code assignments, case sensitivity, utility type changes
• Risk_Areas: Race conditions in duplicate checking, database constraint conflicts
• Security_Considerations: Ensure duplicate checking cannot be bypassed through API manipulation

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Duplicate prevention during bulk GL code assignment
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Bulk operations must respect same uniqueness constraints
• Priority: P1
• Scenario_2: GL code reassignment when utility type changes
• Type: Business Logic
• Rationale: Handle scenarios where entity utility type is modified
• Priority: P2

---

Test Case 34: Integration Failure Rollback Scenario

Test Case Metadata

• Test Case ID: BX05US01_TC_034
• Title: Verify system rollback and error handling during integration failure with external financial systems
• Created By: Hetal
• Created Date: August 18, 2025
• Version: 1.0

Classification

• Module/Feature: GL Codes Management
• Test Type: Integration/Error Handling
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Acceptance
• Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer/Billing Services, API, Integration, MOD-Billing, P1-Critical, Phase-Acceptance, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering/CSM/Quality-Dashboard/Integration-Testing/Security-Validation, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-External-Dependency, Error-Handling

Business Context

• Customer_Segment: Enterprise
• 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: 10 minutes
• Reproducibility_Score: Medium
• Data_Sensitivity: High
• Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

• Feature_Coverage: 100%
• Integration_Points: Billing system integration, Financial reporting system, Error handling mechanisms, Rollback procedures
• Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Integration-Services
• Requirement_Coverage: Complete
• Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

• Related_Requirements: AC020 - Integration with financial systems, Error handling requirements
• Related_Bugs: N/A
• Related_Test_Cases: BX05US01_TC_025 (Successful integration), BX05US01_TC_010 (Status changes)

Test Environment

• Environment: Integration Testing
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11
• Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: External financial systems (with failure simulation), Error handling mechanisms
• Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds rollback completion
• Data_Requirements: Test entity for integration failure testing

Prerequisites

• Setup_Requirements: Integration testing environment, External system failure simulation capability
• User_Roles_Permissions: Billing Manager role
• Test_Data: Active entity for testing: Water Consumption (Consumer Billing, Water, 4001-1001, Active)
• Prior_Test_Cases: Normal integration functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Record current system state baseline	Document entity status and dashboard metrics	Baseline: Water Consumption = Active, Active count = 8	Pre-failure state documentation
2	Verify entity status in external systems	Confirm baseline status in billing and financial systems	External verification: Water Consumption = Active in all systems	Cross-system baseline
3	Simulate external financial system unavailability	External system marked as unavailable for testing	Simulation: Billing system API returns 503 Service Unavailable	Integration failure simulation
4	Attempt status change during system unavailability	Try to change Water Consumption from Active to Inactive	Action: Toggle status during simulated failure	Integration trigger during failure
5	Verify integration failure detection	System detects external system failure appropriately	Expected: Integration timeout or error response detected	Failure detection verification
6	Verify user notification displayed	Clear error message shown to user about integration failure	Expected error: "Integration with financial systems failed. Changes not saved."	User feedback verification
7	Verify local changes rolled back	Water Consumption status remains Active (unchanged)	Expected: Status = Active (original state)	Rollback verification
8	Verify dashboard metrics unchanged	Active count remains 8, no dashboard changes	Expected: Active count = 8, all metrics unchanged	Metric consistency
9	Verify entity table state consistent	Table shows original status for all entities	Expected: All entities maintain original states	Data consistency check
10	Verify audit log entry for failed attempt	Failure logged with details for compliance	Expected: Audit entry with failure reason and timestamp	Compliance logging
11	Restore external system connectivity	External system marked as available again	Simulation: Billing system API returns 200 OK	System recovery simulation
12	Retry the same status change operation	Attempt status change after system recovery	Action: Toggle Water Consumption to Inactive	Post-recovery operation
13	Verify successful integration after recovery	Status change completes successfully with integration	Expected: Water Consumption = Inactive, successful sync	Recovery validation
14	Verify cross-system consistency after recovery	All systems show consistent updated status	Consistency check: GL Codes, Billing, Financial systems aligned	Post-recovery consistency

Verification Points

• Primary_Verification: Integration failures trigger proper rollback preventing inconsistent system states
• Secondary_Verifications: User notification provided, audit trail maintained, system recovers properly
• Negative_Verification: Partial changes should NOT persist, system should NOT remain in inconsistent state

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: Normal integration functionality tests
• Blocked_Tests: Production deployment readiness tests
• Parallel_Tests: Cannot run parallel with other integration tests
• Sequential_Tests: Must run in isolated environment

Additional Information

• Notes: Critical for maintaining data integrity across distributed systems
• Edge_Cases: Partial integration failures, network timeouts, database rollback failures
• Risk_Areas: Data corruption, financial reporting inconsistencies, user workflow disruption
• Security_Considerations: Ensure rollback doesn't expose sensitive data or create vulnerabilities

Missing Scenarios Identified

• Scenario_1: Bulk operation rollback during integration failure
• Type: Integration
• Rationale: Bulk operations have higher complexity for rollback scenarios
• Priority: P1
• Scenario_2: Integration failure recovery with user session continuity
• Type: Usability
• Rationale: Users should be able to continue work after integration recovery
• Priority: P2

---