Skip to main content

Master Test Cases - WX01US01


Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_001

Title: Verify SOP can be associated with exactly one utility type from available options (Water, Electricity, Gas, HVAC, Other) Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Engineering, Report-Product, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-CxServices, 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: Medium
  • Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: Medium
  • Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: CxServices, API, SMART360 Master Module
  • 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, Engineering, Product
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: Yes
  • Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Utility service configuration, User authentication service
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds page load, < 500ms dropdown response
  • Data_Requirements: Active utility types: Water, Electricity, Gas, HVAC, Other

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Valid user session with SOP creation permissions, Samoa Water Authority tenant configuration
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager or Supervisor role with SOP creation access
  • Test_Data: Utility types configured: Water, Electricity, Gas, HVAC, Other
  • Prior_Test_Cases: User authentication successful (Login TC)

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Master → Click "Create SOP" button

SOP Builder loads with Step 1 "Basic Information" highlighted, wizard shows 7 steps numbered 1-7

URL: /master/create-sop

Verify AC3 - 7-step wizard structure

2

Locate and fill "SOP Name" field

Field accepts input with no validation errors, placeholder text disappears

SOP Name: "Water Meter Installation - Residential"

Test field accepts descriptive naming per sample data

3

Fill "Short Name" field

Field accepts abbreviated input, character limit enforced

Short Name: "WMI"

Following sample data format from user story

4

Add text in "Description" field

Multi-line text area accepts detailed description

"Standard procedure for installing water meters in residential properties as per Samoa Water Authority guidelines"

Test description capacity per user story requirements

5

Click "Utility Type" dropdown to expand options

Dropdown displays all 5 utility type options clearly labeled

Expected options: Water, Electricity, Gas, HVAC, Other

Verify BR1 - exactly one utility type constraint

6

Select "Water" from utility type dropdown

"Water" selection highlighted, dropdown closes, field shows selected value

Selected: Water

Test single selection as per AC1 requirement

7

Attempt to open dropdown and select "Electricity"

Previous "Water" selection is replaced with "Electricity", only one selection possible

Try selecting: Electricity

Verify exactly one utility type constraint per BR1

8

Complete "Service Association" dropdown

Select appropriate service association for utility type

Service Association: Meter

Following user story service association mapping

9

Fill "Operation Type" dropdown

Select operation type related to service association

Operation Type: Meter Replacement

Per user story operation type structure

10

Complete remaining mandatory fields (Type, SLA Rules, Labour Cost, Tax Rate, Fieldforce Count)

All fields completed without validation errors

Type: Meter Maintenance, SLA: High-Priority SLA, Cost: ₹450, Tax: 18%, Fieldforce: 2

Using sample data from user story table

11

Click "Next" button to proceed

Successfully navigates to Step 2 "Safety Requirements", Step 1 marked complete with checkmark

Step 2 interface loads

Verify AC3 - progression through 7-step wizard

12

Use browser back button to return to Step 1

Previously selected "Electricity" utility type is retained in field

Utility Type displays: Electricity

Test AC3 - data persistence across navigation

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Only one utility type can be selected at a time, selection persists across navigation
  • Secondary_Verifications: All 5 utility types available in dropdown (Water, Electricity, Gas, HVAC, Other), proper field validation, wizard progression
  • Negative_Verification: Cannot select multiple utility types simultaneously, cannot proceed without utility type selection

Test Results (Template):

  • Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
  • Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior during execution]
  • 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: User authentication and session management tests
  • Blocked_Tests: WX01US01_TC_002, WX01US01_TC_028
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other independent functional tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Must complete before utility type validation tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for ensuring data integrity in utility-specific SOP creation workflow
  • Edge_Cases: Rapid clicking on dropdown options, browser refresh during selection
  • Risk_Areas: Utility type constraint violation could cause data inconsistency across field operations
  • Security_Considerations: Role-based access to utility types based on user permissions

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test utility type selection with disabled/inactive utility types

  • Type: Edge Case

  • Rationale: User story doesn't specify behavior for inactive utility types

  • Priority: P3

  • Scenario_2: Validate utility type selection with special characters in utility names

  • Type: Data Validation

  • Rationale: Ensure robust handling of utility type names

  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_002

Title: Verify utility type field is mandatory and blocks SOP creation progression without selection Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-QA, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-CxServices, Validation-Testing

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

  • Risk_Level: High
  • Complexity_Level: Medium
  • Expected_Execution_Time: 2 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: Low
  • Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: CxServices, Validation Engine, Form Processing
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: QA
  • Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Regression-Coverage, Module-Coverage, QA, Engineering
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Form validation service, Error messaging system
  • Performance_Baseline: < 1 second validation response
  • Data_Requirements: Valid test user with SOP creation permissions

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Valid user session, SOP Builder accessible
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager role at Samoa Water Authority
  • Test_Data: Partial SOP data without utility type selection
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Successful login and Master page access

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to SOP Builder Basic Information step

Page loads with all form fields visible and accessible

URL: /master/create-sop

Verify initial form state per AC3

2

Fill "SOP Name" field with valid input

Field accepts input, no validation errors shown

SOP Name: "Emergency Water Line Repair"

Using descriptive naming per sample data

3

Fill "Short Name" field with valid abbreviation

Field accepts abbreviated input without errors

Short Name: "EWLR"

Following sample data format

4

Add comprehensive description text

Description field accepts multi-line detailed text

"Emergency procedure for repairing water line breaks in urban areas. Includes safety protocols and restoration steps."

Test description field capacity

5

Fill "Service Association" dropdown

Select valid service association option

Service Association: Consumer

Per user story service association options

6

Select "Operation Type" from dropdown

Valid operation type selected without errors

Operation Type: Emergency Repair

Following user story operation types

7

Complete "Type" and "Subtype" fields

Both fields completed with related values

Type: Consumer Complaint, Subtype: Water Quality Issues

Using sample data from user story

8

Fill remaining fields EXCEPT "Utility Type"

All other mandatory fields completed successfully

SLA Rules: High-Priority SLA, Labour Cost: ₹750, Tax Rate: 18%, Fieldforce Count: 3

Leave Utility Type deliberately empty

9

Click "Next" button to attempt progression

Validation error appears for Utility Type field, progression blocked

Error message: "Utility Type is required"

Verify BR2 - mandatory field validation

10

Verify error message styling and placement

Utility Type field highlighted with red border/background, error text in red

Red visual indicators, clear error text

Test error UI design consistency

11

Verify form submission blocked

Cannot proceed to Step 2, remains on Step 1 with error state

Form stays on current step

Confirm progression blocking per BR2

12

Select "Gas" from Utility Type dropdown

Error message clears immediately, field validation passes

Selected: Gas

Test error resolution behavior

13

Click "Next" button after utility type selection

Successfully proceeds to Step 2 "Safety Requirements"

Step 2 Safety Requirements interface loads

Verify progression after validation passes

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Cannot proceed to next step without selecting utility type, clear validation error messaging
  • Secondary_Verifications: Error styling consistent with design standards, validation triggers immediately on attempt
  • Negative_Verification: Form submission completely blocked when utility type missing, no partial saves allowed

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: WX01US01_TC_001 (utility type selection functionality)
  • Blocked_Tests: Form validation test suite
  • Parallel_Tests: Other mandatory field validation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Must run after basic form access tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical validation test ensuring data integrity in SOP creation process
  • Edge_Cases: Rapid form submission attempts, browser auto-fill interfering with validation
  • Risk_Areas: Missing utility type could cause downstream integration failures
  • Security_Considerations: Validation should occur server-side as well as client-side

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test validation with JavaScript disabled in browser

  • Type: Security/Accessibility

  • Rationale: Ensure server-side validation works independently

  • Priority: P2

  • Scenario_2: Test validation with automated form filling tools

  • Type: Edge Case

  • Rationale: Ensure validation works with accessibility tools

  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_003

Title: Verify system generates unique SOP ID in format SOP-XXX automatically upon creation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Database, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Report-API-Test-Results, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Database, ID-Generation

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Database, ID Generation Service, SOP Repository
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
  • Report_Categories: Engineering, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Smoke-Test-Results, API-Test-Results
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Database service, ID generation service
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for SOP creation, < 1 second for ID generation
  • Data_Requirements: Clean database state for ID sequence testing

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Database with existing SOPs, ID counter properly initialized
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with full SOP creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Complete SOP configuration data for multiple SOP creation
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Database connectivity verified, user authentication successful

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Master page and check current SOP count

Master dashboard displays current Total SOPs metric

Current count: 43 SOPs (from user story sample)

Establish baseline per sample data

2

Click "Create SOP" and complete full SOP creation wizard

Complete first SOP through all 7 steps

SOP Name: "Water Meter Installation", Utility: Water, Service: Meter, Type: Installation

Using sample data format from user story

3

Complete Step 2 Safety Requirements

Add required safety protocols and PPE

Safety Package: Water Utility, PPE: Hard Hat, Safety Glasses

Per sample safety requirements

4

Complete Step 3 Task Definition

Add minimum required tasks with time estimates

Task 1: "Initial Inspection - 15 mins", Task 2: "Meter Reading - 15 mins"

Following sample task templates

5

Complete Step 4 Materials & Equipment

Add required materials with quantities

Material 1: "Digital Meter - 1 unit", Material 2: "Connection Adapters - 3 pieces"

Using sample material packages

6

Complete Step 5 Readings & Data

Configure measurement requirements

Reading 1: "Water Pressure - PSI - Range 30-80"

Per sample reading sets

7

Complete Step 6 Help & Resources

Add instruction resources

Resource: Instructions - "Meter Installation Guidelines"

Following help resource structure

8

Complete Step 7 Review & Publish, click "Create SOP"

SOP created successfully, unique ID generated

Service Number displays: SOP214 (next in sequence)

Verify ID generation per BR2 format

9

Navigate to Master page and verify new SOP in listing

New SOP appears with generated ID in SOP-XXX format

Template ID: SOP-214, Status: Active

Confirm ID format and display

10

Immediately create second SOP with identical data

Second SOP gets different sequential ID

Same SOP details but new ID: SOP-215

Test uniqueness constraint

11

Create third SOP rapidly without delay

Third SOP receives next sequential ID

Rapid creation, ID: SOP-216

Test concurrent ID generation

12

Verify all three SOPs in Master table

All SOPs display with unique sequential IDs

IDs: SOP-214, SOP-215, SOP-216 in listing

Confirm no duplicate IDs exist

13

Check Total SOPs count on dashboard

Count increased by 3 (from 43 to 46)

Total SOPs: 46, Active SOPs: 46

Verify metric updates with new SOPs

14

Query database directly for ID uniqueness

Database query shows no duplicate SOP IDs

SQL: SELECT COUNT() FROM SOPs GROUP BY sop_id HAVING COUNT() > 1

Technical verification of uniqueness

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: All created SOPs receive unique IDs in SOP-XXX format, sequential numbering maintained
  • Secondary_Verifications: Dashboard metrics update correctly, IDs display properly in Master table
  • Negative_Verification: No duplicate IDs generated even with rapid concurrent creation

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: Database connectivity and SOP creation functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: SOP listing and search functionality tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other SOP creation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run before SOP modification tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for maintaining data integrity and avoiding ID conflicts in production
  • Edge_Cases: Database connection failure during ID generation, system restart mid-creation
  • Risk_Areas: ID collision could cause data corruption or SOP assignment failures
  • Security_Considerations: ID generation should be tamper-proof and non-predictable sequence

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test ID generation behavior after database restart

  • Type: Reliability

  • Rationale: Ensure ID sequence continuity after system maintenance

  • Priority: P2

  • Scenario_2: Test ID generation with extremely high volume (1000+ SOPs)

  • Type: Performance

  • Rationale: Verify ID generation performance at scale

  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_004

Title: Verify SOP Builder guides users through complete 7-step creation process with proper navigation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: Integration
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Api, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Workflow, User-Experience

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: SOP Builder Wizard, Navigation Controller, Data Persistence Layer
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Wizard navigation service, Session management
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds per step transition, < 5 seconds review page load
  • Data_Requirements: Complete SOP configuration data for all 7 steps

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: User session active, SOP Builder fully functional
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager at Samoa Water Authority with full SOP creation access
  • Test_Data: Comprehensive SOP data covering all wizard steps
  • Prior_Test_Cases: User login successful, Master page accessible

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Master page and click "Create SOP" button

SOP Builder wizard launches with Step 1 "Basic Information" active, progress indicator shows 7 numbered steps

Step 1 highlighted in blue, steps 2-7 in gray

Verify AC3 - 7-step wizard structure

2

Verify wizard header displays step progression

Header shows "SOP Builder" title and "Create and configure a new Standard Operating Procedure" subtitle

Wizard header with step indicators 1-7

Confirm wizard layout per wireframes

3

Complete Step 1 Basic Information with all required fields

All mandatory fields filled, no validation errors, "Next" button enabled

SOP Name: "Gas Leak Inspection", Short Name: "GLI", Description: "Inspect suspected gas leaks to ensure safety compliance", Utility: Gas, Service: Safety Inspection, Type: Inspection, Subtype: Safety, SLA: 6h, Cost: ₹750, Tax: 18%, Fieldforce: 3

Using complete sample data from user story

4

Click "Next" button to progress to Step 2

Successfully navigates to Step 2 "Safety Requirements", Step 1 marked complete with checkmark, Step 2 becomes active

Step 2 "Safety Requirements" interface loads, progress shows step 1 complete

Test step progression per AC3

5

Complete Step 2 Safety Requirements configuration

Safety protocols and PPE selected, step validation passes

Safety Package: "Hazardous Materials", Safety Protocols: "Chemical Handling, Decontamination Procedures", PPE: "Chemical Resistant Gloves, Face Shield, Protective Suit"

Per sample safety requirements data

6

Click "Next" to progress to Step 3 Task Definition

Advances to Step 3 "Task Definition", previous steps marked complete

Step 3 "Task Definition" active, steps 1-2 complete

Verify continuous workflow

7

Complete Step 3 with multiple tasks and time estimates

Task sequence created with estimated completion times

Task 1: "Emergency Shutdown - 10 mins", Task 2: "Connection Inspection - 30 mins", Task 3: "Maintenance Check - 45 mins"

Using sample task templates

8

Progress to Step 4 "Materials & Equipment"

Step 4 loads successfully, task configuration saved

Step 4 "Materials & Equipment" interface

Test mid-process navigation

9

Complete Step 4 with required materials and tools

Materials list configured with quantities and specifications

Material Package: "Field Inspection", Contents: "Inspection Meter, Voltage Tester, Calibration Tools"

Per sample material packages

10

Advance to Step 5 "Readings & Data"

Step 5 readings configuration interface loads

Step 5 "Readings & Data" active

Test late-stage progression

11

Configure Step 5 measurement requirements

Reading parameters defined with units and ranges

Reading Set: "Gas System Readings", Parameters: "Gas Pressure - kPa - Range 1.0-3.0", "Flow Rate - m³/h - Range 0.5-10.0"

Using sample reading sets

12

Progress to Step 6 "Help & Resources"

Step 6 resource management interface loads

Step 6 "Help & Resources" active

Test near-completion navigation

13

Complete Step 6 with instruction resources

Support resources added to SOP

Resource Type: Instructions, Name: "Gas Safety Guidelines", Content: "Detailed safety procedures for gas leak inspection"

Following help resource structure

14

Advance to Step 7 "Review & Publish"

Final review screen loads with comprehensive SOP summary

Step 7 "Review & Publish" showing complete template summary

Verify AC23 - comprehensive review

15

Verify review screen shows all configured components

All 6 previous steps summarized with key data points

Template Summary shows: 3 Tasks, 3m estimated, 3 Field Technicians, ₹750 cost

Test complete data aggregation

16

Verify step completion indicators

All steps 1-6 marked complete with checkmarks or "Complete" labels

Green checkmarks or "Complete" status for all previous steps

Confirm completion tracking

17

Click "Create SOP" button to finalize creation

SOP successfully created, user redirected to Master page with success message

Success notification, return to Master dashboard

Test final submission per AC3

18

Verify new SOP appears in Master listing

Created SOP visible in SOP Templates table with all details

SOP appears with Status: Active, proper Template ID

Confirm publication success

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: All 7 steps accessible and functional, proper progression through complete wizard, comprehensive review before publication
  • Secondary_Verifications: Step indicators update correctly, data persists across navigation, final SOP contains all configured components
  • Negative_Verification: Cannot skip required steps, incomplete steps prevent progression, validation enforced at each stage

Test Results (Template):

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

Execution Analytics:

  • Execution_Frequency: Daily
  • Maintenance_Effort: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships:

  • Blocking_Tests: User authentication, Master page access
  • Blocked_Tests: Individual step validation tests, SOP modification tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other wizard functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should complete before step-specific validation tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical end-to-end workflow test ensuring complete SOP creation process functions correctly
  • Edge_Cases: Browser refresh during wizard, network interruption mid-process, rapid navigation clicking
  • Risk_Areas: Workflow interruption could cause data loss or incomplete SOP creation
  • Security_Considerations: Session timeout during long wizard completion, data validation at each step

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test wizard behavior with browser back/forward buttons

  • Type: User Experience

  • Rationale: Users may attempt browser navigation during wizard

  • Priority: P2

  • Scenario_2: Test wizard recovery after session timeout

  • Type: Reliability

  • Rationale:# SMART360 SOP Management System - Test Cases 1-10 User Story Code: WX01US01 (Master)




Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_005

Title: Verify step navigation and data persistence throughout SOP Builder wizard with backward/forward movement Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-QA, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Session-Management, Data-Persistence

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: 8 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: Medium
  • Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Session Management, Data Persistence, Navigation Controller
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Session management, Data persistence layer
  • Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for step navigation, < 2 seconds for data loading
  • Data_Requirements: Complex SOP data spanning multiple steps

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Active user session, SOP Builder functional
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with SOP creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Comprehensive SOP configuration data
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Basic wizard navigation verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Start SOP creation and complete Step 1 Basic Information

Step 1 data saved, ready for Step 2

SOP Name: "Pipeline Pressure Check", Utility: Gas, Service: Preventive Maintenance, Type: Maintenance, Subtype: Preventive, SLA: 12h, Cost: ₹300

Using sample preventive maintenance data

2

Progress to Step 2 and complete Safety Requirements

Safety data configured and saved

Safety Package: "Working at Heights", PPE: "Safety Harness, Hard Hat, Safety Line"

Per sample safety packages

3

Click "Back" button from Step 2 to return to Step 1

Returns to Step 1 with all previously entered data intact

All Step 1 fields show previously entered values

Test backward navigation with data persistence

4

Modify SOP Name in Step 1

Field accepts modification, change saved

Modified SOP Name: "Pipeline Pressure Check - Routine"

Test data modification capability

5

Navigate forward to Step 2 again

Returns to Step 2 with safety data preserved, Step 1 changes saved

Safety configuration intact, SOP name updated

Test forward navigation after modification

6

Progress to Step 3 Task Definition and add tasks

Tasks configured with time estimates

Task 1: "Initial Inspection - 15 mins", Task 2: "Pressure Testing - 30 mins", Task 3: "Documentation - 10 mins"

Following sample task structure

7

Jump directly to Step 5 by clicking step indicator

Can access Step 5 directly, previous data retained

Step 5 "Readings & Data" loads with previous steps' data preserved

Test non-sequential navigation

8

Configure readings in Step 5

Reading parameters set with ranges

Reading: "System Pressure - PSI - Range 30-80", Photo Required: Yes

Per sample pressure readings

9

Navigate back to Step 3 using step indicator

Returns to Step 3 with task data intact

All 3 configured tasks visible and editable

Test random access navigation

10

Add additional task in Step 3

New task added to existing task list

Task 4: "Final Verification - 5 mins"

Test incremental data addition

11

Simulate browser refresh (F5) during Step 3

Page reloads, returns to current step with all data preserved

All 4 tasks present, Step 3 remains active

Test session persistence

12

Navigate to Step 7 Review to verify all data

Review shows all configured data from all steps

Template Summary displays: 4 Tasks, SOP name updated, safety and readings configured

Test comprehensive data persistence

13

Use browser back button to exit wizard

Navigate away from SOP Builder

Return to Master page or previous page

Test external navigation

14

Return to SOP creation via "Create SOP" button

Can resume or start fresh SOP creation

Option to continue draft or start new SOP

Test re-entry behavior

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Data persists accurately across all navigation scenarios (backward, forward, random access, browser refresh)
  • Secondary_Verifications: Step indicators remain accurate, modifications save correctly, session maintains state
  • Negative_Verification: No data loss during navigation, invalid navigation attempts handled gracefully

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: WX01US01_TC_004 (basic wizard functionality)
  • Blocked_Tests: Draft save functionality tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other navigation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic wizard tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for user experience, ensures data not lost during complex SOP creation process
  • Edge_Cases: Rapid navigation clicking, multiple browser tabs, session timeout during navigation
  • Risk_Areas: Data loss could cause user frustration and workflow interruption
  • Security_Considerations: Session data should be properly secured and cleared on logout

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test navigation with multiple browser tabs open
  • Type: Edge Case
  • Rationale: Users may open multiple tabs during SOP creation
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test navigation behavior after network reconnection
  • Type: Reliability
  • Rationale: Ensure data persistence during network issues
  • Priority: P2



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_006

Title: Verify users can save SOP as draft at any point in creation process and resume later Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • 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 Services, Database, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Draft-Management, Workflow-Continuity

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Draft Management System, Database, Session Management
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Draft storage system, Database
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for draft save, < 3 seconds for draft retrieval
  • Data_Requirements: Partial SOP data for draft testing

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: User session active, SOP Builder functional, draft storage enabled
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with draft save permissions
  • Test_Data: Partial SOP configuration data for various completion stages
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder navigation verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Start SOP creation and partially complete Step 1

Basic information partially entered

SOP Name: "Smart Meter Installation", Short Name: "SMI", Description: "Install advanced electricity smart meters in homes", Utility: Electricity

Using sample smart meter data from user story

2

Look for draft save option in interface

Save Draft button or option visible and accessible

Save option present in UI

Verify AC4 - draft save availability

3

Click Save Draft button/option

Draft saved successfully with confirmation message

Success notification: "Draft saved successfully"

Test draft save functionality

4

Note the timestamp and navigate to Master page

Return to Master dashboard with draft saved

Master page loads normally

Test navigation after draft save

5

Check Draft Templates tab for saved draft

Draft appears in Draft Templates section with count update

Draft Templates shows count: 5 (increased from 4), new draft visible

Verify AC14 - draft templates section

6

Verify draft displays correct information

Draft shows partial completion status and creation details

Template Name: "Smart Meter Installation", Status: draft, Version: v1, Created date visible

Test draft display per sample data format

7

Click on draft name to resume editing

Returns to SOP Builder with saved data pre-populated

Step 1 shows previously entered data intact

Test draft resumption capability

8

Continue to Step 2 and add safety requirements

Progress from saved state, add new configuration

Safety Package: "Electrical Safety", PPE: "Insulated Gloves, Safety Glasses, Hard Hat"

Following electrical safety sample data

9

Save draft again from Step 2

Updated draft saved with new safety data

Success confirmation with updated timestamp

Test incremental draft updates

10

Navigate to Master and verify draft update

Draft shows updated modification time

Modified timestamp reflects recent save

Verify draft update tracking

11

Resume draft and continue to Step 3

Add task configuration to existing draft

Task 1: "Meter Reading - 15 mins", Task 2: "Connection Inspection - 30 mins"

Per sample task templates

12

Save draft from Step 3

Draft updated with task configuration

All previous data plus new tasks saved

Test progressive draft building

13

Test draft from different user session

Login as different user (if permitted) or logout/login

Draft accessible to appropriate users only

Test draft access permissions

14

Complete remaining steps and publish draft

Convert draft to active SOP

Complete all 7 steps, click "Create SOP"

Test AC4 - draft to active transition

15

Verify draft removal from Draft Templates

Published SOP no longer appears in drafts

Draft Templates count decreases, SOP appears in active templates

Test draft cleanup after publication

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Draft can be saved at any step and resumed later with all data preserved
  • Secondary_Verifications: Draft count updates correctly, timestamps accurate, draft-to-active transition works
  • Negative_Verification: Drafts don't appear in active SOP listings, 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: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships:

  • Blocking_Tests: SOP Builder navigation, user authentication
  • Blocked_Tests: Draft management test suite
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other draft functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run before draft listing tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Important for user workflow continuity, allows complex SOPs to be built over time
  • Edge_Cases: System shutdown during draft save, concurrent draft editing, storage limits
  • Risk_Areas: Draft data loss could cause significant user productivity loss
  • Security_Considerations: Draft data should be properly secured and user-scoped

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test draft auto-save functionality during inactivity
  • Type: User Experience
  • Rationale: Prevent data loss during long editing sessions
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test draft storage limits and cleanup policies
  • Type: System Reliability
  • Rationale: Ensure system performance with many drafts
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_007

Title: Verify draft SOP appears in Draft Templates section with correct status and metadata Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Draft-Display, UI-Verification

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: Low
  • Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: Low
  • Failure_Impact: Low

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Draft Display System, UI Rendering, Database Query
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Draft display service, Database
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for tab switching, < 1 second for draft listing
  • Data_Requirements: Multiple draft SOPs with different creation dates and statuses

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Existing draft SOPs in system, user session active
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Any user role with SOP viewing permissions
  • Test_Data: Sample draft SOPs from user story (4 drafts as shown in wireframe)
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Draft creation functionality verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Master page

Master page loads with SOP Templates and Draft Templates tabs

Master dashboard with tab structure visible

Verify base page structure

2

Verify initial tab state

SOP Templates tab active by default, showing published SOPs

SOP Templates tab highlighted, showing 40 active SOPs

Confirm default view per wireframe

3

Click Draft Templates tab

Draft Templates tab becomes active, shows draft listing

Tab switches to Draft Templates, count shows "4"

Test AC14 - draft templates section access

4

Verify Draft Templates count badge

Count badge shows correct number of draft SOPs

Count displays "4" matching sample data

Verify accurate draft counting

5

Check draft table structure

Table displays appropriate columns for draft SOPs

Columns: Template ID, Template Name, Association, Type, Subtype, Status, Version, Created, Created By, Tasks, Usage Count, Total Cost

Verify draft-specific table layout

6

Verify first draft entry

First draft shows correct status and metadata

Template ID: 226, Name: "New Sop", Status: draft (yellow badge), Version: v1, Created: 2025-08-16, Created By: QA1

Using sample data from wireframe

7

Check second draft entry

Second draft displays with proper information

Template ID: 212, Name: "brfbrb", Association: Meter, Type: Meter Maintenance, Subtype: Repairs, Status: draft, Created By: Bynry Support

Verify multiple draft display

8

Verify third draft entry

Third draft shows complete metadata

Template ID: 208, Name: "S/O services check 1", Association: Consumer, Type: Consumer Services, Subtype: S/O Test, Usage Count: 1 times

Test draft with usage tracking

9

Check fourth draft entry

Fourth draft displays correctly

Template ID: 211, Name: "ewrqweq", Association: Meter, Type: Meter Maintenance, Status: draft

Complete draft listing verification

10

Verify status indicators

All drafts show "draft" status with consistent styling

Yellow "draft" badges for all entries

Test status display consistency

11

Check absence of filter options

No "Show Filters" button or filter controls visible

Filter options not present in draft section

Verify AC14 - no filters in draft

12

Test search functionality

Search box available for draft name searching

Search works for draft template names

Test search capability in drafts

13

Click on draft name to access editing

Draft opens in SOP Builder for continued editing

Selected draft loads in wizard with saved data

Test draft editing access

14

Return to Master and verify tab state persistence

Draft Templates tab remains active after edit return

Tab state maintained across navigation

Test tab state management

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: All draft SOPs appear in Draft Templates section with correct status display and metadata
  • Secondary_Verifications: Proper count display, correct table structure, no filter options available
  • Negative_Verification: Drafts don't appear in main SOP Templates, filter restrictions enforced

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: Draft creation functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Draft editing and management tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other UI display tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after draft creation tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Ensures proper separation between draft and published SOPs in user interface
  • Edge_Cases: Large number of drafts, very long draft names, special characters in metadata
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect draft display could confuse users about SOP status
  • Security_Considerations: User should only see drafts they have permission to access

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test draft display with pagination for large numbers of drafts
  • Type: Scalability
  • Rationale: System should handle many drafts efficiently
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test draft sorting and ordering options
  • Type: User Experience
  • Rationale: Users may need to sort drafts by date or name
  • Priority: P4



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_008

Title: Verify users can select and apply pre-configured safety packages with automatic protocol population Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Safety-Management, Compliance-Required

Business Context:

  • Customer_Segment: Enterprise
  • Revenue_Impact: Medium
  • Business_Priority: Must-Have
  • Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
  • Compliance_Required: Yes
  • SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics:

  • Risk_Level: High
  • Complexity_Level: Medium
  • Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: High
  • Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Safety Package System, Protocol Management, PPE Configuration
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Safety package service, Protocol database
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for package selection, < 1 second for protocol population
  • Data_Requirements: Pre-configured safety packages and protocols per user story sample data

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Safety packages configured in system, SOP Builder Step 2 accessible
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with safety configuration permissions
  • Test_Data: Safety packages: Electrical Safety, Confined Space, Working at Heights, Hazardous Materials
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder Step 1 completion verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Step 2 Safety Requirements after completing Step 1

Safety Requirements interface loads with package selection options

Step 2 "Safety Requirements" active, configuration interface visible

Verify AC5 - safety requirements step

2

Locate "Quick Selection - Safety Package" section

Section displays available pre-configured safety packages

Quick Selection section with safety package options

Test safety package availability

3

View available safety packages

Pre-configured packages displayed with descriptions

Packages visible: Electrical Safety, Confined Space, Working at Heights, Hazardous Materials

Per sample safety requirements data

4

Click on "Electrical Safety" package

Package selected and highlighted, shows package details

"Electrical Safety" package selected, shows protocols and PPE

Test package selection mechanism

5

Verify automatic protocol population

Safety protocols auto-populated from selected package

Protocols: "Pre-Job Safety Briefing, Equipment Safety Check"

Verify automatic protocol assignment per sample data

6

Check PPE requirements auto-population

PPE requirements automatically filled from package

PPE: "Insulated Gloves, Safety Glasses, Hard Hat"

Test automatic PPE population per sample data

7

Deselect current package and select "Confined Space"

Previous selection cleared, new package applied

"Confined Space" package selected, previous protocols replaced

Test package switching functionality

8

Verify new package protocols loaded

New protocols replace previous ones

Protocols: "Emergency Response Plan, Air Quality Assessment"

Test protocol replacement per sample data

9

Check new PPE requirements

PPE list updated with confined space requirements

PPE: "Respirator, Safety Harness, Gas Monitor"

Verify PPE update per sample data

10

Select "Working at Heights" package

Package selection changes again

"Working at Heights" selected

Test multiple package switching

11

Verify heights safety protocols

Appropriate protocols for height work loaded

Protocols: "Fall Prevention, Pre-Use Equipment Check"

Per sample working at heights requirements

12

Check heights PPE requirements

Height-specific PPE requirements populated

PPE: "Safety Harness, Hard Hat, Safety Line"

Verify heights PPE per sample data

13

Attempt to select multiple packages simultaneously

Only one package can be selected at a time

Previous selection replaced by new selection

Test single package constraint

14

Proceed to next step with selected package

Safety configuration saved, can progress to Step 3

Step 3 "Task Definition" accessible

Test progression with safety configuration

15

Return to Step 2 to verify persistence

Selected package and configuration retained

"Working at Heights" package still selected with protocols

Test safety configuration persistence

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Safety packages can be selected and automatically populate protocols and PPE requirements correctly
  • Secondary_Verifications: Only one package selectable at a time, configuration persists across navigation
  • Negative_Verification: Previous package selections are replaced when new package selected

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: SOP Builder Step 1 completion
  • Blocked_Tests: Safety validation and compliance tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other safety configuration tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Must complete before safety protocol validation tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for ensuring proper safety compliance in utility field operations
  • Edge_Cases: Package data corruption, missing protocols, network issues during package loading
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect safety configuration could lead to field safety incidents
  • Security_Considerations: Safety package integrity must be maintained, audit trail for safety selections

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test behavior when safety package data is corrupted or missing
  • Type: Error Handling
  • Rationale: Ensure graceful degradation when package data unavailable
  • Priority: P2
  • Scenario_2: Test custom safety protocol addition beyond package defaults
  • Type: Functionality Enhancement
  • Rationale: Users may need additional safety measures beyond packages
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_009

Title: Verify users can create task sequences with predefined templates and time estimates for resource planning Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Api, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Resource-Planning, Task-Management

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Task Template System, Time Estimation Engine, Resource Planning Module
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Task template service, Time estimation system
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for template loading, < 1 second for task addition
  • Data_Requirements: Pre-configured task templates per user story sample data

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Task templates configured, SOP Builder Step 3 accessible
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with task configuration permissions
  • Test_Data: Task templates: Meter Reading, Connection Inspection, Emergency Shutdown, Maintenance Check, Initial Inspection
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder Steps 1-2 completed successfully

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Step 3 Task Definition after completing safety requirements

Task Definition interface loads with template options

Step 3 "Task Definition" active, shows task configuration area

Verify AC6 - task definition step access

2

Locate "Task Templates" section

Section displays available predefined task templates

Task Templates section with "Select from pre-defined task templates or create your own"

Test task template availability

3

Check for operation-specific templates

Templates filtered by selected operation type or show general message

Message: "No task types available for the selected operation type" or available templates

Test template filtering logic

4

Click "Add Manual Task" to create custom task

Manual task creation form opens

Task configuration form with all required fields

Test manual task creation option

5

Fill task name field

Task name field accepts descriptive input

Task Name: "Initial Site Inspection"

Test task naming per sample data

6

Set turnaround time estimate

Time field accepts minutes input for planning

Turnaround Time (minutes): 15

Test time estimation per sample task templates

7

Configure downtime estimate

Downtime field accepts minutes for resource calculation

Downtime (mins): 5

Per sample data showing downtime tracking

8

Select required skills from dropdown

Skills dropdown shows available skill categories

Skills: "Site Assessment"

Using sample skills from task templates

9

Check "This task is mandatory" checkbox

Mandatory flag can be set for critical tasks

Mandatory checkbox checked

Test AC7 - mandatory task flagging

10

Enable "Photo Required" option

Photo requirement can be configured per task

Photo Required checkbox checked

Per sample data showing photo requirements

11

Save first task configuration

Task saved and appears in task list

Task 1 added to sequence with all configured details

Test task persistence and display

12

Add second task using "Add Manual Task"

Second task form opens for additional task

Second task creation form

Test multiple task addition

13

Configure second task with different parameters

Second task configured with unique settings

Task Name: "Meter Reading Verification", Time: 10 mins, Downtime: 2 mins, Skills: "Basic Utility Operations", Photo Required: Yes

Per sample task data variety

14

Add third task for complete workflow

Third task added to sequence

Task Name: "Final Documentation", Time: 5 mins, Mandatory: Yes

Test task sequence building

15

Verify task sequence in task list

All three tasks display in configured order

Task list shows: 1. Initial Site Inspection, 2. Meter Reading Verification, 3. Final Documentation

Test task sequence display

16

Check total time calculation

System calculates total estimated time

Total estimated time: 30 minutes (15+10+5)

Test time aggregation for planning

17

Edit existing task in sequence

Can modify previously created task

Click edit on Task 1, modify time to 20 minutes

Test task modification capability

18

Delete one task from sequence

Task can be removed from sequence

Delete Task 2, sequence renumbers automatically

Test task deletion and renumbering

19

Verify updated task sequence

Remaining tasks show correctly with updated numbering

Final sequence: 1. Initial Site Inspection (20 mins), 2. Final Documentation (5 mins)

Test sequence management

20

Proceed to next step with task configuration

Can advance to Step 4 with tasks configured

Step 4 "Materials & Equipment" becomes accessible

Test progression with task definition complete

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Tasks can be created with all required attributes (name, time, skills, mandatory flag, photo requirement) and form proper sequences
  • Secondary_Verifications: Time estimates aggregate correctly, task order maintained, modifications and deletions work properly
  • Negative_Verification: Cannot save task without required fields, task sequence integrity maintained during modifications

Test Results (Template):

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

Execution Analytics:

  • Execution_Frequency: Weekly
  • Maintenance_Effort: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships:

  • Blocking_Tests: SOP Builder Steps 1-2 completion
  • Blocked_Tests: Resource planning and SLA calculation tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other task management tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Must complete before materials and readings configuration

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for resource planning and SLA compliance in field operations
  • Edge_Cases: Very long task names, extreme time estimates, maximum task sequence limits
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect time estimates could affect resource allocation and SLA compliance
  • Security_Considerations: Task templates should be validated for appropriate user permissions

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test task template reuse across multiple SOPs
  • Type: Template Management
  • Rationale: Ensure task templates can be efficiently reused
  • Priority: P2
  • Scenario_2: Test task dependency relationships within sequences
  • Type: Advanced Functionality
  • Rationale: Some tasks may depend on completion of previous tasks
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_010

Title: Verify tasks can be flagged as mandatory with proper validation and display indicators Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • 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 Services, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Task-Validation, Compliance-Enforcement

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Task Validation System, UI Display Management, Business Logic Engine
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Task management system, Validation engine
  • Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for flag toggling, < 2 seconds for display updates
  • Data_Requirements: Task configuration data with mandatory/optional variations

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Task Definition step accessible, task creation functionality verified
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with task configuration permissions
  • Test_Data: Multiple task configurations for mandatory flag testing
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Basic task creation functionality verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Step 3 Task Definition and start creating new task

Task creation form opens with all configuration options

Manual task creation interface

Establish task creation context

2

Locate "This task is mandatory" checkbox in task form

Checkbox is visible and functional in task configuration

Mandatory checkbox clearly labeled and accessible

Verify AC7 - mandatory flag availability

3

Verify checkbox default state

Checkbox is unchecked by default (non-mandatory)

Unchecked state indicates optional task

Test default mandatory state

4

Fill basic task information

Task details entered successfully

Task Name: "Safety Equipment Check", Turnaround Time: 10 minutes, Skills: "Equipment Maintenance"

Using sample task data

5

Check the "This task is mandatory" checkbox

Checkbox becomes checked/selected state

Checkbox displays checked state visually

Test mandatory flag activation

6

Complete other task fields

All task configuration fields completed

Downtime: 2 minutes, Photo Required: Yes

Complete task configuration

7

Save the task with mandatory flag

Task saved successfully with mandatory status preserved

Task appears in task list with mandatory indicator

Test mandatory flag persistence

8

Verify mandatory task display in task list

Task shows visual indicator for mandatory status

Task displays with special marking (icon, badge, or styling)

Test mandatory visual differentiation

9

Create second task without mandatory flag

Second task created as optional

Task Name: "Additional Documentation", Turnaround Time: 5 minutes, Mandatory: unchecked

Test optional task creation

10

Save optional task and compare displays

Clear visual distinction between mandatory and optional tasks

Task list shows different visual treatment for mandatory vs optional

Test visual differentiation consistency

11

Edit the mandatory task

Can access and modify task configuration

Click edit on mandatory task, form opens with current settings

Test mandatory task editing access

12

Uncheck the mandatory flag

Can change task from mandatory to optional

Uncheck "This task is mandatory" checkbox

Test mandatory flag modification

13

Save modified task

Task status updated from mandatory to optional

Task saves with updated status, visual indicator changes

Test mandatory status update

14

Edit the optional task and make it mandatory

Can change task from optional to mandatory

Check "This task is mandatory" for second task

Test reverse flag modification

15

Verify updated task displays

Both tasks now show updated mandatory status correctly

Task list reflects current mandatory status for both tasks

Test status change display

16

Create third task and test flag toggling

Can toggle mandatory flag multiple times before saving

Toggle checkbox on/off several times during creation

Test flag toggling behavior

17

Save task and proceed to next step

All tasks with current mandatory status saved and accessible for next step

Step 4 accessible with task configuration complete

Test progression with mandatory tasks

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Tasks can be flagged as mandatory and flag persists with proper visual indicators
  • Secondary_Verifications: Visual distinction between mandatory/optional tasks, flag can be modified after creation
  • Negative_Verification: Default state is non-mandatory, flag changes reflect immediately in UI

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 task creation functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Task execution validation tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other task configuration tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic task creation tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Important for ensuring critical tasks are properly identified and enforced during field execution
  • Edge_Cases: All tasks mandatory, no tasks mandatory, bulk mandatory flag changes
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect mandatory flagging could cause field operation compliance issues
  • Security_Considerations: Mandatory flag changes should be audited for compliance tracking

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test mandatory task validation during SOP execution
  • Type: Integration
  • Rationale: Ensure mandatory tasks cannot be skipped during field execution
  • Priority: P1
  • Scenario_2: Test mandatory task reporting and compliance tracking
  • Type: Reporting
  • Rationale: Track completion rates for mandatory vs optional tasks
  • Priority: P3Missing Scenarios Identified:
  • Scenario_1: Test wizard behavior with browser back/forward buttons
  • Type: User Experience
  • Rationale: Users may attempt browser navigation during wizard
  • Priority: P2
  • Scenario_2: Test wizard recovery after session timeout
  • Type: Reliability
  • Rationale: Long wizard completion may exceed session limits
  • Priority: P2





Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_011

Title: Verify Help step resource documents support 3 dropdown types: Instructions, Video Link, and File upload Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Resource-Management, File-Upload

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: 10 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: Low
  • Failure_Impact: Low

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Resource Management System, File Upload Service, Content Management
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, File upload service, Resource management system
  • Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for resource addition, < 10 seconds for file upload
  • Data_Requirements: Sample files for upload testing (PDF, video, documents)

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: SOP Builder Step 6 accessible, file upload functionality enabled
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with resource management permissions
  • Test_Data: Sample instruction text, video URLs, test files for upload
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder Steps 1-5 completed successfully

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Step 6 Help & Resources after completing previous steps

Help & Resources interface loads with resource management options

Step 6 "Help & Resources" active, shows resource configuration area

Verify AC8 - help step access

2

Locate "Resource Management" section

Section displays with "Add Resource" functionality

Resource Management section with "Add Resource" button visible

Test resource management interface

3

Click "Add Resource" button

Resource creation dialog/form opens

Resource creation interface opens

Test resource addition access

4

Check "Resource Type" dropdown options

Dropdown contains exactly 3 options as specified

Options: Instructions, Video Link, File

Verify AC8 - 3 dropdown types

5

Select "Instructions" from Resource Type dropdown

Instructions form fields appear for text-based resources

Resource Type: Instructions, additional fields for instruction content

Test instructions resource type

6

Fill instruction resource details

Form accepts instruction resource configuration

Resource Name: "Safety Guidelines", Instructions: "1. Ensure proper PPE is worn\n2. Follow lockout/tagout procedures\n3. Verify gas detection equipment\n4. Complete safety checklist before starting work"

Test instruction content input

7

Save instruction resource

Instruction resource saved and appears in resource list

Resource appears with type "Instruction" and name "Safety Guidelines"

Test instruction resource persistence

8

Add second resource and select "Video Link"

Video link form fields appear

Resource Type: Video Link, fields for URL and description

Test video link resource type

9

Fill video link resource details

Form accepts video URL and metadata

Resource Name: "Equipment Training Video", Video URL: "https://training.samoawater.com/equipment-safety.mp4", Description: "Comprehensive safety training for equipment operation"

Test video link configuration

10

Save video link resource

Video resource saved and listed with appropriate type

Resource appears with type "Video Link" and accessible URL

Test video resource persistence

11

Add third resource and select "File" option

File upload interface appears

Resource Type: File, file upload field and metadata options

Test file upload resource type

12

Upload PDF document

File upload completes successfully

Upload file: "Safety-Manual.pdf" (sample safety document), Resource Name: "Complete Safety Manual"

Test PDF file upload per AC8

13

Save file resource

File resource saved with upload confirmation

Resource appears with type "File" and downloadable link

Test file resource completion

14

Verify all three resource types in listing

All 3 resources display with correct types and details

Resources listed: 1. Instructions - Safety Guidelines, 2. Video Link - Equipment Training, 3. File - Complete Safety Manual

Test resource variety display

15

Test resource editing functionality

Can modify existing resources

Click edit on instruction resource, modify content

Test resource modification

16

Test resource deletion

Can remove resources from list

Delete video link resource, confirm removal

Test resource deletion

17

Add multiple resources of same type

System supports multiple resources per type

Add second instruction resource with different content

Test multiple resource support

18

Verify resource count in step summary

Step shows accurate resource count

Shows "1 Resources" in summary (matching wireframe format)

Test resource counting display

19

Proceed to Step 7 with configured resources

Can advance with help resources configured

Step 7 "Review & Publish" accessible

Test progression with resources

20

Verify resources appear in review section

All configured resources visible in final review

Review shows all resource types and names in Help & Resources section

Test resource review display

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: All three resource types (Instructions, Video Link, File) are available and function correctly
  • Secondary_Verifications: Each type has appropriate form fields, resources save and display properly
  • Negative_Verification: Only specified resource types available, invalid resource types rejected

Test Results (Template):

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

Execution Analytics:

  • Execution_Frequency: Weekly
  • Maintenance_Effort: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships:

  • Blocking_Tests: SOP Builder Steps 1-5 completion
  • Blocked_Tests: Resource management and file handling tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other resource functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should complete before final review validation

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Important for providing comprehensive support resources to field technicians
  • Edge_Cases: Large file uploads, invalid URLs, very long instruction text, special characters
  • Risk_Areas: File upload failures could prevent resource attachment, broken links affect training
  • Security_Considerations: File uploads should be scanned for malware, URL validation for security

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test file size limits and unsupported file types
  • Type: Validation
  • Rationale: Ensure system handles file restrictions properly
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test video link validation and accessibility
  • Type: Integration
  • Rationale: Ensure video links are accessible and valid
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_012

Title: Verify system supports material and equipment package definition with quantities and specifications Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Inventory-Management, Resource-Planning

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Inventory Management, Material Database, Cost Calculation Engine
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Material database, Cost calculation service
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for material addition, < 1 second for cost calculation
  • Data_Requirements: Material packages from user story sample data

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Material packages configured, SOP Builder Step 4 accessible
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with material configuration permissions
  • Test_Data: Sample material packages: Standard Metering, Water Utility, Asset Maintenance, Field Inspection
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder Steps 1-3 completed successfully

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Step 4 Materials & Equipment after completing task definition

Materials & Equipment interface loads with package and manual options

Step 4 "Materials & Equipment" active, shows material configuration area

Verify AC9 - materials step access

2

Check for "Material Packages" section

Section displays available pre-configured material packages

Material Packages section with package options or "No material packages available" message

Test material package availability

3

Verify operation-specific package filtering

Packages appropriate for selected operation type shown

Packages filtered based on operation type or general packages available

Test package filtering logic

4

Click "Add Manual Material" if no packages available

Manual material addition form opens

Material creation interface with all required fields

Test manual material addition

5

Fill material name field

Material name field accepts descriptive input

Material Name: "Digital Water Meter"

Using sample material from user story data

6

Specify material quantity

Quantity field accepts numeric input with units

Quantity: "1 unit"

Per sample material packages format

7

Add size and specifications

Specifications field accepts detailed technical information

Size/Specifications: "25mm diameter, Smart-enabled with remote reading capability"

Test detailed specification input

8

Enter estimated cost per unit

Cost field accepts currency values

Estimated Cost per Unit: "₹1,500"

Using realistic utility equipment costs

9

Save first material

Material saved and appears in materials list

Material 1 saved: "Digital Water Meter - 1 unit - ₹1,500"

Test material persistence and display

10

Add second material with different specifications

Second material configured with unique details

Material Name: "Connection Adapters", Quantity: "3 pieces", Size: "Standard threading - various sizes", Cost: "₹50 per piece"

Test multiple material support

11

Add third material for comprehensive setup

Third material added to complete material list

Material Name: "Sealing Compound", Quantity: "500ml tube", Specifications: "Waterproof pipe sealant for utility connections", Cost: "₹200"

Following sample material variety

12

Verify materials list display

All materials show with quantities and specifications

Materials list displays: 3 materials with names, quantities, specs, individual costs

Test material listing format

13

Check automatic cost calculation

System calculates total material cost

Total Material Cost: ₹1,750 (1,500 + 150 + 200)

Test cost aggregation per AC9

14

Edit existing material quantity

Can modify material quantities after creation

Change Digital Water Meter quantity to "2 units"

Test quantity modification

15

Verify cost recalculation

Total cost updates automatically with quantity change

Updated Total Cost: ₹3,250 (3,000 + 150 + 200)

Test dynamic cost calculation

16

Add equipment item

Equipment can be added alongside materials

Equipment Name: "Pipe Wrench Set", Quantity: "1 set", Specifications: "Professional grade - 5 piece set", Cost: "₹800"

Test equipment vs material distinction

17

Test material deletion

Materials can be removed from list

Delete "Sealing Compound", total cost recalculates

Test material removal and cost update

18

Add bulk material requirement

System handles large quantity materials

Material Name: "Utility Cable", Quantity: "100 meters", Cost: "₹25 per meter"

Test bulk material handling

19

Verify final materials summary

All materials and equipment properly summarized

Final list shows 4 items with total cost calculation

Test comprehensive material summary

20

Proceed to next step with materials configured

Can advance to Step 5 with materials defined

Step 5 "Readings & Data" becomes accessible

Test progression with materials complete

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Materials and equipment can be defined with quantities, specifications, and cost calculations
  • Secondary_Verifications: Multiple materials supported, costs calculate automatically, quantities can be modified
  • Negative_Verification: Cannot save material without required fields, invalid quantities rejected

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: SOP Builder Steps 1-3 completion
  • Blocked_Tests: Cost calculation and inventory integration tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other material management tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Must complete before readings configuration

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for accurate resource planning and cost estimation in field operations
  • Edge_Cases: Zero quantities, extremely high costs, special characters in specifications
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect material quantities could cause field operation delays
  • Security_Considerations: Material costs should be validated for reasonable ranges

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test material package templates for common utility operations
  • Type: Template Management
  • Rationale: Pre-configured packages could improve efficiency
  • Priority: P2
  • Scenario_2: Test integration with inventory management system
  • Type: Integration
  • Rationale: Ensure material availability checking
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_013

Title: Verify reading requirements include parameter ranges with units and criticality levels Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Api, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Data-Collection, Measurement-Validation

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Data Collection System, Measurement Validation, Reading Templates
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Reading template service, Validation engine
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for reading configuration, < 1 second for validation
  • Data_Requirements: Reading sets from user story sample data

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Reading templates configured, SOP Builder Step 5 accessible
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with reading configuration permissions
  • Test_Data: Sample reading sets: Standard Utility Meter, Pressure System, Electrical System, Water Quality, Gas System
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder Steps 1-4 completed successfully

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Step 5 Readings & Data after completing materials configuration

Readings & Data interface loads with reading configuration options

Step 5 "Readings & Data" active, shows reading setup area

Verify AC10 - readings step access

2

Check "Reading Templates" section

Section displays available pre-configured reading sets

Reading Templates section with template options or "No reading templates available" message

Test reading template availability

3

Verify operation-specific reading filtering

Reading templates appropriate for operation type shown

Templates filtered by operation or general templates available

Test reading template filtering

4

Click "Add Manual Reading" to create custom reading

Manual reading configuration form opens

Reading creation interface with all parameter fields

Test manual reading addition

5

Fill reading name field

Reading name field accepts descriptive measurement input

Reading Name: "Water Pressure Reading"

Using sample reading from user story data

6

Configure unit of measurement

Unit field accepts standardized measurement units

Unit of Measurement: "PSI"

Per sample reading sets standardization

7

Set minimum acceptable value

Minimum value field accepts numeric range input

Minimum Value: "30"

Following sample pressure system readings

8

Set maximum acceptable value

Maximum value field accepts numeric range input

Maximum Value: "80"

Per sample PSI range 30-80

9

Configure criticality level

Criticality dropdown shows available levels

Criticality Level: "High"

Test criticality configuration per AC10

10

Enable photo requirement

Photo required checkbox can be configured

Photo Required: checked

Per sample reading requirements

11

Save first reading configuration

Reading saved with all parameters and ranges

Reading 1 saved: "Water Pressure Reading - PSI - Range 30-80 - High Criticality"

Test reading persistence and display

12

Add second reading with different parameters

Second reading configured with unique specifications

Reading Name: "Flow Rate Measurement", Unit: "m³/h", Min: "0.5", Max: "10.0", Criticality: "Medium"

Following sample gas system readings

13

Add third reading for electrical measurements

Electrical system reading configured

Reading Name: "Voltage Reading", Unit: "V", Min: "110", Max: "130", Criticality: "High", Photo: No

Per sample electrical system readings

14

Verify readings summary display

All readings show with parameters and ranges

Readings list displays: 3 readings with names, units, ranges, criticality levels

Test reading listing format

15

Check reading count indicators

Summary shows accurate reading counts

Shows "Total Readings: 3", "Photos Required: 1", "Critical: 2"

Per wireframe summary format

16

Test range validation

System validates min < max values

Attempt to set Min: 100, Max: 50 - validation error expected

Test range logic validation

17

Edit existing reading parameters

Can modify reading configuration after creation

Change Water Pressure max value to "85 PSI"

Test reading modification

18

Add reading with edge case values

System handles boundary values appropriately

Reading: "pH Level", Unit: "pH", Min: "6.5", Max: "8.5", Criticality: "Medium"

Following sample water quality readings

19

Test reading deletion

Readings can be removed from configuration

Delete "Flow Rate Measurement", verify count updates

Test reading removal

20

Proceed to next step with readings configured

Can advance to Step 6 with readings defined

Step 6 "Help & Resources" becomes accessible

Test progression with readings complete

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Reading requirements can be defined with parameter ranges, units, and criticality levels
  • Secondary_Verifications: Range validation works, multiple readings supported, summary counts accurate
  • Negative_Verification: Invalid ranges rejected, required fields enforced

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: SOP Builder Steps 1-4 completion
  • Blocked_Tests: Data validation and measurement tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other reading configuration tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Must complete before help resources configuration

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for ensuring proper data collection and validation during field operations
  • Edge_Cases: Extreme measurement ranges, negative values, decimal precision requirements
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect ranges could cause false alarms or missed critical measurements
  • Security_Considerations: Reading configurations should be validated for operational safety

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test reading template reuse across multiple SOPs
  • Type: Template Management
  • Rationale: Common readings should be reusable for efficiency
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test integration with field measurement devices
  • Type: Integration
  • Rationale: Ensure readings match field device capabilities
  • Priority: P2




Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_014

Title: Verify system calculates and displays SLA metrics for active SOPs with exemption tracking Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: Integration
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Api, Database, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Performance-Metrics, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-API-Test-Results, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-SLA-Calculation, Metrics-Dashboard

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: SLA Calculation Engine, Performance Metrics API, Dashboard Service
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
  • Report_Categories: Engineering, Quality-Dashboard, Performance-Metrics, Module-Coverage, API-Test-Results
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: Yes
  • Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, SLA calculation service, Performance metrics API
  • Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for SLA calculation, < 2 seconds for dashboard update
  • Data_Requirements: Active SOPs with defined SLAs and execution data

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Multiple active SOPs with different SLA values, execution history data
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with SLA monitoring permissions
  • Test_Data: SOPs with SLAs: 24h, 48h, 6h, 12h per user story sample data
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Multiple SOPs created and published successfully

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Master dashboard page

Dashboard loads with current SLA metrics displayed

Master page showing 4 key metrics cards

Verify AC11 - SLA metrics display

2

Locate "Avg Rules Duration" metric card

Metric shows calculated average SLA time

Current display: "8.4h" as shown in wireframe

Test SLA metric visibility

3

Verify SLA calculation methodology

Average calculated from all active SOPs

Base calculation: (Sum of SLA Times) / (Total SOPs)

Per BR8 - SLA calculation formula

4

Create new SOP with 24-hour SLA

SOP created with specific SLA configuration

SOP: "Water Meter Installation", SLA: 24 hours

Using sample data SLA value

5

Publish SOP and verify metric update

SLA metric recalculates with new SOP included

Metric updates to reflect new SOP in calculation

Test real-time SLA calculation

6

Create second SOP with 48-hour SLA

Second SOP with different SLA value

SOP: "Electric Meter Replacement", SLA: 48 hours

Per sample data SLA variation

7

Verify updated average calculation

Average SLA recalculates with both SOPs

Expected calculation: (24+48)/2 = 36 hours average

Test dynamic SLA averaging

8

Create third SOP with 6-hour SLA

Add SOP with shorter SLA timeframe

SOP: "Gas Leak Inspection", SLA: 6 hours

Following sample urgent SLA

9

Check three-SOP average calculation

Average incorporates all three SOP SLAs

Expected: (24+48+6)/3 = 26 hours average

Test multi-SOP averaging

10

Execute one SOP instance to generate completion data

SOP execution creates actual completion time

Execute "Gas Leak Inspection" with 5.5 hour completion

Test actual vs SLA tracking

11

Verify SLA compliance calculation

System calculates compliance rate

SLA met: 5.5h < 6h = compliant execution

Test compliance determination

12

Execute SOP exceeding SLA timeframe

Create SLA violation scenario

Execute "Water Meter Installation" with 26 hour completion (exceeds 24h SLA)

Test SLA violation tracking

13

Check exemption rate display

System shows exemption percentage

Exemption Rate: 5% (↓ 5%) as shown in wireframe

Per user story exemption tracking

14

Verify exemption calculation methodology

Exemptions calculated as percentage of total

Formula: (Exempted SOPs / Total SOPs) × 100

Test exemption rate calculation

15

Add SOP exemption for valid business reason

Mark SLA violation as exempt

Add exemption reason: "Equipment failure - beyond control"

Test exemption management

16

Verify exemption impact on calculations

Exempted SOPs excluded from SLA compliance rate

Compliance rate recalculates excluding exempted cases

Test exemption calculation logic

17

Create draft SOP and verify no impact

Draft SOPs don't affect SLA calculations

Create draft SOP - metrics unchanged

Test draft exclusion from calculations

18

Archive active SOP and check impact

Archived SOPs excluded from active calculations

Archive one SOP - average recalculates

Test archived SOP exclusion

19

Generate comprehensive SLA report

System provides detailed SLA performance data

Report shows: individual SOP performance, compliance rates, exemptions

Test comprehensive SLA reporting


Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: SLA metrics calculated correctly from active SOPs with proper exemption tracking and real-time updates
  • Secondary_Verifications: Exemption rates calculated accurately, draft/archived SOPs excluded from calculations
  • Negative_Verification: Invalid SLA data doesn't corrupt calculations, draft SOPs don't impact metrics

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: SOP creation and publication functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Performance reporting and analytics tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other metrics calculation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after SOP execution tracking tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for operational performance monitoring and SLA compliance tracking
  • Edge_Cases: Extremely long/short SLAs, timezone considerations, leap year calculations
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect SLA calculations could affect business performance reporting
  • Security_Considerations: SLA data should be protected from manipulation, audit trail required

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test SLA calculation with timezone differences
  • Type: Globalization
  • Rationale: Utility operations may span multiple timezones
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test SLA metric export and integration with external reporting systems
  • Type: Integration
  • Rationale: Management may need SLA data in external business intelligence tools
  • Priority: P2



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_015

Title: Verify Master page displays accurate Total SOPs, Active SOPs, Template Types, and Avg SLA metrics Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Dashboard-Metrics, UI-Verification

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Dashboard Service, Metrics Calculation, Database Query Engine
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Product
  • Report_Categories: Product, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Smoke-Test-Results, User-Acceptance
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: Yes
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Dashboard service, Metrics calculation engine
  • Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for dashboard load, < 1 second for metric updates
  • Data_Requirements: Known quantities of SOPs, templates, and SLA data from user story

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Existing SOPs and drafts in system, Master page accessible
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Any authenticated user with Master page access
  • Test_Data: Expected counts: 43 Total SOPs, 38 Active SOPs, 9 Template Types, 8.4h Avg SLA
  • Prior_Test_Cases: User authentication successful

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Master page from main menu

Master page loads with dashboard metrics section

Master dashboard with 4 metric cards displayed

Verify AC12 - key metrics display

2

Locate "Total SOPs" metric card

First metric card shows total SOP count

Metric displays "43" as shown in wireframe

Test total SOP counting per sample data

3

Verify Total SOPs description text

Card shows descriptive text explaining the metric

Description: "Standard Operating Procedures across all templates"

Test metric clarity and labeling

4

Check "Active SOPs" metric card

Second metric card shows active SOP count

Metric displays "38" as shown in wireframe

Test active SOP filtering per sample data

5

Verify Active SOPs description

Card explains active vs total distinction

Description: "SOPs currently in use and operational"

Test active status explanation

6

Locate "Template Types" metric card

Third metric card shows unique template categories

Metric displays "9" as shown in wireframe

Test template type counting per sample data

7

Check Template Types description

Card explains template categorization

Description: "Unique categories of SOP templates"

Test template type clarity

8

Find "Avg Rules Duration" metric card

Fourth metric card shows average SLA time

Metric displays "8.4h" as shown in wireframe

Test SLA averaging per sample data

9

Verify Avg Rules Duration description

Card explains SLA calculation methodology

Description: "Average processing time for rules execution"

Test SLA metric explanation

10

Create new active SOP and refresh dashboard

Metrics update to reflect new SOP creation

Total SOPs: 44, Active SOPs: 39 (both increment by 1)

Test real-time metric updates

11

Create draft SOP and verify impact

Draft affects total but not active count

Total SOPs: 45, Active SOPs: 39 (only total increments)

Test draft vs active distinction

12

Archive an active SOP and check metrics

Active count decreases, total remains same

Total SOPs: 45, Active SOPs: 38 (active decrements)

Test archival impact on metrics

13

Verify metric visual consistency

All metric cards have consistent styling and layout

Uniform card design, colors, fonts, spacing

Test UI design consistency

14

Check metric icons or visual indicators

Each metric has appropriate visual elements

Icons/colors that distinguish metric types

Test visual metric differentiation

15

Test metric responsiveness on smaller screens

Metrics adapt to different screen sizes

Cards remain readable and functional

Test responsive design behavior

16

Verify metric click behavior (if applicable)

Clicking metrics provides additional detail or navigation

Metric cards may link to detailed views

Test metric interactivity

17

Refresh page and verify metric persistence

Metrics load correctly after page refresh

All metric values remain accurate after reload

Test metric data persistence

18

Login as different user role and verify metrics

Same metrics visible across different user types

Consistent metric display regardless of user role

Test metric accessibility

19

Compare metrics with manual database count

Metrics match actual database record counts

Manual verification of counts against database

Test metric calculation accuracy

20

Verify metric update frequency

Metrics reflect recent changes within reasonable timeframe

Recent SOP changes reflected in dashboard

Test metric refresh timing

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: All four key metrics (Total SOPs, Active SOPs, Template Types, Avg SLA) display correctly with accurate counts
  • Secondary_Verifications: Metrics update in real-time, visual consistency maintained, proper labeling
  • Negative_Verification: Draft SOPs don't count as active, archived SOPs excluded from active count

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: User authentication, Master page access
  • Blocked_Tests: Detailed metrics and reporting tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other dashboard functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run before detailed SOP management tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical dashboard functionality providing operational overview to management
  • Edge_Cases: Very large SOP counts, empty system state, calculation edge cases
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect metrics could mislead operational decisions
  • Security_Considerations: Metrics should only show data user has permission to view

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test metric performance with very large datasets (1000+ SOPs)
  • Type: Performance
  • Rationale: Ensure dashboard scales with system growth
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test metric drilling down to detailed views
  • Type: User Experience
  • Rationale: Users may want to see SOP lists behind metrics
  • Priority: P4



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_016

Title: Verify Master page table displays version information with proper formatting and sorting Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Version-Control, UI-Table-Display

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: Low
  • Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: Low
  • Failure_Impact: Low

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Version Control System, Table Display Service, Sorting Engine
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Table rendering service, Version tracking system
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for table load, < 1 second for sorting
  • Data_Requirements: SOPs with various version numbers from user story sample data

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: SOPs with different version numbers, Master table accessible
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Any user with SOP viewing permissions
  • Test_Data: Version formats: v1, v22, v2 per wireframe sample data
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Master page access verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Master page SOP Templates tab

SOP Templates table loads with all column headers

Table displays with Version column visible

Verify AC13 - version column presence

2

Locate "Version" column in table header

Version column header is clearly visible and labeled

Column header shows "Version" text

Test version column identification

3

Check version format in first SOP row

Version displays in proper format (vX or vX.Y)

Example row shows "v22" as in wireframe

Test version formatting per sample data

4

Verify second SOP version format

Consistent version formatting across rows

Shows "v2" format

Test version format consistency

5

Check third SOP version display

Version format maintained for different numbers

Shows "v1" or similar format

Test version format for different values

6

Verify version column width and alignment

Column properly sized for version content

Version text fits within column width

Test version column design

7

Create new SOP to test initial version

New SOP should start with version v1

Create SOP - verify initial version assignment

Test initial version numbering

8

Edit existing SOP to test version increment

Version should increment upon modification

Edit SOP content - version updates to next number

Test version increment logic

9

Click Version column header to test sorting

Table sorts by version number (ascending)

Versions sort: v1, v2, v22 (numerical order)

Test version sorting functionality

10

Click Version header again for descending sort

Table sorts by version (descending order)

Versions sort: v22, v2, v1 (reverse numerical)

Test reverse version sorting

11

Compare version sorting with other columns

Version sorting works independently

Version sort doesn't affect other column data

Test sorting independence

12

Verify version persistence after page refresh

Version numbers remain consistent after reload

Page refresh maintains version values

Test version data persistence

13

Check version display in search results

Filtered results show version column correctly

Search for SOP - version column visible in results

Test version display in filtered view

14

Verify version in SOP detail view

SOP details page shows version information

Click SOP name - detail view includes version

Test version in detailed view

15

Test version with double-digit numbers

System handles higher version numbers properly

Create SOP with v10+ version number

Test multi-digit version handling

16

Check version column in different screen sizes

Version column adapts to responsive design

Resize browser - version column remains functional

Test responsive version display

17

Verify version tooltip or help text

Additional version information available if applicable

Hover over version - tooltip may show additional info

Test version help features

18

Test version accessibility features

Version column accessible via keyboard navigation

Tab navigation includes version column

Test version accessibility

19

Compare version display across user roles

Version information consistent for different users

Login as different role - same version data

Test version visibility consistency

20

Verify version in exported data

Version information included in data exports if available

Export table data - version column included

Test version in export functionality

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Version column displays in table with proper formatting (vX format) and accurate version tracking
  • Secondary_Verifications: Version sorting works correctly, versions increment properly on edits
  • Negative_Verification: Version cannot be manually edited by users, version format remains consistent

Test Results (Template):

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

Execution Analytics:

  • Execution_Frequency: Weekly
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships:

  • Blocking_Tests: Master table display functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Version control and SOP modification tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other table functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic table display tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Important for tracking SOP changes and maintaining change history
  • Edge_Cases: Very high version numbers, rapid version changes, concurrent editing
  • Risk_Areas: Version tracking failures could cause confusion about SOP currency
  • Security_Considerations: Version information should reflect actual SOP state, prevent version manipulation

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test version rollback functionality if available
  • Type: Version Control
  • Rationale: Users may need to revert to previous SOP versions
  • Priority: P4
  • Scenario_2: Test version comparison between different SOP versions
  • Type: Version Management
  • Rationale: Track changes between SOP versions
  • Priority: P4



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_017

Title: Verify no filter options are available in Draft Templates section per business requirements Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P3-Medium, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Low, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Filter-Management, UI-Restriction

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Filter Service, UI Component Management, Draft Display System
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Draft management system, Filter service
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for tab switching
  • Data_Requirements: Multiple draft SOPs for testing, active SOPs with filters for comparison

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Existing draft SOPs in system, SOP Templates with filter functionality
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Any user with Master page access
  • Test_Data: Draft count showing "4" per wireframe, active SOPs with filter options
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Draft creation functionality verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Master page

Master page loads with both SOP Templates and Draft Templates tabs

Page shows tab structure with counts: SOP Templates (40), Draft Templates (4)

Establish baseline tab view

2

Verify initial tab state shows SOP Templates

SOP Templates tab is active by default with filter options visible

"Show Filters" button visible in SOP Templates section

Confirm filters available in main templates

3

Check SOP Templates filter functionality

Filter controls are accessible and functional

"Show Filters" button clickable, filter panel opens

Verify filters work in main section

4

Note filter options in SOP Templates

Document available filter types for comparison

Filters include: Utility Type, Priority, Status options

Establish filter baseline for comparison

5

Click Draft Templates tab to switch sections

Draft Templates section becomes active

Tab switches to Draft Templates (4), showing draft listing

Test AC14 - draft section access

6

Look for "Show Filters" button in Draft Templates

No "Show Filters" button present in draft section

Button absent from draft interface

Verify AC14 - no filter button in drafts

7

Check for any filter controls in draft section

No filter dropdowns, checkboxes, or filter UI elements visible

Draft section lacks filter controls entirely

Test complete filter absence

8

Search for hidden or collapsed filter options

No hidden filter functionality available

Inspect interface - no filter elements found

Ensure no hidden filter access

9

Check table header for filter capabilities

Draft table headers don't include filter dropdowns

Column headers are simple text without filter controls

Test table-level filter absence

10

Verify search functionality availability

Search may be available without advanced filtering

Search box present for basic name searching only

Test search vs filter distinction

11

Compare Draft Templates interface with SOP Templates

Clear difference in filtering capabilities

SOP Templates has filters, Draft Templates does not

Verify deliberate filter restriction

12

Test right-click context menu for filters

No filter options in context menus

Right-click on draft - no filter-related menu items

Test contextual filter absence

13

Check for filter-related keyboard shortcuts

No filter shortcuts work in draft section

Standard filter hotkeys don't activate

Test keyboard filter restrictions

14

Verify column sorting availability

Basic sorting may be available without filtering

Column headers may allow sorting without filtering

Test sort vs filter distinction

15

Create additional drafts and verify no filter needs

Multiple drafts display without filter requirements

All drafts visible in simple list format

Test filter necessity with more drafts

16

Switch back to SOP Templates to confirm filters return

Filter functionality restored in main templates

"Show Filters" button returns when switching back

Verify filter availability toggle

17

Test browser developer tools for hidden filters

No filter-related code present in draft section

Inspect DOM - draft section lacks filter components

Technical verification of filter absence

18

Verify URL parameters don't add filters to drafts

Filter URL parameters ignored in draft section

URL with filter params doesn't affect draft display

Test URL-based filter restrictions

19

Check user permissions for filter access

No user role can access filters in draft section

Test different user roles - no draft filters available

Test permission-based filter restrictions

20

Document filter absence for compliance

Confirm AC14 requirement fully met

Draft section completely lacks filter functionality

Final verification of requirement compliance

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: No filter options (buttons, dropdowns, controls) available anywhere in Draft Templates section
  • Secondary_Verifications: Clear distinction from SOP Templates which has filters, search functionality may be separate from filtering
  • Negative_Verification: No hidden, keyboard, URL-based, or permission-based filter access in drafts

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: Draft creation and display functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Draft management workflow tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other UI restriction tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after filter functionality tests in main templates

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Business requirement to keep draft interface simple without filtering complexity
  • Edge_Cases: Large numbers of drafts, complex draft names, special characters in drafts
  • Risk_Areas: Accidental filter implementation could confuse draft management workflow
  • Security_Considerations: Filter restrictions should be enforced consistently across user roles

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test filter restriction with very large numbers of drafts
  • Type: Scalability
  • Rationale: Verify filter absence remains practical with many drafts
  • Priority: P4
  • Scenario_2: Test accessibility compliance without filter options
  • Type: Accessibility
  • Rationale: Ensure draft section remains accessible without filters
  • Priority: P4



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_018

Title: Verify users can filter SOPs by utility type, priority, and status with accurate results Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • 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 Services, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Filter-Engine, Search-Functionality

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: 15 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: Low
  • Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Filter Engine, Search Service, Database Query System
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Filter service, Database query engine
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for filter application, < 1 second for filter clearing
  • Data_Requirements: SOPs with various utility types, priorities, and statuses from sample data

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: SOPs with different attributes for filtering, filter functionality enabled
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Any user with SOP viewing permissions
  • Test_Data: SOPs with utilities: Water, Electricity, Gas; Priorities: High, Medium, Low; Statuses: Active
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Templates display functionality verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Master SOP Templates tab

SOP Templates listing loads with all SOPs visible

Full SOP list displayed with "Show Filters" button

Verify AC15 - filter access point

2

Click "Show Filters" button

Filter panel opens with available filter categories

Filter panel shows: Utility Type, Priority, Status options

Test filter panel activation

3

Check Utility Type filter options

Dropdown shows all available utility types

Options: Water, Electricity, Gas, HVAC, Other

Test utility type filter availability

4

Select "Water" from Utility Type filter

Table filters to show only Water utility SOPs

Table displays SOPs with Utility: Water only

Test utility type filtering per sample data

5

Verify filtered results accuracy

All displayed SOPs have Water utility type

Check each SOP row - all show "Water" in utility column

Test filter result accuracy

6

Check result count after utility filter

Table shows reduced count matching filter criteria

Result count reflects filtered dataset

Test filter count display

7

Clear utility filter and test Priority filter

Filter panel resets, access Priority filter options

Priority dropdown shows: High, Medium, Low options

Test filter clearing and priority access

8

Select "High" priority filter

Table shows only high priority SOPs

Table displays SOPs with Priority: High only

Test priority filtering functionality

9

Verify priority filter results

All displayed SOPs have High priority designation

Check priority column - all show "High" priority

Test priority filter accuracy

10

Test Status filter options

Status dropdown shows available status values

Options include: Active, Draft, Archived statuses

Test status filter availability

11

Select "Active" status filter

Table shows only active SOPs

Table displays SOPs with Status: Active only

Test status filtering per AC15

12

Apply multiple filters simultaneously

Combine Utility=Water AND Priority=High filters

Table shows SOPs matching both criteria

Test combined filter logic

13

Verify multi-filter results

Results match all applied filter criteria

SOPs show Water utility AND High priority

Test filter intersection logic

14

Add third filter to combination

Apply Water + High + Active filters

Table shows SOPs matching all three criteria

Test complex filter combinations

15

Check "no results" scenario

Apply filters with no matching SOPs

Empty table or "No results found" message

Test empty filter results handling

16

Test filter persistence during navigation

Apply filters, navigate away, return to check persistence

Filters may reset or persist based on design

Test filter state management

17

Clear all filters at once

Use "Clear All" or individual filter clearing

All filters removed, full SOP list restored

Test filter reset functionality

18

Test filter with search combination

Apply filter and search term together

Results match both filter criteria and search# SMART360 SOP Management System - Enhanced Test Cases 11-20



Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: All three filter types (utility, priority, status) work correctly individually and in combination
  • Secondary_Verifications: Filter results are accurate, counts update properly, filters can be cleared
  • Negative_Verification: Invalid filter combinations handled gracefully, empty results displayed appropriately

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: SOP Templates display functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced search and reporting tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other search functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic SOP listing tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for users to efficiently find relevant SOPs in large datasets
  • Edge_Cases: Special characters in filter values, concurrent filter changes, filter with no data
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect filtering could cause users to miss important SOPs
  • Security_Considerations: Filters should respect user permissions and data access rights

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test filter performance with thousands of SOPs
  • Type: Performance
  • Rationale: Ensure filters scale with system growth
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test saved filter preferences for users
  • Type: User Experience
  • Rationale: Users may want to save frequently used filter combinations
  • Priority: P4



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_019

Title: Verify system tracks usage count for each SOP template with accurate increment tracking Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: Integration
  • Priority: P2-High
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Api, Database, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Performance-Metrics, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-API-Test-Results, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Usage-Tracking, Analytics-Data

Business Context:

  • Customer_Segment: Enterprise
  • 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: 18 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: Medium
  • Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Usage Tracking Service, Analytics Engine, Field Operations Module
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
  • Report_Categories: Engineering, Performance-Metrics, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, API-Test-Results
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Usage tracking service, Field operations integration
  • Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for usage increment, < 2 seconds for display update
  • Data_Requirements: SOPs with existing usage data per wireframe sample

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Integration with field operations module, usage tracking enabled
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Field operations execution permissions for testing usage increments
  • Test_Data: SOPs with various usage counts: 0 times, 1 times per wireframe sample data
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP creation and field integration verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Master SOP Templates table

Table loads with Usage Count column visible

Table shows Usage Count column with current values

Verify AC16 - usage count display

2

Check existing usage counts in table

Various SOPs show different usage counts

Examples: "0 times", "1 times" as shown in wireframe

Test current usage tracking display

3

Identify newly created SOP with zero usage

Find SOP that hasn't been executed yet

New SOP shows "0 times" in Usage Count column

Establish baseline for usage tracking

4

Note specific SOP for usage testing

Document SOP details for execution tracking

SOP ID: 208, Name: "S/O services check 1", Current Usage: "1 times"

Using sample data from wireframe

5

Simulate SOP execution through field operations

Execute SOP via field operations module (simulation or integration)

Field technician completes SOP instance

Test field operations integration

6

Return to Master table and refresh

Check if usage count incremented after execution

Usage Count should increase by 1

Test usage increment tracking

7

Verify usage count accuracy

Usage count reflects actual SOP execution

SOP 208 usage changes from "1 times" to "2 times"

Test accurate usage counting

8

Execute same SOP multiple times

Perform 3 additional SOP executions

Execute SOP 3 more times in succession

Test multiple usage increments

9

Check cumulative usage count

Usage count reflects all executions

Usage Count shows "5 times" (1+1+3)

Test cumulative usage tracking

10

Test different SOP usage tracking

Execute different SOP to test independent tracking

Execute SOP with "0 times" usage

Test independent SOP usage tracking

11

Verify independent usage counts

Each SOP tracks usage independently

First SOP: "5 times", Second SOP: "1 times"

Test separate usage counters per SOP

12

Execute SOP with higher volume

Perform 10 executions of same SOP rapidly

Execute SOP 10 times in quick succession

Test high-volume usage tracking

13

Verify high-volume count accuracy

Usage count accurately reflects all executions

Usage Count shows correct total (previous + 10)

Test bulk usage increment accuracy

14

Check usage count persistence

Usage counts persist across user sessions

Logout/login - usage counts remain accurate

Test usage data persistence

15

Test usage count in SOP detail view

Individual SOP details show usage information

Click SOP name - detail view includes usage count

Test usage display in detail view

16

Verify usage count format consistency

All usage counts display in consistent format

Format: "X times" throughout interface

Test usage display formatting

17

Test usage count with draft SOPs

Draft SOPs should not increment usage counts

Execute draft SOP (if possible) - no usage increment

Test draft exclusion from usage tracking

18

Check usage count in reporting

Usage data available for reporting and analytics

Generate usage report - counts match table display

Test usage data in reporting systems

19

Test usage count sorting

Table can be sorted by usage count

Click Usage Count column header - table sorts by usage

Test usage-based sorting functionality

20

Verify usage count with archived SOPs

Archived SOPs retain historical usage data but don't increment

Archive SOP - usage count preserved but no new increments

Test usage tracking with archived SOPs

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Usage count accurately tracks SOP executions and increments with each use
  • Secondary_Verifications: Counts persist across sessions, independent tracking per SOP, consistent display format
  • Negative_Verification: Draft SOPs don't increment usage, archived SOPs don't get new usage increments

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: SOP creation, field operations integration
  • Blocked_Tests: Usage analytics and reporting tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other analytics tracking tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after field operations integration tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Important for understanding SOP adoption and identifying popular procedures
  • Edge_Cases: Extremely high usage counts, concurrent executions, system failures during tracking
  • Risk_Areas: Inaccurate usage data could affect operational decisions and SOP optimization
  • Security_Considerations: Usage data should be tamper-proof and auditable

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test usage tracking with failed SOP executions
  • Type: Error Handling
  • Rationale: Determine if incomplete executions count toward usage
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test usage count reset or correction functionality
  • Type: Data Management
  • Rationale: Admin may need to correct usage counts in some scenarios
  • Priority: P4



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_020

Title: Verify field feedback mechanisms are available for continuous SOP improvement Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: Integration
  • Priority: P3-Medium
  • Execution Phase: Acceptance
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Api, MOD-Master, P3-Medium, Phase-Acceptance, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Customer-Segment-Analysis, Report-Module-Coverage, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Feedback-System, Continuous-Improvement

Business Context:

  • Customer_Segment: Enterprise
  • Revenue_Impact: Low
  • Business_Priority: Could-Have
  • Customer_Journey: Support
  • Compliance_Required: No
  • SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Feedback System, Field Operations Module, Notification Service
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Feedback service, Field operations integration
  • Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for feedback submission, < 2 seconds for feedback display
  • Data_Requirements: Published SOPs available for feedback testing

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Feedback system enabled, field user access configured
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Field Technician role for feedback submission, Operations Manager for feedback review
  • Test_Data: Published SOPs available for feedback collection
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP publication and field operations integration verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Access SOP detail view from Master listing

Individual SOP details page loads

Click on SOP name from Master table

Verify AC17 - feedback mechanism access

2

Look for feedback section or mechanism

Feedback interface visible and accessible

Feedback form, rating system, or comment section present

Test feedback availability

3

Login as Field Technician role

Switch to field user perspective for feedback

User: technician@samoawater.com

Test field user feedback access

4

Submit positive feedback on SOP

Feedback form accepts positive input

Rating: 5 stars, Comment: "Clear instructions, easy to follow. Safety protocols well-defined."

Test positive feedback submission

5

Verify feedback submission confirmation

System confirms feedback received

Success message: "Feedback submitted successfully"

Test feedback confirmation

6

Submit improvement suggestion

System accepts constructive feedback

Comment: "Consider adding checklist for final verification step to ensure completion quality."

Test improvement suggestion capability

7

Login as different field technician

Test feedback from multiple field users

User: technician2@samoawater.com

Test multi-user feedback collection

8

Submit different feedback on same SOP

Multiple feedback entries supported

Rating: 4 stars, Comment: "Good procedure but timing estimates could be more accurate."

Test multiple feedback aggregation

9

Return to Operations Manager view

Switch to management perspective

User: ops.manager@samoawater.com

Test feedback review access

10

View feedback summary in SOP details

Aggregated feedback visible to managers

SOP detail page shows feedback summary with average rating

Test feedback display and aggregation

11

Check feedback analytics

System provides feedback metrics

Average rating, total feedback count, recent comments

Test feedback analytics capability

12

Submit feedback with rating only

Rating-only feedback accepted

3-star rating without written comment

Test flexible feedback options

13

Submit detailed feedback with suggestions

Comprehensive feedback form completion

Rating: 4 stars, Comment: "Excellent safety coverage. Suggest adding video link for equipment operation demonstration."

Test detailed feedback capability

14

Test feedback notifications

Relevant users notified of new feedback

SOP creators/managers receive feedback notifications

Test feedback notification system

15

Check feedback in reporting

Feedback data available in system reports

Generate SOP feedback report - data included

Test feedback reporting integration

16

Verify feedback history tracking

Historical feedback preserved and accessible

Previous feedback entries remain visible over time

Test feedback history management

17

Test feedback moderation (if applicable)

Inappropriate feedback can be managed

Submit test inappropriate feedback - moderation response

Test feedback content management

18

Check feedback impact on SOP improvements

Feedback influences SOP updates or flagging

High negative feedback flags SOP for review

Test feedback-driven improvement process

19

Verify feedback accessibility

Feedback system accessible via assistive technologies

Test with screen reader - feedback form accessible

Test feedback accessibility compliance

20

Test feedback export functionality

Feedback data can be exported for analysis

Export feedback data - comprehensive dataset available

Test feedback data portability

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Field feedback mechanisms are functional and accessible for continuous SOP improvement
  • Secondary_Verifications: Feedback aggregated and reported, notifications work, multiple users can contribute
  • Negative_Verification: Inappropriate feedback can be managed, unauthorized users cannot access feedback data

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: SOP publication, user role management
  • Blocked_Tests: SOP improvement workflow tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other feedback system tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after field operations integration tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Important for continuous improvement and maintaining SOP quality based on field experience
  • Edge_Cases: Anonymous feedback, bulk feedback, feedback on archived SOPs
  • Risk_Areas: Inadequate feedback collection could prevent SOP optimization
  • Security_Considerations: Feedback should be attributed properly, sensitive feedback protected

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test feedback integration with SOP version control
  • Type: Integration
  • Rationale: Feedback should track to specific SOP versions
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test automated feedback reminders for field technicians
  • Type: User Engagement
  • Rationale: Encourage regular feedback collection
  • Priority: P4| 20 | Verify metric persistence across user sessions | SLA metrics remain consistent across different user logins | Login as different user - same SLA metrics displayed | Test metric consistency and persistence |

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: SLA metrics calculated correctly from active SOPs with proper exemption tracking and real-time updates
  • Secondary_Verifications: Exemption rates calculated accurately, draft/archived SOPs excluded from calculations
  • Negative_Verification: Invalid SLA data doesn't corrupt calculations, draft SOPs don't impact metrics

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: SOP creation and publication functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Performance reporting and analytics tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other metrics calculation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after SOP execution tracking tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for operational performance monitoring and SLA compliance tracking
  • Edge_Cases: Extremely long/short SLAs, timezone considerations, leap year calculations
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect SLA calculations could affect business performance reporting
  • Security_Considerations: SLA data should be protected from manipulation, audit trail required

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test SLA calculation with timezone differences
  • Type: Globalization
  • Rationale: Utility operations may span multiple timezones
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test SLA metric export and integration with external reporting systems
  • Type: Integration
  • Rationale: Management may need SLA data in external business intelligence tools
  • Priority: P2





Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_021

Title: Verify system supports attachment of reference materials and help documentation with multiple file types Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-File-Management, Documentation-Support

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: 15 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: Medium
  • Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: File Management System, Content Storage, Document Viewer
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, File storage service, Document management system
  • Performance_Baseline: < 10 seconds for file upload, < 3 seconds for file access
  • Data_Requirements: Various file types for attachment testing (PDF, DOC, JPG, MP4, etc.)

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: File upload functionality enabled, adequate storage space
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with document attachment permissions
  • Test_Data: Sample files: Safety manual (PDF), Equipment diagram (JPG), Training video (MP4), Procedure document (DOC)
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder Step 6 Help & Resources access verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Step 6 Help & Resources in SOP Builder

Help & Resources interface loads with attachment capabilities

Step 6 active with resource management options

Verify AC18 - reference materials access

2

Click "Add Resource" and select "File" type

File upload interface appears for document attachment

Resource Type: File, file selection interface opens

Test file attachment option

3

Upload PDF safety manual

PDF file uploads successfully with progress indicator

Upload: "Water-Safety-Manual.pdf" (2.5MB)

Test PDF document support

4

Add resource name and description for PDF

Metadata fields accept descriptive information

Resource Name: "Comprehensive Water Safety Manual", Description: "Complete safety guidelines for water utility operations"

Test file metadata capability

5

Save PDF resource attachment

PDF resource saved and appears in resource list

Resource listed with file icon and download link

Test PDF resource persistence

6

Upload image file for equipment diagram

Image file uploads and displays correctly

Upload: "Meter-Installation-Diagram.jpg" (1.2MB)

Test image file support per AC18

7

Configure image resource details

Image resource metadata completed

Resource Name: "Meter Installation Visual Guide", Description: "Step-by-step visual installation guide"

Test image resource configuration

8

Upload video training file

Video file uploads with appropriate handling

Upload: "Safety-Training-Video.mp4" (25MB)

Test video file support

9

Set video resource information

Video resource properly configured

Resource Name: "Field Safety Training", Description: "Comprehensive safety training for field operations"

Test video resource setup

10

Upload Microsoft Word document

DOC/DOCX file uploads successfully

Upload: "Emergency-Procedures.docx" (800KB)

Test document file support

11

Test file size validation

System handles various file sizes appropriately

Upload files ranging from 100KB to 50MB

Test file size limits and validation

12

Upload Excel spreadsheet with data

Excel file uploads and is accessible

Upload: "Equipment-Checklist.xlsx" (400KB)

Test spreadsheet file support

13

Test unsupported file type rejection

System rejects inappropriate file types

Attempt upload: "test-script.exe" (should be rejected)

Test file type validation

14

Verify file accessibility from SOP

Attached files can be accessed and downloaded

Click file links - files open/download correctly

Test file access functionality

15

Check file preview capability

System provides file preview where possible

Preview PDF and image files in browser

Test file preview features

16

Test file replacement functionality

Existing files can be updated with new versions

Replace safety manual with updated version

Test file version management

17

Upload multiple files simultaneously

Bulk file upload works correctly

Upload 3 files at once using multi-select

Test batch file upload

18

Verify file organization and categorization

Files organized logically in resource list

Files grouped by type or category

Test file organization

19

Test file deletion capability

Files can be removed from resource list

Delete one uploaded file, confirm removal

Test file removal functionality

20

Check file security and access control

Files accessible only to authorized users

Verify file access requires proper authentication

Test file security measures

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Various file types (PDF, DOC, JPG, MP4, XLS) can be uploaded and attached as reference materials
  • Secondary_Verifications: File metadata can be configured, files are accessible and downloadable, file organization works
  • Negative_Verification: Inappropriate file types rejected, file size limits enforced, 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: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships:

  • Blocking_Tests: SOP Builder Help & Resources step access
  • Blocked_Tests: File management and document workflow tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other file handling tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic resource management tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for providing comprehensive documentation support to field technicians
  • Edge_Cases: Very large files, corrupted files, special characters in filenames, network interruptions during upload
  • Risk_Areas: File storage failures could prevent documentation access, security vulnerabilities in file handling
  • Security_Considerations: File uploads should be scanned for malware, access should be role-based

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test file versioning and change tracking
  • Type: Version Control
  • Rationale: Users may need to track document changes over time
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test file compression and storage optimization
  • Type: Performance
  • Rationale: Large files may impact system performance
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_022

Title: Verify users can define required fieldforce count for accurate resource planning and scheduling Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Resource-Planning, Workforce-Management

Business Context:

  • Customer_Segment: Enterprise
  • Revenue_Impact: High
  • Business_Priority: Should-Have
  • Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
  • Compliance_Required: Yes
  • SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Resource Planning System, Workforce Management, Scheduling Engine
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Resource planning service, Workforce management system
  • Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for field updates, < 2 seconds for calculation
  • Data_Requirements: Fieldforce count data from user story sample data (2-4 technicians per SOP)

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Resource planning integration enabled, fieldforce management configured
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with resource planning permissions
  • Test_Data: SOP configurations requiring different fieldforce counts per sample data
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder Step 1 Basic Information access verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Step 1 Basic Information in SOP Builder

Basic Information form loads with all configuration fields

SOP creation interface with fieldforce count field

Verify AC19 - fieldforce count field presence

2

Locate "Required Fieldforce Count" field

Field visible and accessible in basic information section

Field labeled "Required Fieldforce Count" with numeric input

Test fieldforce count field identification

3

Check field help text or description

Field includes descriptive text explaining purpose

Description: "Number of field personnel needed" or similar

Test field clarity and guidance

4

Enter minimum fieldforce count

Field accepts minimum valid value

Required Fieldforce Count: 1

Test minimum value acceptance per AC19

5

Test field validation for numeric input only

Field validates numeric input and rejects text

Try entering: "two" - validation error expected

Test input validation

6

Enter typical fieldforce count for water meter installation

Field accepts standard operational value

Required Fieldforce Count: 2

Using sample data from user story (Water Meter Installation - 2 technicians)

7

Configure higher fieldforce count for complex operations

Field accepts larger team requirements

Required Fieldforce Count: 4

Using sample data (Water Main Repair - 4 technicians)

8

Test maximum reasonable fieldforce count

Field accepts high but reasonable values

Required Fieldforce Count: 10

Test upper boundary validation

9

Attempt to enter zero or negative values

Field rejects invalid values with appropriate error

Try: 0 and -1 - validation errors expected

Test negative value validation

10

Complete SOP creation with fieldforce count

SOP saves with specified fieldforce requirement

Complete SOP with 3 technicians requirement

Test fieldforce count persistence

11

Navigate to Master page and verify display

Fieldforce count appears in SOP listing

Master table shows fieldforce count in SOP details

Test fieldforce count display in listing

12

Access SOP detail view

Individual SOP shows fieldforce requirement clearly

Detail view displays: "2 field technicians"

Test fieldforce count in detail view per wireframe

13

Create second SOP with different fieldforce count

Different SOP gets appropriate fieldforce setting

SOP: "Gas Leak Inspection" - 3 technicians

Test independent fieldforce configuration

14

Check resource planning integration

Fieldforce count used for scheduling and planning

Planning system recognizes fieldforce requirements

Test integration with resource planning

15

Verify fieldforce count in work order assignment

Count influences work order creation and assignment

Work orders reflect fieldforce requirements

Test workforce management integration

16

Edit existing SOP fieldforce count

Fieldforce requirement can be modified after creation

Change from 2 to 3 technicians

Test fieldforce count modification

17

Check impact of fieldforce count on SLA calculation

Higher fieldforce counts may affect resource allocation

Verify SLA considers fieldforce requirements

Test SLA and resource planning relationship

18

Test fieldforce count aggregation in reporting

Reports show fieldforce requirements across SOPs

Generate resource planning report

Test fieldforce count in reporting

19

Verify fieldforce count validation during SOP execution

Field operations respect fieldforce requirements

Execution requires specified number of technicians

Test fieldforce enforcement in operations

20

Check fieldforce count consistency across system modules

Count displays consistently in all relevant interfaces

Master, Planning, Execution modules show same count

Test cross-module consistency

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Required fieldforce count can be defined and saved for each SOP with proper validation
  • Secondary_Verifications: Count integrates with resource planning, displays consistently across interfaces
  • Negative_Verification: Invalid values (zero, negative, non-numeric) properly rejected

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: SOP Builder basic configuration
  • Blocked_Tests: Resource planning and workforce management tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other resource configuration tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run before resource planning integration tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for accurate resource allocation and preventing understaffed field operations
  • Edge_Cases: Very large teams, specialized skill requirements, overtime considerations
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect fieldforce counts could cause service delays or safety issues
  • Security_Considerations: Fieldforce requirements should be validated against organizational capacity

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test fieldforce count with skill-based requirements
  • Type: Advanced Functionality
  • Rationale: Different technicians may have different specializations
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test fieldforce count optimization recommendations
  • Type: Intelligence Features
  • Rationale: System could suggest optimal team sizes based on historical data
  • Priority: P4



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_023

Title: Verify published SOPs are visible to authorized users based on role-based permissions and access control Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Api, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Acceptance, Type-Security, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Security-Validation, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Customer-Segment-Analysis, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Authentication, Role-Based-Access

Business Context:

  • Customer_Segment: Enterprise
  • Revenue_Impact: Medium
  • Business_Priority: Must-Have
  • Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
  • Compliance_Required: Yes
  • SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Authentication Service, Authorization Engine, Role Management System
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Authentication service, Role management system
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for role validation, < 3 seconds for page load
  • Data_Requirements: Multiple user accounts with different roles and permissions

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Role-based access control configured, multiple user accounts created
  • User_Roles_Permissions: IT Administrator, Operations Manager, Supervisor, Field Technician roles configured
  • Test_Data: Published SOPs, user accounts per role defined in user story
  • Prior_Test_Cases: User authentication and role assignment verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Login as IT Administrator

Full system access with administrative privileges

User: admin@samoawater.com, Role: IT Administrator

Verify AC20 - IT Administrator access level

2

Access Master page as IT Administrator

Complete SOP listing visible with all management functions

All SOPs visible, Create SOP button available

Test IT Administrator SOP visibility

3

Verify IT Administrator can create/modify SOPs

Full CRUD operations available for SOPs

Can create, edit, delete, publish SOPs

Test IT Administrator permissions

4

Logout and login as Operations Manager

Operations Manager role access level

User: ops.manager@samoawater.com, Role: Operations Manager

Test Operations Manager authentication

5

Check Operations Manager SOP visibility

Can view and manage SOPs with operational oversight

All published SOPs visible, management functions available

Test Operations Manager permissions per user story

6

Verify Operations Manager can access Master metrics

Dashboard metrics and analytics accessible

Can view SLA metrics, performance data, operational insights

Test Operations Manager dashboard access

7

Test Operations Manager SOP creation capabilities

Can create and publish new SOPs

Create SOP button available, full wizard access

Test Operations Manager creation permissions

8

Logout and login as Supervisor

Supervisor role access and permissions

User: supervisor@samoawater.com, Role: Supervisor

Test Supervisor authentication

9

Check Supervisor SOP access level

Can view and assign SOPs with team management focus

Published SOPs visible, assignment capabilities available

Test Supervisor permissions per user story

10

Verify Supervisor can manage work order templates

Template management and workflow assignment access

Can configure templates, assign to team members

Test Supervisor workflow management

11

Test Supervisor SOP modification rights

Can edit SOPs within scope of authority

Edit access for SOPs, may have restrictions on certain fields

Test Supervisor modification permissions

12

Logout and login as Field Technician

Field Technician limited access level

User: technician@samoawater.com, Role: Field Technician

Test Field Technician authentication

13

Check Field Technician SOP visibility

Can view SOPs for execution but not modification

Published SOPs visible in read-only mode

Test Field Technician read-only access per user story

14

Verify Field Technician cannot create SOPs

Create SOP functionality not available

Create SOP button hidden or disabled

Test Field Technician creation restrictions

15

Test Field Technician execution access

Can execute SOPs through field operations interface

Access to SOP execution, feedback submission

Test Field Technician operational access

16

Attempt unauthorized access with Field Technician role

Administrative functions not accessible

Cannot access user management, system configuration

Test Field Technician access restrictions

17

Test role transition scenarios

Role changes reflect immediately in permissions

Change user role - permissions update accordingly

Test dynamic role enforcement

18

Verify session timeout and re-authentication

Session security maintained across role checks

Session expires appropriately, re-login required

Test session security

19

Test cross-role data consistency

Same SOPs visible consistently across appropriate roles

All authorized roles see same published SOPs

Test data consistency across roles

20

Verify audit trail for role-based access

Access attempts logged for security monitoring

Login attempts, permission checks logged

Test access auditing

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Published SOPs visible to authorized users based on their specific role permissions
  • Secondary_Verifications: Role restrictions properly enforced, unauthorized access prevented, session security maintained
  • Negative_Verification: Users cannot access functions outside their role permissions, unauthorized actions blocked

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: User authentication and role management setup
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced security and compliance tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other security validation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic authentication tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for maintaining data security and ensuring users only access appropriate SOPs
  • Edge_Cases: Role changes during active sessions, concurrent logins, expired permissions
  • Risk_Areas: Security breach could expose sensitive operational procedures
  • Security_Considerations: Role-based access should be consistently enforced across all system interfaces

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test role-based SOP visibility with organizational hierarchy
  • Type: Advanced Security
  • Rationale: Users may need access based on organizational structure
  • Priority: P2
  • Scenario_2: Test temporary role elevation for emergency situations
  • Type: Emergency Access
  • Rationale: Critical situations may require temporary permission elevation
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_024

Title: Verify system supports complete SOP lifecycle management with draft, active, and archived status transitions Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Database, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Lifecycle-Management, State-Management

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: State Management Engine, Workflow Controller, Database Update Service
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, State management service, Workflow engine
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for status transitions, < 3 seconds for state validation
  • Data_Requirements: SOPs in various lifecycle states for testing transitions

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: SOP lifecycle management enabled, state transition rules configured
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with full SOP lifecycle management permissions
  • Test_Data: SOPs in different states: draft, active, archived per system design
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP creation and publication functionality verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Create new SOP and save as draft

SOP created with "draft" status

SOP Name: "Emergency Response Protocol", Status: Draft

Verify AC21 - draft status creation

2

Verify draft status display in listing

Draft appears in Draft Templates with correct status indicator

Draft Templates section shows SOP with "draft" status badge

Test draft status visibility

3

Check draft status properties

Draft SOP has appropriate restrictions and capabilities

Can edit, cannot execute, not counted in active metrics

Test draft state behavior

4

Complete draft SOP and publish

Draft transitions to "active" status upon publication

Complete all wizard steps, click "Create SOP"

Test draft to active transition

5

Verify active status in Master listing

Published SOP appears in SOP Templates with "active" status

SOP Templates section shows SOP with "Active" status indicator

Test active status display per wireframe

6

Check active status properties

Active SOP has full operational capabilities

Can execute, appears in field operations, counts in metrics

Test active state behavior

7

Test active SOP execution capabilities

Active SOPs can be assigned and executed

Assign SOP to field technician, execute successfully

Test active SOP operational usage

8

Initiate SOP archival process

Active SOP can be archived when no longer needed

Right-click SOP or use Archive action

Test active to archived transition

9

Verify archived status transition

SOP status changes from "active" to "archived"

Status indicator updates to "Archived"

Test archival process completion

10

Check archived status display

Archived SOP shows appropriate status and restrictions

Status badge shows "Archived", limited actions available

Test archived status visibility

11

Verify archived SOP properties

Archived SOPs have read-only access with historical data preserved

Cannot execute, data preserved, not in active counts

Test archived state behavior

12

Test invalid status transitions

System prevents inappropriate status changes

Cannot directly transition draft to archived

Test status transition validation

13

Check status transition audit trail

All status changes logged with timestamps and user information

Audit log shows: Created → Draft → Active → Archived with details

Test lifecycle audit tracking

14

Verify metric impact of status changes

Dashboard metrics reflect status transitions correctly

Active count decreases when SOP archived, draft count changes

Test status impact on metrics

15

Test status-based filtering

Can filter SOPs by status in listing

Filter by "Active" shows only active SOPs

Test status-based filtering functionality

16

Create multiple SOPs in different states

System handles various SOPs in different lifecycle states

2 drafts, 3 active, 1 archived SOPs coexisting

Test mixed status environment

17

Test bulk status operations

Multiple SOPs can have status changed simultaneously

Select multiple active SOPs, bulk archive action

Test bulk status management

18

Verify status persistence across sessions

SOP status maintained after logout/login

Status remains consistent across user sessions

Test status data persistence

19

Test status rollback scenarios

Can reactivate archived SOPs if business rules allow

Attempt to reactivate archived SOP

Test status rollback capability

20

Check status consistency across modules

SOP status consistent between Master and Field modules

Same status displayed in all system interfaces

Test cross-module status consistency

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Complete SOP lifecycle supported with draft, active, and archived states and proper transitions
  • Secondary_Verifications: Status-based filtering works, metrics reflect status changes, audit trail maintained
  • Negative_Verification: Invalid status transitions prevented, status restrictions properly enforced

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: SOP creation and publication functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced lifecycle and compliance tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other state management tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic SOP management tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for maintaining SOP currency and preventing use of outdated procedures
  • Edge_Cases: Status changes during active SOP execution, concurrent status modifications, system failures during transitions
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect status management could cause operational confusion or compliance issues
  • Security_Considerations: Status changes should be authorized and audited for compliance tracking

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test automated status transitions based on time or usage criteria
  • Type: Advanced Automation
  • Rationale: SOPs may need automatic archival after certain periods
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test status notification workflow for stakeholders
  • Type: Communication
  • Rationale: Users should be notified of important status changes
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_025

Title: Verify system validates all required fields are completed before allowing SOP publication Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Validation-Engine, Data-Integrity

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Validation Engine, Form Processing, Business Rules Engine
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: QA
  • Report_Categories: QA, Quality-Dashboard, Regression-Coverage, Module-Coverage, Engineering
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Validation service, Business rules engine
  • Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for validation response, < 2 seconds for error display
  • Data_Requirements: Incomplete SOP configurations for validation testing

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: SOP Builder functional, validation rules configured
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with SOP creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Partial SOP configurations missing various required fields
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder navigation and basic functionality verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Start SOP creation with minimal Step 1 data

Begin with incomplete basic information

SOP Name: "Test Validation SOP", Missing: Utility Type, SLA, Cost

Verify AC22 - validation blocking

2

Skip to Step 7 Review & Publish without completing required steps

Can access review but publication blocked

Navigate directly to final step

Test incomplete SOP publication prevention

3

Attempt to click "Create SOP" with incomplete data

Publication blocked with validation error messages

Error: "Please complete all required sections"

Test publication validation enforcement

4

Check specific validation messages

Clear, specific error messages for missing sections

Errors: "Basic Information incomplete", "Safety Requirements missing"

Test detailed validation messaging

5

Return to Step 1 and complete basic information

Complete all required fields in Step 1

Fill: Utility Type: Water, SLA: 24h, Cost: ₹500, Tax: 18%, Fieldforce: 2

Test incremental completion

6

Navigate to Step 7 and attempt publication again

Still blocked due to other incomplete sections

Error: "Safety Requirements required", "Tasks required"

Test partial completion validation

7

Complete Step 2 Safety Requirements

Safety section marked complete

Add safety package and PPE requirements

Test safety completion validation

8

Try publication with Steps 1-2 complete

Still blocked for remaining required sections

Error: "Task Definition required"

Test progressive validation

9

Complete Step 3 with minimum required tasks

Task section validated

Add 1 task: "Initial Inspection - 15 mins"

Test minimum task requirement

10

Attempt publication with Steps 1-3 complete

May still require materials or other sections

Check for additional required sections

Test comprehensive validation

11

Skip Step 4 Materials and attempt publication

Determine if materials are mandatory

May succeed or require materials based on business rules

Test optional vs required sections

12

Complete all mandatory sections through Step 6

All required sections completed

Complete materials, readings, help resources

Test full requirement completion

13

Attempt publication with all requirements met

Publication should succeed

"Create SOP" button enables and creates SOP

Test successful validation passage

14

Verify published SOP appears in Master listing

SOP created and visible with active status

Master table shows new SOP with all configured data

Test complete publication success

15

Test validation with empty required fields

Individual field validation prevents progression

Leave SOP Name empty - field-level validation

Test field-level validation

16

Test validation with invalid data formats

Format validation catches incorrect inputs

Invalid email format, negative numbers

Test data format validation

17

Check validation persistence across navigation

Validation state maintained during wizard navigation

Incomplete data triggers validation on return

Test validation state management

18

Test validation error recovery

Errors clear when requirements satisfied

Fix validation errors - messages disappear

Test validation error resolution

19

Verify comprehensive validation summary

Review screen shows all validation issues

Complete validation summary with actionable items

Test validation summary display

20

Test validation with draft save capability

Can save incomplete SOP as draft but not publish

Save Draft works, Create SOP blocked

Test draft vs publication validation difference

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Cannot publish SOP without completing all required fields and sections
  • Secondary_Verifications: Clear validation messages provided, validation enforced consistently
  • Negative_Verification: Incomplete SOPs cannot be published regardless of navigation path

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: SOP Builder basic functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Publication workflow and compliance tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other validation testing
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after individual step validation tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for ensuring data integrity and preventing incomplete SOPs in field operations
  • Edge_Cases: Browser refresh during validation, concurrent editing, validation rule changes
  • Risk_Areas: Incomplete SOPs could cause field operation failures or safety issues
  • Security_Considerations: Validation should be enforced server-side to prevent bypass attempts

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test validation with complex business rule dependencies
  • Type: Advanced Validation
  • Rationale: Some fields may be required based on other field values
  • Priority: P2
  • Scenario_2: Test validation performance with large SOP configurations
  • Type: Performance
  • Rationale: Ensure validation remains fast with complex SOPs
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_026

Title: Verify system provides comprehensive review screen showing all SOP components before final publication Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Review-System, UI-Verification

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Review System, Data Aggregation Service, UI Rendering Engine
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Review aggregation service, UI components
  • Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for review page load, < 1 second for section expansion
  • Data_Requirements: Complete SOP configuration spanning all 7 wizard steps

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Complete SOP configuration ready for review
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with SOP creation and review permissions
  • Test_Data: Comprehensive SOP with all components configured per user story sample data
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder Steps 1-6 completion verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Complete comprehensive SOP through Step 6

All wizard steps configured with detailed data

SOP: "Pipeline Pressure Check", all 6 steps complete

Verify AC23 - complete SOP for review

2

Navigate to Step 7 Review & Publish

Review screen loads with comprehensive SOP summary

Step 7 "Review & Publish" active, shows template summary

Test review screen access

3

Check template summary metrics

Key metrics displayed prominently

Shows: "1 Tasks", "3m estimated", "2 Field Technicians", "₹300" cost

Test summary metrics per wireframe

4

Verify Basic Information section display

Complete basic info summarized accurately

Section shows: SOP Name, Utility Type, Service Association, SLA, etc.

Test basic information review

5

Check Basic Information completion status

Section marked as complete with proper indicator

"Complete" status or green checkmark visible

Test completion status indicators

6

Expand/view Safety Requirements section

Safety configuration displayed with details

Shows selected safety packages, protocols, PPE requirements

Test safety requirements review

7

Verify Safety Requirements completion status

Safety section shows complete status

"Complete" indicator for safety configuration

Test safety completion display

8

Review Task Definition section

All configured tasks displayed with details

Shows: Task names, time estimates, skills, mandatory flags

Test task definition review

9

Check task sequence and details

Tasks displayed in correct order with complete information

Task 1: "Initial Inspection - 15 mins", mandatory: Yes

Test task detail accuracy

10

Verify Materials & Equipment section

All materials and equipment listed with specifications

Shows: Material names, quantities, specifications, costs

Test materials review display

11

Check materials cost aggregation

Total materials cost calculated and displayed

Shows total cost aggregated from individual items

Test cost calculation in review

12

Review Readings & Data section

All reading requirements displayed with parameters

Shows: Reading names, units, ranges, criticality levels

Test readings review display

13

Verify reading configuration accuracy

Reading parameters match configured values

Water Pressure: PSI, Range 30-80, Criticality: High

Test reading detail accuracy

14

Check Help & Resources section

All attached resources listed with types

Shows: Instructions, video links, uploaded files

Test resources review display

15

Verify resource accessibility from review

Can access/preview resources from review screen

Click resource links - files accessible

Test resource access in review

16

Test edit navigation from review

Can navigate back to edit specific sections

Click section headers or edit links - return to relevant step

Test edit access from review

17

Verify data persistence after edit

Changes made during editing reflected in review

Edit task time - review updates accordingly

Test edit-review synchronization

18

Check review screen responsive design

Review adapts to different screen sizes

Resize browser - review remains functional and readable

Test responsive review display

19

Verify review screen print capability

Review can be printed or exported for documentation

Print preview shows complete SOP summary

Test review documentation capability

20

Complete publication from review

Final "Create SOP" button creates SOP successfully

SOP published, user returned to Master with confirmation

Test final publication from review

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Comprehensive review screen displays all SOP components accurately with complete information
  • Secondary_Verifications: Edit navigation works, completion status indicators accurate, responsive design functional
  • Negative_Verification: Incomplete sections clearly marked, missing data highlighted in review

Test Results (Template):

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

Execution Analytics:

  • Execution_Frequency: Weekly
  • Maintenance_Effort: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships:

  • Blocking_Tests: SOP Builder Steps 1-6 completion
  • Blocked_Tests: Final publication and Master listing tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other review functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after individual step configuration tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for ensuring users can verify complete SOP configuration before publication
  • Edge_Cases: Very large SOPs, complex configurations, special characters in data
  • Risk_Areas: Incomplete review could lead to publishing incorrect SOPs
  • Security_Considerations: Review should only show data user has permission to see

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test review screen with maximum configuration complexity
  • Type: Scalability
  • Rationale: Ensure review handles very complex SOPs effectively
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test review screen export to external formats
  • Type: Integration
  • Rationale: Users may need to share SOP summaries externally
  • Priority: P4



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_027

Title: Verify bulk upload and view insights features are not included per business requirements Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P4-Low
  • Execution Phase: Acceptance
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P4-Low, Phase-Acceptance, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Low, Revenue-Impact-None, Integration-Feature-Exclusion, Compliance-Verification

Business Context:

  • Customer_Segment: All
  • Revenue_Impact: None
  • Business_Priority: Could-Have
  • Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
  • Compliance_Required: Yes
  • SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: UI Component Verification, Feature Flag Management, Access Control
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: QA
  • Report_Categories: QA, Module-Coverage, User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Engineering
  • Trend_Tracking: No
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: None

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Complete system interface
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for interface verification
  • Data_Requirements: Standard Master interface without excluded features

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Complete Master interface accessible, feature exclusions configured
  • User_Roles_Permissions: All user roles for comprehensive exclusion verification
  • Test_Data: Standard SOP data for interface testing
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Master page and SOP management functionality verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Master page main interface

Master page loads without bulk upload or insights features

Standard Master dashboard interface

Verify AC24 - feature exclusion compliance

2

Search for bulk upload buttons or options

No bulk upload functionality visible anywhere

No "Import SOPs", "Bulk Upload", "CSV Import" buttons

Test bulk upload absence

3

Check context menus for bulk operations

Right-click menus lack bulk import options

Right-click on SOP table - no bulk operations

Test contextual bulk feature absence

4

Look for file import functionality

No file import options in any menu

Check File menu, Tools menu - no import options

Test import functionality exclusion

5

Search for analytics or insights sections

No insights dashboards or analytics views present

No "Analytics", "Insights", "Reports" sections

Test insights feature absence

6

Check for data visualization components

No charts, graphs, or visual analytics present

Standard table/list views only

Test analytics visualization exclusion

7

Look for business intelligence features

No BI or advanced reporting capabilities

Basic listing and metrics only

Test BI feature exclusion

8

Test keyboard shortcuts for excluded features

Standard import/analytics shortcuts don't work

Ctrl+I, Alt+A don't trigger excluded features

Test keyboard shortcut exclusion

9

Check URL direct access to excluded features

Direct URLs to bulk/insights return 404 or redirect

/master/bulk-upload, /master/insights URLs

Test direct access prevention

10

Verify user documentation exclusion

Help text doesn't mention excluded features

User guides lack bulk upload/insights documentation

Test documentation consistency

11

Test API endpoints for excluded features

API calls for bulk operations return appropriate errors

API: /api/sops/bulk-import returns 404/403

Test API exclusion enforcement

12

Check admin interface for excluded features

Administrative panels don't include bulk/insights configuration

Admin settings lack bulk upload configuration

Test admin exclusion consistency

13

Verify role-based exclusion

No user role has access to excluded features

Test all roles: IT Admin, Operations Manager, Supervisor, Field Technician

Test universal feature exclusion

14

Look for third-party integration points

No external analytics or bulk import integrations

No external tool connectors visible

Test integration exclusion

15

Check database schema for excluded features

Database lacks tables/fields for excluded functionality

No bulk_imports, analytics_cache tables

Test database exclusion compliance

16

Test browser developer tools inspection

Client code doesn't include excluded feature components

Inspect DOM - no bulk/insights JavaScript modules

Test code-level exclusion

17

Verify error handling for excluded features

Appropriate error messages if features accidentally accessed

Clear "Feature not available" messages

Test graceful exclusion handling

18

Check system logs for excluded feature attempts

Attempts to access excluded features logged appropriately

Security logs show blocked access attempts

Test exclusion monitoring

19

Test mobile interface exclusion consistency

Mobile views also lack excluded features

Mobile responsive design excludes same features

Test cross-platform exclusion

20

Verify future-proofing of exclusions

System architecture prevents accidental inclusion

Feature flags or configuration prevent activation

Test exclusion permanence

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Bulk upload and view insights features are completely absent from all system interfaces
  • Secondary_Verifications: No access methods (UI, API, direct URL) provide excluded functionality
  • Negative_Verification: No hidden, administrative, or role-based access to excluded features exists

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: Master interface functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: N/A (exclusion verification)
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other compliance verification tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after main feature testing

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Important for ensuring system meets specified scope and doesn't include out-of-scope features
  • Edge_Cases: Future feature additions, configuration changes, accidental feature activation
  • Risk_Areas: Accidental inclusion of excluded features could affect system scope compliance
  • Security_Considerations: Excluded features should be completely inaccessible to prevent security gaps

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test exclusion compliance after system updates
  • Type: Regression
  • Rationale: Ensure excluded features remain excluded after updates
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test exclusion documentation and training materials
  • Type: Documentation
  • Rationale: Ensure support materials don't reference excluded features
  • Priority: P4



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_028

Title: Verify each SOP must be associated with exactly one utility type per business rule enforcement Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, Database, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Report-API-Test-Results, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Business-Rules, Data-Integrity

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Business Rules Engine, Data Validation Service, Database Constraints
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
  • Report_Categories: Engineering, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Smoke-Test-Results, API-Test-Results
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Business rules engine, Database validation
  • Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for validation, < 2 seconds for constraint enforcement
  • Data_Requirements: Utility types: Water, Electricity, Gas, HVAC, Other

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Business rule validation enabled, database constraints configured
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with SOP creation permissions
  • Test_Data: All available utility types configured in system
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Basic SOP creation functionality verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Start SOP creation process

SOP Builder loads with utility type selection required

New SOP creation interface

Verify BR1 - utility type requirement

2

Attempt to proceed without selecting utility type

System prevents progression with validation error

No utility type selected

Test mandatory utility type enforcement

3

Select "Water" utility type

Single utility type selection successful

Utility Type: Water

Test single utility type selection

4

Attempt to select second utility type

Previous selection replaced, only one type allowed

Try to add: Electricity

Test BR1 - exactly one utility type constraint

5

Complete SOP creation with Water utility

SOP successfully created with single utility association

Complete SOP: "Water Leak Detection"

Test successful creation with one utility

6

Verify database record shows single utility

Database query confirms exactly one utility association

Query: SELECT utility_types FROM sops WHERE sop_id = 'new_sop'

Test database constraint enforcement

7

Create second SOP with different utility type

Second SOP gets different single utility association

SOP: "Electrical Safety Inspection", Utility: Electricity

Test independent utility assignment

8

Attempt API call with multiple utilities

API rejects requests with multiple utility types

API payload: {utilities: ["Water", "Gas"]}

Test API-level constraint enforcement

9

Test database direct insertion with multiple utilities

Database constraint prevents multiple utility insertion

Direct SQL with multiple utilities fails

Test database-level constraint

10

Verify utility type modification

Can change SOP utility type but only to one different type

Change Water SOP to Gas utility

Test utility type modification within constraint

11

Test bulk operations compliance

Bulk operations respect single utility constraint

Bulk update multiple SOPs - each keeps one utility

Test bulk operation constraint compliance

12

Check data export utility type accuracy

Exported data shows exactly one utility per SOP

Export SOPs - verify utility type column

Test data export constraint compliance

13

Verify reporting utility type consistency

Reports show correct single utility association per SOP

Generate utility type report

Test reporting constraint compliance

14

Test utility type deletion impact

Cannot delete utility type if SOPs are associated

Attempt to delete "Water" utility type

Test referential integrity

15

Check SOP filtering by utility type

Filter shows SOPs with exactly matching utility type

Filter by "Electricity" - shows only electricity SOPs

Test filter constraint compliance

16

Verify search utility type accuracy

Search results maintain single utility association

Search for utility types - results accurate

Test search constraint compliance

17

Test utility type inheritance in SOP cloning

Cloned SOPs maintain single utility type from source

Clone Water SOP - clone inherits Water utility only

Test cloning constraint compliance

18

Check utility type validation in SOP import

Import processes respect single utility constraint

Import SOP data - validates utility type constraint

Test import constraint compliance

19

Verify utility type audit trail

Changes to utility type logged appropriately

Change utility type - audit log shows change

Test audit constraint compliance

20

Test edge case with null utility type

System prevents SOPs with no utility type assignment

Attempt null utility - validation prevents creation

Test null value constraint

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Every SOP can only be associated with exactly one utility type, constraint enforced at all levels
  • Secondary_Verifications: Database constraints active, API validation working, UI prevents multiple selection
  • Negative_Verification: Cannot create SOP with multiple utilities, cannot create SOP with no 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: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships:

  • Blocking_Tests: Basic SOP creation functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced utility type management tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other business rule validation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run before utility-specific feature tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical business rule ensuring data integrity and preventing operational confusion
  • Edge_Cases: Database corruption, concurrent modifications, system integration failures
  • Risk_Areas: Multiple utility associations could cause field operation assignment errors
  • Security_Considerations: Constraint should be tamper-proof and consistently enforced


Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test utility type constraint with system integrations
  • Type: Integration
  • Rationale: External systems may attempt to create SOPs with multiple utilities
  • Priority: P2
  • Scenario_2: Test utility type constraint performance with large datasets
  • Type: Performance
  • Rationale: Ensure constraint checking remains fast with many SOPs
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_029

Title: Verify SOPs must have unique system-generated identifiers with proper format validation and collision prevention Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: Integration
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Database, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-API-Test-Results, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-ID-Generation, Data-Integrity

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: ID Generation Service, Database Sequence Management, Collision Detection
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
  • Report_Categories: Engineering, Quality-Dashboard, API-Test-Results, Module-Coverage, Smoke-Test-Results
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, ID generation service, Database sequence management
  • Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for ID generation, < 500ms for collision check
  • Data_Requirements: Clean ID sequence, existing SOPs for collision testing

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: ID generation service functional, database sequences configured
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with SOP creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Current SOP count and last assigned ID from system
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Database connectivity and SOP creation verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Query current highest SOP ID in system

Establish baseline for ID sequence testing

Current max ID: SOP-214 (from wireframe data)

Verify BR2 - unique ID requirement baseline

2

Create first new SOP through complete process

SOP gets next sequential ID in SOP-XXX format

Expected ID: SOP-215

Test sequential ID generation

3

Verify ID format compliance

Generated ID follows exact SOP-XXX pattern

Format validation: "SOP-" + 3-digit number

Test BR2 format requirement

4

Check ID immutability

SOP ID cannot be modified after creation

Attempt ID edit - should be read-only or hidden

Test ID protection

5

Create second SOP immediately

Gets next sequential ID without gaps

Expected ID: SOP-216

Test continuous sequence

6

Create multiple SOPs rapidly

All SOPs get unique sequential IDs

Create 5 SOPs quickly - IDs: SOP-217 through SOP-221

Test rapid ID generation

7

Verify database uniqueness constraint

Database prevents duplicate ID insertion

Direct DB insert with duplicate ID fails

Test database-level uniqueness

8

Test concurrent SOP creation

Multiple users creating SOPs simultaneously get unique IDs

3 users create SOPs at same time

Test concurrency collision prevention

9

Check ID persistence across system restart

IDs remain consistent after system restart

Restart system - ID sequence continues correctly

Test ID sequence persistence

10

Verify ID in all system interfaces

Same SOP ID displayed consistently across all modules

Check Master, Field Operations, Reports - same ID

Test ID consistency across system

11

Test ID generation failure recovery

System handles ID generation service failures gracefully

Simulate ID service failure - appropriate error handling

Test ID generation error handling

12

Check ID collision detection

System detects and prevents ID collisions

Attempt manual collision - system prevents

Test collision detection mechanism

13

Verify ID in API responses

API calls return correct SOP IDs in responses

GET /api/sops/{id} returns matching ID

Test API ID consistency

14

Test ID with high volume

ID generation works with large numbers of SOPs

Create 100+ SOPs - unique IDs maintained

Test scalability of ID generation

15

Check ID in data exports

Exported data includes correct SOP IDs

Export SOP data - IDs match system records

Test ID export consistency

16

Verify ID in search and filtering

Search by SOP ID returns correct SOP

Search for "SOP-215" - returns first created SOP

Test ID-based search accuracy

17

Test ID validation in imports

Import process validates SOP ID format and uniqueness

Import data with invalid IDs - validation errors

Test import ID validation

18

Check ID in audit trails

Audit logs reference correct SOP IDs

Audit entries show accurate SOP IDs

Test audit ID accuracy

19

Verify ID rollback prevention

Cannot reuse IDs from deleted SOPs

Delete SOP, create new - new ID assigned

Test ID reuse prevention

20

Test ID format edge cases

System handles edge cases in ID generation

Test with ID sequence near limits

Test ID generation boundaries

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: All SOPs receive unique system-generated IDs in SOP-XXX format with no collisions
  • Secondary_Verifications: IDs are immutable, persistent, and consistent across all system interfaces
  • Negative_Verification: Cannot manually set IDs, duplicate IDs prevented, invalid formats rejected

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: Database connectivity, SOP creation process
  • Blocked_Tests: SOP referencing and lookup tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other ID management tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run before SOP modification and deletion tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for maintaining data integrity and preventing SOP reference conflicts
  • Edge_Cases: System clock changes, database corruption, ID sequence overflow
  • Risk_Areas: ID conflicts could cause serious operational and data integrity issues
  • Security_Considerations: ID generation should be tamper-proof and unpredictable to outsiders

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test ID generation with database failover scenarios
  • Type: High Availability
  • Rationale: Ensure ID uniqueness maintained during database failover
  • Priority: P2
  • Scenario_2: Test ID format migration if format changes required
  • Type: Data Migration
  • Rationale: Future format changes may require ID migration strategy
  • Priority: P4



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_030

Title: Verify all SOPs must include at least one task in task definition section per business rule Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Task-Validation, Business-Rules

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Task Validation Engine, Business Rules Service, SOP Publishing Workflow
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: QA
  • Report_Categories: QA, Quality-Dashboard, Regression-Coverage, Module-Coverage, Engineering
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Task validation service, Business rules engine
  • Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for task validation, < 2 seconds for error display
  • Data_Requirements: SOP configuration data with and without tasks

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Task validation enabled, SOP Builder functional
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with SOP creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Partial SOP configurations for task validation testing
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder Steps 1-2 completion verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Complete SOP Steps 1-2 without adding tasks

Basic information and safety completed, tasks empty

SOP: "Task Validation Test", Steps 1-2 complete

Verify BR3 - task requirement setup

2

Navigate to Step 3 Task Definition

Task Definition interface loads with no tasks configured

Step 3 active, empty task list

Test task requirement validation point

3

Attempt to proceed to Step 4 without adding tasks

System prevents progression with validation error

No tasks added, click Next

Test BR3 enforcement - progression blocking

4

Check task validation error message

Clear error message about task requirement

Error: "At least one task is required"

Test task requirement messaging

5

Navigate to Step 7 Review with no tasks

Review accessible but publication blocked

Access Step 7 directly

Test publication blocking without tasks

6

Attempt to publish SOP without tasks

Publication blocked with validation error

Click "Create SOP" - validation prevents

Test BR3 - publication validation

7

Check comprehensive validation message

Validation clearly identifies missing tasks

Error highlights Task Definition incomplete

Test comprehensive validation messaging

8

Return to Step 3 and add minimum task

Single task satisfies requirement

Add task: "Equipment Check - 10 mins"

Test minimum task requirement satisfaction

9

Verify task validation passes

Can proceed to Step 4 after adding task

Step 4 becomes accessible

Test validation resolution

10

Complete SOP with single task

SOP publishes successfully with one task

Complete remaining steps, publish successfully

Test successful creation with minimum tasks

11

Create second SOP with multiple tasks

Multiple tasks also satisfy requirement

Add 3 tasks to new SOP

Test requirement with multiple tasks

12

Test task deletion validation

Cannot delete all tasks from SOP

Delete tasks until one remains - last deletion blocked

Test task deletion constraints

13

Verify task requirement in SOP editing

Existing SOPs maintain task requirement

Edit published SOP - cannot remove all tasks

Test task requirement in modifications

14

Test draft save with no tasks

Can save draft without tasks but cannot publish

Save draft with no tasks - allowed for drafts

Test draft vs publication task requirements

15

Check task requirement in API

API enforces task requirement

API call without tasks returns validation error

Test API-level task validation

16

Verify task requirement in import

Import process validates task presence

Import SOP without tasks - validation error

Test import task validation

17

Test task requirement error recovery

Adding task clears validation errors

Add task after error - validation passes

Test error resolution process

18

Check task requirement in cloning

Cloned SOPs inherit task requirement

Clone SOP - must maintain at least one task

Test cloning task validation

19

Verify task requirement audit

Task requirement violations logged

Audit log shows validation failures

Test task requirement auditing

20

Test task requirement with bulk operations

Bulk operations respect task requirement

Bulk edit cannot remove all tasks from SOPs

Test bulk operation task validation

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Cannot create or publish SOP without at least one task in task definition section
  • Secondary_Verifications: Validation enforced consistently across UI, API, and import processes
  • Negative_Verification: SOPs with zero tasks cannot be published, validation errors clear when requirement met

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: SOP Builder task definition functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Task execution and workflow tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other business rule validation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic task creation tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical business rule ensuring SOPs have actionable content for field operations
  • Edge_Cases: Task deletion during editing, imported SOPs without tasks, system migration scenarios
  • Risk_Areas: SOPs without tasks could cause field operation confusion and incomplete procedures
  • Security_Considerations: Task requirement should be consistently enforced to prevent operational gaps

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test task requirement with conditional task templates
  • Type: Advanced Business Rules
  • Rationale: Some operation types may have different task requirements
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test task requirement with automated task generation
  • Type: Automation
  • Rationale: System could auto-generate basic tasks for certain SOP types
  • Priority: P4Additional Information:
  • Notes: Critical for maintaining SOP currency and preventing use of outdated procedures
  • Edge_Cases: Status changes during active SOP execution, concurrent status modifications, system failures during transitions
  • Risk_Areas: Incorrect status management could cause operational confusion or compliance issues
  • Security_Considerations: Status changes should be authorized and audited for compliance tracking

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test automated status transitions based on time or usage criteria
  • Type: Advanced Automation
  • Rationale: SOPs may need automatic archival after certain periods
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test status notification workflow for stakeholders
  • Type: Communication
  • Rationale: Users should be notified of important status changes
  • Priority: P3




Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_031

Title: Verify SLA must be defined in hours or days for each SOP with proper validation and calculation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Performance-Metrics, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-SLA-Management, Business-Rules

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: SLA Calculation Engine, Time Validation Service, Performance Metrics System
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, SLA validation service, Time calculation engine
  • Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for SLA validation, < 2 seconds for time calculation
  • Data_Requirements: SLA values from user story sample data (6h, 12h, 24h, 48h, 2d)

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: SLA validation enabled, time format validation configured
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with SLA configuration permissions
  • Test_Data: SLA configurations per user story sample data
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder Step 1 Basic Information access verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Step 1 Basic Information in SOP Builder

SLA Rules field visible and accessible

SLA configuration interface present

Verify BR4 - SLA field presence

2

Check SLA Rules dropdown options

Available SLA options show time-based values

Options: High-Priority SLA, Standard SLA, Extended SLA

Test SLA options availability

3

Select "High-Priority SLA" option

SLA configured with hours-based timeframe

Selected: High-Priority SLA (6 hours)

Test hours-based SLA per sample data

4

Verify SLA display format

SLA shows in clear time format

Display: "6h" or "6 hours"

Test SLA format clarity

5

Create SOP with hours-based SLA

SOP saves with hour-based SLA successfully

SOP: "Gas Leak Inspection", SLA: 6h

Using sample data for urgent operations

6

Select day-based SLA option

SLA configured with days timeframe

Selected: Extended SLA (2 days)

Test days-based SLA per sample data

7

Verify day-based SLA display

SLA shows in days format clearly

Display: "2d" or "2 days"

Test day format display

8

Create SOP with days-based SLA

SOP saves with day-based SLA successfully

SOP: "Water Main Repair", SLA: 2d

Using sample data for complex operations

9

Attempt to proceed without SLA selection

Validation prevents progression without SLA

Error: "SLA Rules is required"

Test BR4 - mandatory SLA requirement

10

Check SLA validation error messaging

Clear error message about SLA requirement

Validation error clearly displayed

Test SLA requirement validation

11

Test SLA value boundaries

System validates reasonable SLA limits

Min: 1 hour, Max: 30 days (reasonable limits)

Test SLA boundary validation

12

Verify SLA in Master listing

Published SOPs show SLA in table

Master table displays SLA values correctly

Test SLA display in listings

13

Check SLA in SOP detail view

Individual SOP shows SLA clearly

Detail view: "SLA: High-Priority SLA - 6h"

Test SLA display in detail view

14

Test SLA modification

Can modify SLA in existing SOPs

Change from 6h to 12h SLA

Test SLA modification capability

15

Verify SLA calculation integration

SLA values used in performance calculations

Dashboard metrics use SLA for calculations

Test SLA integration with metrics

16

Check SLA in work order assignment

Work orders reflect SOP SLA requirements

Field assignments show SLA timeframes

Test SLA operational integration

17

Test SLA consistency across modules

Same SLA displayed in all system interfaces

Master, Field Operations, Reports show same SLA

Test cross-module SLA consistency

18

Verify SLA in performance reporting

Reports include SLA compliance data

Performance reports show SLA vs actual times

Test SLA reporting integration

19

Test SLA with time zone considerations

SLA calculations account for time zones

SLA tracking works across different time zones

Test SLA time zone handling

20

Check SLA audit trail

SLA changes logged for compliance

Audit log shows SLA modifications with timestamps

Test SLA change auditing

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: SLA must be defined for every SOP in hours or days format with proper validation
  • Secondary_Verifications: SLA integrates with performance calculations, displays consistently across interfaces
  • Negative_Verification: Cannot create SOP without SLA definition, invalid SLA values rejected

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: SOP Builder basic configuration
  • Blocked_Tests: SLA performance tracking and compliance tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other SLA management tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run before SLA calculation and tracking tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for operational performance management and service level compliance
  • Edge_Cases: Very short SLAs, very long SLAs, decimal hour values, timezone changes
  • Risk_Areas: Missing SLA could prevent proper performance tracking and compliance monitoring
  • Security_Considerations: SLA definitions should be protected from unauthorized modification

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test SLA escalation and notification rules
  • Type: Advanced SLA Management
  • Rationale: SLAs may need escalation procedures when approaching deadlines
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test SLA adjustment for emergency situations
  • Type: Emergency Handling
  • Rationale: Emergency situations may require SLA modifications
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_032

Title: Verify active SOPs cannot be deleted but can be archived if no longer needed Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Database, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-QA, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Lifecycle-Management, Data-Protection

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Lifecycle Management, Data Protection Service, Archive Management
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Product
  • Report_Categories: Product, QA, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Engineering
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Archive management service, Data protection system
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for archive operation, < 1 second for delete prevention
  • Data_Requirements: Active SOPs and draft SOPs for deletion/archive testing

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Archive functionality enabled, data protection rules configured
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with SOP management permissions
  • Test_Data: Active SOPs and draft SOPs in various states
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP creation and publication functionality verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Create and publish SOP to active status

SOP becomes active and available for operations

SOP: "Active Test Procedure", Status: Active

Verify BR5 - active SOP setup

2

Navigate to Master listing and locate active SOP

Active SOP visible in SOP Templates table

Active SOP appears with "Active" status badge

Test active SOP identification

3

Right-click on active SOP to check context menu

Context menu shows available actions

Right-click menu displays action options

Test available actions for active SOPs

4

Look for delete option in context menu

Delete option not available for active SOPs

No "Delete" option in context menu

Test BR5 - delete restriction for active SOPs

5

Check action buttons for active SOP

Standard action buttons without delete functionality

Edit, View, Archive options available, no Delete

Test action button restrictions

6

Look for archive option in actions

Archive option available for active SOPs

"Archive" option present in actions

Test archive availability per BR5

7

Click Archive option for active SOP

Archive confirmation dialog appears

Confirmation: "Are you sure you want to archive this SOP?"

Test archive process initiation

8

Confirm archive operation

SOP status changes from active to archived

Status changes to "Archived", SOP moved to archived section

Test successful archiving

9

Verify archived SOP properties

Archived SOP has different action options available

Archived SOP shows different action set

Test archived state behavior

10

Create draft SOP for comparison

Draft SOP created and saved

SOP: "Draft Test Procedure", Status: Draft

Test draft SOP creation

11

Check delete options for draft SOP

Draft SOPs can be deleted

Delete option available for draft SOPs

Test BR5 - draft deletion allowed

12

Delete draft SOP successfully

Draft SOP removed from system

Draft deleted, removed from Draft Templates

Test draft deletion capability

13

Attempt bulk operations on active SOPs

Bulk delete not available for active SOPs

Select multiple active SOPs - bulk delete unavailable

Test bulk operation restrictions

14

Test API delete request for active SOP

API prevents deletion of active SOPs

DELETE /api/sops/{active_id} returns 403/409 error

Test API-level deletion prevention

15

Check database deletion constraints

Database prevents active SOP deletion

Direct database delete fails for active SOPs

Test database-level protection

16

Verify archived SOP deletion policy

Archived SOPs may have different deletion rules

Check if archived SOPs can be deleted

Test archived SOP deletion policy

17

Test SOP reactivation from archive

Archived SOPs can be reactivated if needed

Reactivate archived SOP - returns to active status

Test archive reversal capability

18

Check deletion audit trail

Deletion attempts logged for compliance

Audit log shows blocked deletion attempts

Test deletion attempt auditing

19

Verify data integrity protection

Active SOP data protected from accidental loss

Active SOPs maintain data integrity

Test data protection enforcement

20

Test deletion policy communication

Clear messaging about deletion restrictions

Error messages explain why deletion blocked

Test user communication about restrictions

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Active SOPs cannot be deleted but can be archived, draft SOPs can be deleted
  • Secondary_Verifications: Archive process works correctly, reactivation possible, audit trail maintained
  • Negative_Verification: No method (UI, API, database) allows deletion of active SOPs

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: SOP lifecycle management functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced archive management and data retention tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other data protection tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after SOP status management tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Important for protecting operational data and maintaining historical SOP records
  • Edge_Cases: SOPs in execution during archive attempt, concurrent archive operations, system failures during archiving
  • Risk_Areas: Accidental deletion of active SOPs could disrupt field operations
  • Security_Considerations: Archive and deletion permissions should be strictly controlled and audited

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test SOP dependency checking before archival
  • Type: Dependency Management
  • Rationale: SOPs may reference other SOPs or be referenced by work orders
  • Priority: P3
  • Scenario_2: Test automated archival based on usage patterns
  • Type: Automation
  • Rationale: Unused SOPs could be automatically flagged for archival
  • Priority: P4



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_033

Title: Verify SOP templates can only be published after all mandatory fields are completed and validated Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

  • Module/Feature: Master
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, MOD-Master, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Validation-Engine, Publication-Control

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Validation Engine, Publication Workflow, Business Rules Service
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

  • Primary_Stakeholder: QA
  • Report_Categories: QA, Quality-Dashboard, Regression-Coverage, Module-Coverage, Engineering
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Validation service, Publication workflow engine
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for validation check, < 1 second for error display
  • Data_Requirements: Complete and incomplete SOP configurations for validation testing

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Validation rules configured, publication workflow functional
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with SOP publication permissions
  • Test_Data: SOP configurations with various completion levels
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder wizard functionality verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Identify all mandatory fields across SOP wizard

Document complete list of required fields

Mandatory: SOP Name, Utility Type, SLA, at least 1 Task, Safety Requirements

Verify BR6 - mandatory field identification

2

Start SOP creation with minimal Step 1 data

Create SOP with only basic required fields

SOP Name: "Publication Test", Utility Type: Water

Test partial mandatory completion

3

Skip to Step 7 Review without completing other mandatory steps

Can access review but publication blocked

Navigate directly to review step

Test incomplete SOP publication blocking

4

Attempt publication with incomplete mandatory fields

Publication blocked with comprehensive validation errors

Click "Create SOP" - multiple validation errors shown

Test BR6 - publication validation enforcement

5

Check validation error specificity

Errors clearly identify missing mandatory sections

Errors: "Safety Requirements required", "Task Definition incomplete"

Test detailed validation messaging

6

Complete Step 2 Safety Requirements

Safety section validated and marked complete

Add safety package: "Electrical Safety"

Test incremental mandatory completion

7

Attempt publication with Step 2 complete

Still blocked due to other incomplete mandatory sections

Task Definition still required

Test progressive validation enforcement

8

Complete Step 3 with required tasks

Task section validated with minimum required tasks

Add task: "Safety Inspection - 20 mins"

Test minimum task requirement satisfaction

9

Check SLA requirement validation

SLA must be defined for publication

SLA Rules: High-Priority SLA selected

Test SLA mandatory requirement

10

Verify all mandatory sections completed

All required sections show completion status

Steps 1-3 marked complete with minimum requirements

Test comprehensive mandatory completion

11

Attempt publication with all mandatory fields

Publication succeeds with all requirements met

"Create SOP" successfully creates active SOP

Test successful publication after validation

12

Test optional field validation

Optional fields don't block publication

Skip optional fields like Materials, Help Resources

Test optional vs mandatory distinction

13

Create second SOP missing different mandatory field

Different validation scenario

Missing: Utility Type in Step 1

Test various mandatory field validations

14

Check field-level validation

Individual mandatory fields validated

Empty SOP Name triggers field-level error

Test granular validation

15

Test mandatory field format validation

Mandatory fields must meet format requirements

Invalid data formats in mandatory fields

Test data format validation

16

Verify draft save with incomplete mandatory fields

Can save as draft but cannot publish

Save Draft works with incomplete mandatory data

Test draft vs publication validation difference

17

Test API publication validation

API enforces mandatory field requirements

POST /api/sops with incomplete data returns validation error

Test API-level publication validation

18

Check validation persistence across sessions

Validation state maintained across user sessions

Incomplete SOP remains unpublishable after logout/login

Test validation state persistence

19

Test bulk publication validation

Bulk operations respect mandatory field requirements

Cannot bulk publish SOPs with incomplete mandatory fields

Test bulk operation validation

20

Verify publication audit trail

Publication attempts and validations logged

Audit log shows publication blocks and successes

Test publication auditing

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Cannot publish SOP templates without completing all mandatory fields across all wizard steps
  • Secondary_Verifications: Validation is comprehensive, specific, and persistent across sessions
  • Negative_Verification: No bypass methods exist for mandatory field validation

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: SOP Builder wizard completion functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Publication workflow and compliance tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other validation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after individual step validation tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Critical for ensuring published SOPs are complete and operational
  • Edge_Cases: Browser refresh during validation, concurrent editing, validation rule changes
  • Risk_Areas: Incomplete published SOPs could cause field operation failures
  • Security_Considerations: Validation should be server-side and tamper-proof

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test mandatory field validation with business rule dependencies
  • Type: Complex Validation
  • Rationale: Some fields may become mandatory based on other field values
  • Priority: P2
  • Scenario_2: Test mandatory field validation performance with large SOPs
  • Type: Performance
  • Rationale: Ensure validation remains fast with complex SOP configurations
  • Priority: P3



Test Case ID: WX01US01_TC_034

Title: Verify work-in-progress SOPs can be saved as draft at any stage with proper data persistence Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support: Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Database, MOD-Master, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Draft-Management, Workflow-Continuity

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: 16 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: Medium
  • Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking:

  • Feature_Coverage: 100%
  • Integration_Points: Draft Management System, Session Persistence, Data Storage Service
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

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

Requirements Traceability:

Test Environment:

  • Environment: Staging
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: SMART360 Master module, Draft storage system, Session management
  • Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for draft save, < 3 seconds for draft restoration
  • Data_Requirements: Partial SOP configurations at various completion stages

Prerequisites:

  • Setup_Requirements: Draft management enabled, adequate storage for draft data
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Operations Manager with draft save permissions
  • Test_Data: SOP configurations at different completion levels
  • Prior_Test_Cases: SOP Builder navigation and basic functionality verified

Test Procedure:

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Start new SOP creation process

SOP Builder loads with empty form

Fresh SOP creation session

Verify BR7 - draft save capability setup

2

Complete minimal Step 1 data only

Partial basic information entered

SOP Name: "Draft Save Test", Utility Type: Gas

Test early-stage draft save

3

Look for draft save functionality

Draft save option visible and accessible

"Save Draft" button or menu option present

Test draft save availability

4

Save work as draft from Step 1

Draft saved successfully with confirmation

Success message: "Draft saved successfully"

Test draft save from early step

5

Navigate away from SOP Builder

Return to Master page or other section

Leave SOP Builder interface

Test navigation after draft save

6

Access Draft Templates to verify save

Saved draft appears in Draft Templates listing

Draft shows in Draft Templates with correct name

Test draft persistence and visibility

7

Resume draft editing

Return to SOP Builder with saved data intact

Click draft name - SOP Builder loads with saved data

Test draft restoration

8

Continue to Step 2 and add data

Progress to safety requirements configuration

Add safety package: "Confined Space"

Test progressive draft building

9

Save draft again from Step 2

Updated draft saved with new information

Draft save includes Step 2 data

Test incremental draft updates

10

Complete Step 3 tasks and save draft

Draft includes task configuration

Add tasks: "Initial Assessment - 15 mins", "Equipment Check - 10 mins"

Test draft save with multiple steps

11

Test draft save from Step 4 materials

Draft save works from materials configuration

Add materials: "Safety Equipment Kit"

Test draft save from mid-process

12

Save draft from Step 5 readings

Draft includes reading requirements

Add readings: "Gas Pressure - kPa - Range 1.0-3.0"

Test draft save from later steps

13

Add resources in Step 6 and save draft

Draft preserves help resources

Add instruction resource: "Emergency Procedures"

Test comprehensive draft save

14

Test session persistence of draft

Draft data survives browser refresh and logout/login

Refresh browser, logout/login - draft data intact

Test session-independent persistence

15

Create multiple concurrent drafts

Can save multiple drafts simultaneously

Create second draft: "Concurrent Draft Test"

Test multiple draft management

16

Test draft modification timestamps

Draft timestamps update with each save

Check draft modification dates

Test draft versioning

17

Save very large draft configuration

System handles complex draft data

Create draft with extensive configuration across all steps

Test draft storage capacity

18

Test draft save with special characters

Draft saves data with special characters correctly

Include special characters in names and descriptions

Test draft data integrity

19

Complete draft and publish

Draft successfully transitions to active SOP

Complete all steps and publish draft

Test draft-to-active transition

20

Verify draft cleanup after publication

Published draft removed from Draft Templates

Draft no longer appears in drafts after publication

Test draft lifecycle completion

Verification Points:

  • Primary_Verification: Work-in-progress SOPs can be saved as draft at any stage with complete data persistence
  • Secondary_Verifications: Multiple drafts supported, timestamps tracked, session-independent persistence
  • Negative_Verification: Draft data never lost, no conflicts between concurrent drafts

Test Results (Template):

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

Execution Analytics:

  • Execution_Frequency: Weekly
  • Maintenance_Effort: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships:

  • Blocking_Tests: SOP Builder navigation and basic functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Draft management and collaboration tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Can run with other draft functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Should run after basic SOP creation tests

Additional Information:

  • Notes: Important for user productivity and preventing data loss during complex SOP creation
  • Edge_Cases: Network interruptions during save, browser crashes, storage limit exceeded
  • Risk_Areas: Draft data loss could cause significant user productivity loss
  • Security_Considerations: Draft data should be user-scoped and properly secured

Missing Scenarios Identified:

  • Scenario_1: Test draft auto-save functionality
  • Type: User Experience
  • Rationale: Automatic saving could prevent data loss during




Back to top