Photo Read Validation Test Cases -MX03US02
Test Case 1 - Verify meter reading cycle header displays correct cycle name and date range
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_001
Title: Verify meter reading cycle header displays correct cycle name and date range Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Low
- Complexity_Level: Low
- Expected_Execution_Time: 2 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 25% of cycle display feature
- Integration_Points: CxServices, API, Happy path
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Smoke-Test-Results
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability:
Test Environment:
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Photo validation service, cycle management service
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds page load
- Data_Requirements: Active cycle "Savaii 202501 R2" with dates "2025-01-09 to 2026-01-09"
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Active meter reading cycle configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role access
- Test_Data: Cycle: "Savaii 202501 R2", Date range: "2025-01-09 to 2026-01-09"
- Prior_Test_Cases: User authentication successful
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Cycle name "Savaii 202501 R2" and date range "2025-01-09 to 2026-01-09" correctly displayed
- Secondary_Verifications: Header styling, breadcrumb navigation, responsive design
- Negative_Verification: No missing or incorrect cycle information displayed
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, cycle setup
- Blocked_Tests: All meter validation workflows
- Parallel_Tests: Navigation tests, header component tests
- Sequential_Tests: Must run before meter data access
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical foundation for all meter validation activities
- Edge_Cases: Very long cycle names, special characters in cycle names
- Risk_Areas: Cycle configuration changes affecting display
- Security_Considerations: Cycle access permissions, data visibility controls
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Cycle header behavior during cycle transitions
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: User story shows cycle management but transition behavior unclear
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Multiple active cycles handling
- Type: Edge Case
- Rationale: Business rule for handling overlapping cycles not defined
- Priority: P3
Test Case 2- Verify cycle information displays correctly for different cycle periods and formats
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_002
Title: Verify cycle information displays correctly for different cycle periods and formats Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
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: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 50% of cycle display variations
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Database, Configuration Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Regression-Coverage, 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: Cycle configuration service, multiple cycle data sets
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds page load
- Data_Requirements: Multiple cycle configurations (monthly, quarterly, annual)
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Multiple cycle types configured in system
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Monthly cycle, Quarterly cycle, Custom date ranges
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC001 (Basic cycle display)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: All cycle types display with correct names and accurate date ranges
- Secondary_Verifications: Date format consistency, character handling, responsive design
- Negative_Verification: No date calculation errors or format inconsistencies
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Cycle configuration service
- Blocked_Tests: Cycle-specific validation workflows
- Parallel_Tests: Other cycle display tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires multiple cycle configurations
Additional Information:
- Notes: Ensures system flexibility for different utility billing cycles
- Edge_Cases: Leap year handling, daylight saving transitions, timezone changes
- Risk_Areas: Date calculation errors, internationalization issues
- Security_Considerations: Cycle configuration access controls
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Timezone handling for multi-region deployments
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: Utility companies may operate across time zones
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Historical cycle archive access
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Need to access older cycles for comparison or audit
- Priority: P4
Test Case 3 - Verify cycle information persistence during navigation and session management
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_003
Title: Verify cycle information persistence during navigation and session management Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of navigation persistence
- Integration_Points: Session Service, CxServices, Navigation Framework
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Integration-Testing, 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: Session management service, navigation framework
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds page load
- Data_Requirements: Active cycle "Savaii 202501 R2" with persistent session
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Active session with cycle information loaded
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role with session management
- Test_Data: Cycle: "Savaii 202501 R2", User session active
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC001 (Basic cycle display)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Cycle information persists accurately across all navigation scenarios
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance during navigation, session stability, multi-tab behavior
- Negative_Verification: No cycle information loss or corruption during navigation
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: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Session service, navigation framework
- Blocked_Tests: User workflow continuity tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other persistence tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires active session establishment
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for user experience and workflow continuity
- Edge_Cases: Network interruptions, server restarts, concurrent sessions
- Risk_Areas: Session management failures, navigation framework issues
- Security_Considerations: Session security, cycle access permissions
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Concurrent session handling across multiple devices
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: Users may access system from multiple locations
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Session recovery after network interruption
- Type: Error Recovery
- Rationale: Robust handling of connectivity issues
- Priority: P2
Test Case 4 - Verify handling of missing or invalid cycle information and error states
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_004
Title: Verify handling of missing or invalid cycle information and error states Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
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: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: Medium
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of error state handling
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Error Handling Service, Fallback Systems
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Security-Validation, Regression-Coverage
- 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: Cycle service with configurable error states
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds error page load
- Data_Requirements: Test environment with no active cycles configured
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Test environment with cycle service errors configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role with error state access
- Test_Data: No active cycles, corrupted cycle data, invalid date ranges
- Prior_Test_Cases: Normal cycle functionality verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: System gracefully handles missing or invalid cycle information
- Secondary_Verifications: Error message quality, fallback functionality, recovery capabilities
- Negative_Verification: No system crashes or undefined states when cycles unavailable
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: Per-Release
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Error condition setup
- Blocked_Tests: Normal workflow tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other error handling tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires error state configuration
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for system reliability and user experience during failures
- Edge_Cases: Partial cycle data corruption, intermittent service failures
- Risk_Areas: Cascade failures, user confusion during errors
- Security_Considerations: Error message information disclosure, unauthorized access
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Cycle configuration change during active user session
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: Administrative changes while users are actively working
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Multiple concurrent cycle configuration errors
- Type: Error Handling
- Rationale: Compound failure scenarios
- Priority: P3
Test Case 5 - Verify all reading status tabs display with correct counts and color coding
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_005
Title: Verify all reading status tabs display with correct counts and color coding Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of tab display functionality
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Database, Count Calculation Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Smoke-Test-Results
- 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: Photo validation service, count calculation service, database
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds page load
- Data_Requirements: Cycle "Savaii 202501 R2" with known reading distribution
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Active cycle "Savaii 202501 R2" with reading data
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role access
- Test_Data: View Reading (1244), Duplicate Reading (30), Missing (0), Exemptions (27), Revisit (0), Pass (1242)
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC001 (Cycle display)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: All reading status tabs display with accurate counts matching database
- Secondary_Verifications: Color coding consistency, icon appropriateness, count badge readability
- Negative_Verification: No missing tabs, incorrect counts, or inconsistent styling
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: Cycle setup, data loading
- Blocked_Tests: Tab-specific functionality tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other UI component tests
- Sequential_Tests: Must run after data preparation
Additional Information:
- Notes: Foundation for all meter validation workflows and user navigation
- Edge_Cases: Very large counts (>9999), zero counts across all tabs
- Risk_Areas: Count calculation errors, real-time count updates
- Security_Considerations: Data access permissions, count visibility by role
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Real-time count updates during concurrent user actions
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Multiple validators working simultaneously may affect counts
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Count accuracy during system load
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: High system load may affect count calculation performance
- Priority: P3
Test Case 6 - Verify count accuracy and real-time updates when readings are processed through validation actions
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_006
Title: Verify count accuracy and real-time updates when readings are processed through validation actions Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of real-time count functionality
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Database, Real-time Service, Count Calculation
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing, 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: Real-time count service, validation service, database
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms for count updates
- Data_Requirements: Meter 70581023 in processable state, initial counts recorded
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Active cycle with meters requiring validation
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role with processing permissions
- Test_Data: Meter: 70581023, Consumer: MATAIA REUPENA, Initial tab counts recorded
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC005 (Tab display), meter available for processing
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Tab counts update accurately and in real-time for all validation actions
- Secondary_Verifications: Count persistence, mathematical consistency, update performance
- Negative_Verification: No count discrepancies or update delays exceeding 2 seconds
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: Tab display, meter access
- Blocked_Tests: Batch processing, reporting
- Parallel_Tests: Other validation action tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires processable meters
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for user confidence in system accuracy and real-time feedback
- Edge_Cases: Rapid successive actions, concurrent user processing, network latency
- Risk_Areas: Count calculation errors, database synchronization issues
- Security_Considerations: Action authorization, audit trail accuracy
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Concurrent multi-user count updates
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Multiple validators working simultaneously
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Count recovery after system interruption
- Type: Error Recovery
- Rationale: Network or system failures during processing
- Priority: P2
Test Case 7 - Verify tab color coding, icons, and visual hierarchy match status types and urgency
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_007
Title: Verify tab color coding, icons, and visual hierarchy match status types and urgency Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: UI
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P3-Medium
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
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: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Low
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of visual design consistency
- Integration_Points: UI Framework, Design System
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
- Trend_Tracking: No
- 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: UI framework, design system components
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds page load
- Data_Requirements: All tab types with counts for visual verification
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Cycle with varied reading statuses for all tab types
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role for UI access
- Test_Data: All tabs populated: Pending, New, Duplicate, View, Missing, Exemptions, Revisit, Pass
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC005 (Tab functionality)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Tab color coding and icons appropriately represent status urgency and type
- Secondary_Verifications: Accessibility compliance, cross-browser consistency, responsive behavior
- Negative_Verification: No confusing color choices or unclear visual hierarchy
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: Per-Release
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Tab functionality, data population
- Blocked_Tests: User experience testing
- Parallel_Tests: Other UI consistency tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires populated tab data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Essential for user productivity and error prevention through visual cues
- Edge_Cases: High contrast mode, color blindness accommodation
- Risk_Areas: Inconsistent design implementation, accessibility violations
- Security_Considerations: No security implications for visual design
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Dark mode or theme variations
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Modern applications often support multiple themes
- Priority: P4
- Scenario_2: Colorblind accessibility testing
- Type: Accessibility
- Rationale: Ensure system usable by colorblind users
- Priority: P3
Test Case 8 - Verify tab count updates in real-time across multiple concurrent user sessions
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_008
Title: Verify tab count updates in real-time across multiple concurrent user sessions Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Performance
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Performance
- Automation Status: Manual
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: Medium
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of concurrent user synchronization
- Integration_Points: Real-time Service, WebSocket, Database, Session Management
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Performance-Metrics, Integration-Testing, Quality-Dashboard
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability:
Test Environment:
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+ (2 sessions), Firefox 118+ (1 session)
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Real-time service, WebSocket connections, concurrent session support
- Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds count synchronization
- Data_Requirements: Cycle "Savaii 202501 R2" accessible by multiple users
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Multiple user accounts with validator permissions
- User_Roles_Permissions: 3 validator accounts: Validator1, Validator2, Validator3
- Test_Data: Cycle: "Savaii 202501 R2", meters available for processing
- Prior_Test_Cases: Single user count updates verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Tab counts synchronize accurately across multiple concurrent user sessions within 5 seconds
- Secondary_Verifications: Network resilience, performance under load, audit trail accuracy
- Negative_Verification: No count discrepancies, lost updates, or synchronization conflicts
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: High
- Automation_Candidate: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Single user functionality, real-time service
- Blocked_Tests: Production load testing
- Parallel_Tests: Other concurrency tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires multi-user environment
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for multi-validator environments and data consistency
- Edge_Cases: Network latency, server load, WebSocket failures
- Risk_Areas: Data synchronization conflicts, performance degradation
- Security_Considerations: Session isolation, user action attribution
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Supervisor override during concurrent validator actions
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: Role hierarchy during concurrent operations
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: System performance with 10+ concurrent users
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Realistic production load scenarios
- Priority: P1
Test Case 9 - Verify tab behavior and user experience when all tabs have zero counts
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_009
Title: Verify tab behavior and user experience when all tabs have zero counts Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Low
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of empty state handling across all tabs
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Empty State Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: QA
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, User-Acceptance
- Trend_Tracking: No
- 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: Cycle service with empty cycle configuration
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds page load
- Data_Requirements: Completed cycle with all readings processed
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Completed cycle where all readings have been processed
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Cycle: "Completed Cycle 202504", all counts: 0 except Pass tab
- Prior_Test_Cases: Cycle completion workflow
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: All zero-count tabs display appropriate empty states without functionality errors
- Secondary_Verifications: UI consistency, feature availability, navigation stability
- Negative_Verification: No broken functionality or confusing UI states
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Cycle completion
- Blocked_Tests: New cycle initiation
- Parallel_Tests: Other empty state tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires completed processing cycle
Additional Information:
- Notes: Important for end-of-cycle user experience and system usability
- Edge_Cases: Partial cycle completion, mixed empty/populated states
- Risk_Areas: User confusion about system state, workflow interruption
- Security_Considerations: Data access in completed cycles
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Transition from populated to empty state in real-time
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: User experience during final processing actions
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Cycle restart from empty state
- Type: Workflow
- Rationale: Administrative restart of completed cycles
- Priority: P4
Test Case 10 - Verify toggle functionality between List View and Detail View modes with layout consistency
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_010
Title: Verify toggle functionality between List View and Detail View modes with layout consistency Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of view toggle functionality
- Integration_Points: UI Framework, Layout Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, Module-Coverage
- 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: UI framework, layout engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds view transition
- Data_Requirements: Cycle "Savaii 202501 R2" with readings in "View Reading" tab
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Active cycle with readings available for viewing
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Cycle: "Savaii 202501 R2", View Reading tab with 1244 readings
- Prior_Test_Cases: Tab functionality verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Toggle between List View and Detail View works smoothly with correct layout changes
- Secondary_Verifications: Button state consistency, data integrity, responsive behavior
- Negative_Verification: No layout breaks, missing data, or toggle failures
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Tab functionality, data loading
- Blocked_Tests: View-specific feature tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other UI component tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires populated reading data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Essential for user productivity and data access flexibility
- Edge_Cases: Very large datasets, browser compatibility, screen size variations
- Risk_Areas: Layout rendering issues, performance with large data sets
- Security_Considerations: Data visibility consistency across views
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: View preference persistence across user sessions
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: User experience improvement for consistent workflow
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: View mode keyboard shortcuts
- Type: Accessibility
- Rationale: Keyboard navigation for accessibility compliance
- Priority: P4
Test Case 11 - Verify List View displays correct columns, data accuracy, and tabular functionality
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_011
Title: Verify List View displays correct columns, data accuracy, and tabular functionality Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
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: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of List View data display
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Database, Sorting Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Regression-Coverage
- 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: Database, sorting service, UI framework
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds data load
- Data_Requirements: "View Reading" tab with meters 70581023, 70581016, 70581066
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Cycle "Savaii 202501 R2" with reading data
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Meters: 70581023 (MATAIA REUPENA), 70581016 (N/A), 70581066 (N/A)
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC010 (View toggle functionality)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: List View displays all required columns with accurate meter data
- Secondary_Verifications: Sorting functionality, action icons, data formatting consistency
- Negative_Verification: No missing columns, data corruption, or broken interactive elements
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: Data loading, view toggle
- Blocked_Tests: Data export, meter selection
- Parallel_Tests: Detail view tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires populated meter data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Foundation for bulk operations and data overview
- Edge_Cases: Very long meter numbers, special characters in names, large consumption values
- Risk_Areas: Data truncation, sorting performance, column alignment
- Security_Considerations: Data visibility by role, sensitive information display
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Column width adjustment and persistence
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: User customization for improved productivity
- Priority: P4
- Scenario_2: List View performance with 1000+ meters
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Large dataset handling requirements
- Priority: P2
Test Case 12 - Verify Detail View displays comprehensive meter information with all required sections
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_012
Title: Verify Detail View displays comprehensive meter information with all required sections Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
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: Low
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Detail View information display
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Image Service, Historical Data Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance, Module-Coverage
- 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: Image service, historical data service, meter information service
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds detail load
- Data_Requirements: Meter 70581023 with complete information set
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with complete data including images and history
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Meter: 70581023, Consumer: MATAIA REUPENA, Account: 28498, Route: Read-Book-193
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC010 (View toggle), TC011 (List View)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Detail View displays all required sections with complete and accurate meter information
- Secondary_Verifications: Data accuracy across sections, image loading, section organization
- Negative_Verification: No missing sections, data inconsistencies, or loading errors
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: View toggle, data loading, image service
- Blocked_Tests: Validation actions, detail interactions
- Parallel_Tests: List view tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires complete meter data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for comprehensive meter analysis and validation decisions
- Edge_Cases: Missing data sections, image loading failures, corrupted historical data
- Risk_Areas: Performance with complex data, section rendering issues
- Security_Considerations: Sensitive data visibility, role-based section access
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Detail View section collapse/expand functionality
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Screen space optimization for focused analysis
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Print-friendly Detail View format
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Documentation and reporting requirements
- Priority: P4
Test Case 13 - Verify view preference persistence across user sessions and navigation
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_013
Title: Verify view preference persistence across user sessions and navigation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P3-Medium
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
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: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Low
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of preference persistence
- Integration_Points: Session Service, User Preferences, Local Storage
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance, Integration-Testing
- Trend_Tracking: No
- 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: Session management, user preference service
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds preference restoration
- Data_Requirements: User account with session persistence enabled
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: User session with preference storage capability
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role with session management
- Test_Data: User: Validator1, Cycle: "Savaii 202501 R2"
- Prior_Test_Cases: Basic view toggle functionality
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: View preferences persist across sessions, navigation, and browser restarts
- Secondary_Verifications: Cross-tab consistency, multi-browser behavior, logout/login cycles
- Negative_Verification: No preference loss, inconsistent states, or synchronization failures
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Session management, user authentication
- Blocked_Tests: User experience optimization
- Parallel_Tests: Other preference tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires user session capability
Additional Information:
- Notes: Enhances user productivity by maintaining workflow preferences
- Edge_Cases: Storage limitations, concurrent sessions, preference conflicts
- Risk_Areas: Storage service failures, cross-browser compatibility
- Security_Considerations: Preference data security, session hijacking prevention
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Preference conflict resolution with multiple active sessions
- Type: Edge Case
- Rationale: User working on multiple devices simultaneously
- Priority: P4
- Scenario_2: Preference reset and default restoration
- Type: Administration
- Rationale: User preference management and troubleshooting
- Priority: P4
Test Case 14 - Verify meter image display functionality when images are available with metadata overlay
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_014
Title: Verify meter image display functionality when images are available with metadata overlay Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Manual
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: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of image display when available
- Integration_Points: Image Service, Metadata Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, Module-Coverage
- 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: Image storage service, metadata service
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds image load
- Data_Requirements: Meter 70581023 with available current reading image
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with uploaded reading images and metadata
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Meter: 70581023, Image with reading value 6, Date: 2025-02-14
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC012 (Detail View functionality)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Meter images display clearly with accurate metadata overlay when available
- Secondary_Verifications: Image quality, metadata accuracy, loading performance, accessibility
- Negative_Verification: No broken images, missing metadata, or loading errors
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Detail View, image service availability
- Blocked_Tests: Image comparison, historical image access
- Parallel_Tests: Other image functionality tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires image data availability
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for visual verification of meter readings and validation decisions
- Edge_Cases: Large image files, corrupted images, missing metadata
- Risk_Areas: Image service performance, storage limitations, browser compatibility
- Security_Considerations: Image access permissions, sensitive location data
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Image zoom and detailed inspection capabilities
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Detailed visual analysis for validation accuracy
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Image annotation and markup functionality
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Validator notes and issue documentation
- Priority: P4
Test Case 15 - Verify "Show Previous" image toggle functionality and historical image comparison
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_015
Title: Verify "Show Previous" image toggle functionality and historical image comparison Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of historical image functionality
- Integration_Points: Image Service, Historical Data Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance, 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: Image service, historical data service
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds historical image load
- Data_Requirements: Meter 70581023 with current and previous reading images
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with multiple historical reading images
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Meter: 70581023, Current: 6 (2025-02-14), Previous: 6207 (2025-01-16)
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC014 (Current image display)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Show Previous toggle successfully switches between current and historical meter images
- Secondary_Verifications: Image quality consistency, toggle responsiveness, metadata accuracy
- Negative_Verification: No image corruption, loading failures, or toggle malfunctions
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: No
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Current image display, historical data availability
- Blocked_Tests: Image comparison workflows
- Parallel_Tests: Other image functionality tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires meters with historical images
Additional Information:
- Notes: Important for validator decision-making through visual comparison
- Edge_Cases: Multiple previous images, corrupted historical data, storage limitations
- Risk_Areas: Historical data retrieval performance, image service availability
- Security_Considerations: Historical image access permissions, data retention policies
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Multiple previous images navigation (beyond just one previous)
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Access to longer historical sequence for trend analysis
- Priority: P4
- Scenario_2: Side-by-side current and previous image comparison
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Improved visual comparison capability
- Priority: P3
Test Case 16 - Verify graceful handling and user messaging when meter images are not available
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_016
Title: Verify graceful handling and user messaging when meter images are not available Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
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: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of image unavailable scenarios
- Integration_Points: Image Service, Error Handling Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance, 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: Image service with configurable unavailability scenarios
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds error state display
- Data_Requirements: Meter without associated images or with broken image links
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter configured without images or with broken image references
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Meter without images, broken image URLs
- Prior_Test_Cases: Normal image display functionality verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: System gracefully handles missing meter images with appropriate user messaging
- Secondary_Verifications: UI consistency, feature accessibility, workflow continuity
- Negative_Verification: No broken layouts, error crashes, or workflow disruptions
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: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Image service configuration
- Blocked_Tests: Image-dependent workflows
- Parallel_Tests: Other error handling tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires image unavailable scenarios
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for maintaining system usability when technical issues occur
- Edge_Cases: Partial image corruption, intermittent service failures, storage quota exceeded
- Risk_Areas: User confusion, workflow interruption, cascade failures
- Security_Considerations: Error message information disclosure, service availability attacks
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Image upload functionality for missing images
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Allow users to provide missing images when possible
- Priority: P4
- Scenario_2: Alternative data sources when images unavailable
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: Backup verification methods for validation decisions
- Priority: P3
Test Case 17 - Verify image loading performance, error handling, and network resilience
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_017
Title: Verify image loading performance, error handling, and network resilience Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Performance
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Performance
- Automation Status: Manual
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: Medium
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of image performance scenarios
- Integration_Points: Image Service, Network Layer, Error Handling
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Performance-Metrics, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
- 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: Image service, network simulation tools
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds image load, < 5 seconds large images
- Data_Requirements: Various image sizes and formats for performance testing
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Network simulation capability, various image test files
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role with image access
- Test_Data: Small images (<1MB), Large images (5-10MB), Corrupted images
- Prior_Test_Cases: Basic image display functionality
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Image loading performance meets defined benchmarks with graceful error handling
- Secondary_Verifications: Network resilience, caching efficiency, resource management
- Negative_Verification: No system crashes, memory leaks, or indefinite loading states
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: High
- Automation_Candidate: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Image service availability, network infrastructure
- Blocked_Tests: Production performance validation
- Parallel_Tests: Other performance tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires performance testing environment
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for user experience in various network conditions
- Edge_Cases: Extreme network conditions, very large files, concurrent users
- Risk_Areas: Performance degradation, user frustration, system overload
- Security_Considerations: DoS prevention, resource limitation enforcement
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Image compression and optimization impact
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Optimize delivery for various network conditions
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Mobile network performance testing
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Field workers often use mobile connections
- Priority: P3
Test Case 18 - Verify reading details display accuracy in Detail View with consumption calculations
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_018
Title: Verify reading details display accuracy in Detail View with consumption calculations Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of reading details display
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Database, Calculation Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, Module-Coverage
- 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: Calculation engine, database, meter data service
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds detail load
- Data_Requirements: Meter 70581023 with complete reading history
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with current and previous reading data
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Meter: 70581023, Previous: 6207 (2025-01-16), Current: 6 (2025-02-14)
- Prior_Test_Cases: Detail View access verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Reading details display accurate previous, current readings and correct consumption calculation
- Secondary_Verifications: Date accuracy, calculation formula, status indicators, layout clarity
- Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, date mismatches, or data inconsistencies
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Detail View, data loading
- Blocked_Tests: Validation decisions, billing calculations
- Parallel_Tests: Other calculation tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires complete meter data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Foundation for all validation decisions and billing accuracy
- Edge_Cases: Meter replacements, reading corrections, timezone changes
- Risk_Areas: Calculation errors, date handling, data synchronization
- Security_Considerations: Reading data integrity, calculation audit trails
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Reading details with meter replacement scenarios
- Type: Edge Case
- Rationale: Special handling when meter hardware changes
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Cross-timezone reading date handling
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: Utilities operating across multiple time zones
- Priority: P3
Test Case 19 - Verify consumption calculation accuracy for normal positive consumption scenarios
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_019
Title: Verify consumption calculation accuracy for normal positive consumption scenarios Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of positive consumption calculations
- Integration_Points: Calculation Engine, Database, Validation Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Regression-Coverage
- 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: Calculation engine, meter data with normal consumption patterns
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms calculation time
- Data_Requirements: Meters with positive consumption scenarios
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meters with normal positive consumption readings
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Normal consumption meters from user story sample data
- Prior_Test_Cases: Basic reading display functionality
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Consumption calculations are mathematically accurate for all positive consumption scenarios
- Secondary_Verifications: Calculation performance, precision handling, audit trail creation
- Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, precision loss, or performance issues
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Reading data availability, calculation engine
- Blocked_Tests: Billing integration, reporting
- Parallel_Tests: Other calculation scenarios
- Sequential_Tests: Requires normal consumption data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for billing accuracy and revenue protection
- Edge_Cases: Very large consumption values, decimal readings, meter rollover
- Risk_Areas: Calculation errors, precision loss, performance degradation
- Security_Considerations: Calculation integrity, audit trail security
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Consumption calculation with meter rollover scenarios
- Type: Edge Case
- Rationale: Meter registers rolling over to zero after maximum value
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Bulk consumption recalculation performance
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: System performance when recalculating many meters simultaneously
- Priority: P2
Test Case 20 - Verify consumption calculation handling and flagging of negative consumption readings
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_020
Title: Verify consumption calculation handling and flagging of negative consumption readings Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of negative consumption handling
- Integration_Points: Calculation Engine, Alert Service, Business Rules Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Security-Validation, Module-Coverage
- 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: Calculation engine, business rules engine, alert service
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms calculation and flagging
- Data_Requirements: Meter 70581023 with negative consumption (-6201)
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with readings resulting in negative consumption
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Meter: 70581023, Previous: 6207, Current: 6, Consumption: -6201
- Prior_Test_Cases: Normal consumption calculations verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Negative consumption calculations are accurate and appropriately flagged as suspicious
- Secondary_Verifications: Visual indicators, business rule enforcement, audit trail creation
- Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, missing flags, or inadequate user warnings
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: Calculation engine, business rules
- Blocked_Tests: Exception handling workflows
- Parallel_Tests: Other anomaly detection tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires negative consumption data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for detecting potential meter tampering, reading errors, or meter replacement
- Edge_Cases: Very large negative values, meter rollback scenarios, data correction situations
- Risk_Areas: Missed fraud detection, false positive alerts, billing inaccuracies
- Security_Considerations: Fraud detection, data integrity, investigation support
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Negative consumption threshold configuration
- Type: Business Rule
- Rationale: Different utilities may have different tolerance levels
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Automated investigation workflow for negative consumption
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: Streamlined process for handling negative consumption cases
- Priority: P3
Test Case 21 - Verify reading details data consistency between List View and Detail View formats
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_021
Title: Verify reading details data consistency between List View and Detail View formats Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
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: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of cross-view data consistency
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Database, UI Framework
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Regression-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: UI framework, database synchronization
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds view switching
- Data_Requirements: Meters 70581023, 70581016, 70581066 with complete data
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Multiple meters with reading data for comparison
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Meters: 70581023 (MATAIA REUPENA), 70581016 (N/A), 70581066 (N/A)
- Prior_Test_Cases: List View and Detail View basic functionality
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: All reading data displays consistently between List View and Detail View
- Secondary_Verifications: Real-time synchronization, data format consistency, navigation stability
- Negative_Verification: No data discrepancies, missing information, or synchronization failures
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: List View, Detail View functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Data integrity workflows
- Parallel_Tests: Other consistency tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires populated meter data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for user confidence in data accuracy across interface modes
- Edge_Cases: Large datasets, special characters, null values, real-time updates
- Risk_Areas: Data synchronization failures, UI rendering inconsistencies
- Security_Considerations: Data integrity, unauthorized data modification
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Data consistency during concurrent user modifications
- Type: Concurrency
- Rationale: Multiple users editing data simultaneously
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Performance impact of cross-view data synchronization
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Large datasets may affect synchronization speed
- Priority: P3
Test Case 22 - Verify automatic daily average consumption calculation with mathematical accuracy
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_022
Title: Verify automatic daily average consumption calculation with mathematical accuracy Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Automated
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: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of daily average calculation
- Integration_Points: Calculation Engine, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, 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: Calculation engine, date calculation service
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms calculation time
- Data_Requirements: Meter 70581023 with consumption -6201 over 29 days
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with reading data spanning multiple days
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Meter: 70581023, Consumption: -6201, Days: 29, Expected Average: 214 per day
- Prior_Test_Cases: Consumption calculation verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Daily average consumption calculated automatically and accurately using |Consumption| ÷ Days formula
- Secondary_Verifications: Decimal precision, performance, real-time updates, cross-view consistency
- Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, division by zero, or performance issues
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Consumption calculation, date calculation
- Blocked_Tests: Usage analysis, reporting
- Parallel_Tests: Other calculation tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires reading data with date spans
Additional Information:
- Notes: Important for usage pattern analysis and consumption benchmarking
- Edge_Cases: Leap year calculations, daylight saving transitions, meter replacement periods
- Risk_Areas: Division by zero, precision loss, date calculation errors
- Security_Considerations: Calculation integrity, audit trail for derived values
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Daily average calculation across month boundaries
- Type: Date Handling
- Rationale: Ensure accurate calculations spanning multiple months
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Daily average with partial day readings
- Type: Edge Case
- Rationale: Readings taken at different times within days
- Priority: P3
Test Case 23 - Verify daily average calculation accuracy for positive consumption scenarios
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_023
Title: Verify daily average calculation accuracy for positive consumption scenarios Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
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: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of positive consumption daily averages
- Integration_Points: Calculation Engine, Data Validation Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Regression-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: Calculation engine, meters with positive consumption
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms calculation time
- Data_Requirements: Normal consumption meters from user story data
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meters with positive consumption readings
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Various meters with positive consumption values
- Prior_Test_Cases: Basic daily average calculation functionality
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Daily average calculations are mathematically accurate for all positive consumption scenarios
- Secondary_Verifications: Decimal precision, rounding consistency, calculation performance
- Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, inconsistent rounding, or performance degradation
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Positive consumption calculations
- Blocked_Tests: Usage analytics, benchmarking
- Parallel_Tests: Negative consumption tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires positive consumption data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Essential for accurate usage analysis and consumption benchmarking
- Edge_Cases: Very small consumption values, single-digit days, high precision requirements
- Risk_Areas: Rounding errors, precision loss, calculation consistency
- Security_Considerations: Calculation audit trail, data integrity
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Daily average calculation with varying time periods
- Type: Temporal
- Rationale: Different reading intervals may affect accuracy
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Batch daily average recalculation performance
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: System performance with bulk calculations
- Priority: P3
Test Case 24 - Verify daily average calculation edge cases and boundary conditions
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_024
Title: Verify daily average calculation edge cases and boundary conditions Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Low
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: Medium
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of edge case scenarios
- Integration_Points: Calculation Engine, Error Handling Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, QA, 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: Calculation engine with edge case handling
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms calculation time
- Data_Requirements: Test meters with edge case scenarios
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Test data with boundary conditions configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator or Supervisor role
- Test_Data: Zero consumption, single day periods, large values
- Prior_Test_Cases: Normal daily average calculations verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Daily average calculations handle all edge cases and boundary conditions appropriately
- Secondary_Verifications: Error handling, precision maintenance, system stability
- Negative_Verification: No system crashes, calculation errors, or undefined states
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Basic calculation functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Production edge case scenarios
- Parallel_Tests: Other boundary condition tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires edge case test data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for system robustness and handling of unusual data scenarios
- Edge_Cases: Division by zero protection, floating point precision, integer overflow
- Risk_Areas: System crashes, incorrect calculations, precision loss
- Security_Considerations: Input validation, calculation bounds checking
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Daily average calculation with timezone transitions
- Type: Temporal Edge Case
- Rationale: Daylight saving time may affect day calculations
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Concurrent edge case calculation performance
- Type: Performance Edge Case
- Rationale: Multiple edge cases processed simultaneously
- Priority: P4
Test Case 25 - Verify daily average calculation updates dynamically when readings are adjusted
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_025
Title: Verify daily average calculation updates dynamically when readings are adjusted Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of dynamic calculation updates
- Integration_Points: Calculation Engine, Real-time Service, Adjustment Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing, 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: Real-time calculation engine, adjustment service
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds recalculation
- Data_Requirements: Meter with adjustable readings
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with reading data available for adjustment
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with adjustment permissions
- Test_Data: Meter with initial consumption and days for baseline calculation
- Prior_Test_Cases: Basic daily average calculation, adjustment functionality
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Daily average calculations update automatically and accurately when readings are adjusted
- Secondary_Verifications: Update timing, calculation accuracy, data persistence
- Negative_Verification: No calculation delays, incorrect updates, or data inconsistencies
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Adjustment functionality, basic calculation
- Blocked_Tests: Real-time validation workflows
- Parallel_Tests: Other real-time update tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires adjustment permissions
Additional Information:
- Notes: Important for maintaining calculation accuracy during validation workflows
- Edge_Cases: Rapid successive adjustments, large calculation changes, network latency
- Risk_Areas: Calculation synchronization, update performance, data consistency
- Security_Considerations: Adjustment authorization, calculation audit trail
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Daily average updates during concurrent user adjustments
- Type: Concurrency
- Rationale: Multiple validators adjusting readings simultaneously
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Bulk adjustment impact on daily
Test Case 26 - Verify all four validation action buttons are available, functional, and properly styled
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_026
Title: Verify all four validation action buttons are available, functional, and properly styled Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of validation action interface
- Integration_Points: CxServices, UI Framework, Action Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, Module-Coverage
- 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: Action service, UI framework, validation service
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms action button response
- Data_Requirements: Meter 70581023 available for validation actions
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter in processable state with action buttons enabled
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role with action permissions
- Test_Data: Meter: 70581023, Consumer: MATAIA REUPENA, status: processable
- Prior_Test_Cases: Detail View access verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: All four validation action buttons (Pass, Exempt, Revisit, Adjust) are visible, properly styled, and functional
- Secondary_Verifications: Color coding, accessibility, hover states, keyboard navigation
- Negative_Verification: No missing buttons, broken styling, or unresponsive interactions
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: Detail View, meter data loading
- Blocked_Tests: Individual action workflows
- Parallel_Tests: Other UI component tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires meter in actionable state
Additional Information:
- Notes: Foundation for all meter validation workflows and user productivity
- Edge_Cases: Different meter states, role-based button availability, disabled states
- Risk_Areas: UI rendering issues, accessibility failures, interaction problems
- Security_Considerations: Action authorization, button state security
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Action button behavior for different meter statuses
- Type: State Management
- Rationale: Buttons may need different availability based on meter state
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Bulk action button availability in List View
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Efficiency for processing multiple meters
- Priority: P3
Test Case 27 - Verify Pass action functionality, status updates, and workflow completion
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_027
Title: Verify Pass action functionality, status updates, and workflow completion Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Pass action workflow
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Database, Billing System, Count Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Integration-Testing
- 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: Validation service, database, count service, billing integration
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds action completion
- Data_Requirements: Meter in "View Reading" or processable state
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter available for validation with Pass action enabled
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role with Pass action permissions
- Test_Data: Meter requiring validation, initial "Pass" tab count recorded
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC026 (Action buttons available)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Pass action successfully validates readings with proper status updates and count changes
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance, audit trail, billing integration, workflow navigation
- Negative_Verification: No action failures, count discrepancies, or workflow interruptions
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: Action button availability, meter data
- Blocked_Tests: Billing processes, reporting
- Parallel_Tests: Other validation action tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires processable meter
Additional Information:
- Notes: Most critical validation action for revenue generation and billing accuracy
- Edge_Cases: Network failures during Pass, concurrent Pass actions, system overload
- Risk_Areas: Billing integration failures, count synchronization issues
- Security_Considerations: Action authorization, audit trail integrity
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Pass action with simultaneous user conflicts
- Type: Concurrency
- Rationale: Multiple validators attempting to pass same meter
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Pass action rollback for supervisor corrections
- Type: Administrative
- Rationale: Need to correct mistakenly passed readings
- Priority: P2
Test Case 28 - Verify role-based access control for validation actions across user types
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_028
Title: Verify role-based access control for validation actions across user types Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Security
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of role-based action access
- Integration_Points: Authorization Service, Role Management, Action Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
- 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: Authorization service, role management system
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second authorization check
- Data_Requirements: Validator and Supervisor user accounts
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Multiple user accounts with different roles configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator account, Supervisor account, unauthorized account
- Test_Data: Test meters available for role-based testing
- Prior_Test_Cases: Basic action functionality verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Validation actions are properly restricted based on user roles with appropriate access controls
- Secondary_Verifications: UI element visibility, API security, URL access protection
- Negative_Verification: No unauthorized access, privilege escalation, or security bypasses
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: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: User authentication, role assignment
- Blocked_Tests: Production security validation
- Parallel_Tests: Other security tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires multiple user accounts
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for maintaining data integrity and preventing unauthorized system access
- Edge_Cases: Role changes during active sessions, concurrent role modifications
- Risk_Areas: Privilege escalation, unauthorized data modification, compliance violations
- Security_Considerations: Role inheritance, session security, audit trail completeness
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Dynamic role changes during active validation session
- Type: Security Edge Case
- Rationale: Role modifications while user is actively working
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Cross-role collaboration workflows
- Type: Workflow Security
- Rationale: Validator-Supervisor interaction scenarios
- Priority: P2
Test Case 29 - Verify validation action audit trail creation and completeness
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_029
Title: Verify validation action audit trail creation and completeness Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of audit trail functionality
- Integration_Points: Audit Service, Database, Compliance System
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Security-Validation, Module-Coverage
- 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: Audit service, database, compliance logging
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second audit entry creation
- Data_Requirements: Meters available for validation actions
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Audit logging system enabled and functional
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role with audit trail access
- Test_Data: Test meters for performing various validation actions
- Prior_Test_Cases: Validation actions functionality verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: All validation actions create complete and accurate audit trail entries
- Secondary_Verifications: Data completeness, timestamp accuracy, user tracking, immutability
- Negative_Verification: No missing audit entries, data corruption, or modification capabilities
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: Validation actions, audit service
- Blocked_Tests: Compliance reporting, investigation workflows
- Parallel_Tests: Other audit tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires functional validation actions
Additional Information:
- Notes: Essential for regulatory compliance, investigation support, and accountability
- Edge_Cases: High-volume logging, concurrent actions, system failures during logging
- Risk_Areas: Audit service failures, data loss, compliance violations
- Security_Considerations: Audit data protection, unauthorized access prevention
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Audit trail performance under high-volume operations
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: System performance during peak validation periods
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Audit trail recovery after system failures
- Type: Resilience
- Rationale: Ensuring audit completeness during system issues
- Priority: P1
Test Case 30 - Verify exemption modal displays with reason code requirement and validation
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_030
Title: Verify exemption modal displays with reason code requirement and validation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of exemption modal interface
- Integration_Points: CxServices, UI Framework, Validation Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, Module-Coverage
- 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: UI framework, exemption service, reason code service
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second modal loading
- Data_Requirements: Meter available for exemption action
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Exemption reason codes configured in system
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role with exemption permissions
- Test_Data: Meter requiring exemption, configured reason codes
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC026 (Action buttons available)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Exemption modal displays correctly with reason code dropdown and required interface elements
- Secondary_Verifications: Modal styling, accessibility, reason code availability, button consistency
- Negative_Verification: No missing elements, broken styling, or accessibility issues
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Exempt button availability, reason code configuration
- Blocked_Tests: Exemption workflow completion
- Parallel_Tests: Other modal interface tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires exemption-eligible meter
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for ensuring proper documentation of exception handling decisions
- Edge_Cases: Long reason code lists, missing reason codes, modal sizing issues
- Risk_Areas: Modal rendering problems, reason code loading failures
- Security_Considerations: Reason code access control, exemption authorization
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Exemption modal with custom reason code entry
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Flexibility for unique exemption scenarios
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Exemption modal with multi-select reason codes
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Complex exemption scenarios requiring multiple reasons
- Priority: P4
Test Case 31 - Verify exemption cannot proceed without reason code selection and validation enforcement
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_031
Title: Verify exemption cannot proceed without reason code selection and validation enforcement Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of exemption validation enforcement
- Integration_Points: Validation Service, Business Rules Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Security-Validation, Module-Coverage
- 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: Validation service, business rules engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms validation response
- Data_Requirements: Meter available for exemption testing
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Exemption modal functionality verified
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role with exemption permissions
- Test_Data: Meter requiring exemption, reason code validation rules
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC030 (Exemption modal display)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Exemption action cannot proceed without reason code selection with clear validation enforcement
- Secondary_Verifications: Error messaging, modal persistence, status preservation, accessibility
- Negative_Verification: No bypass methods, data corruption, or incomplete validation states
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Exemption modal display
- Blocked_Tests: Valid exemption completion
- Parallel_Tests: Other validation enforcement tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires exemption modal access
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for ensuring compliance with documentation requirements for exemptions
- Edge_Cases: Client-side validation bypass attempts, network interruptions during validation
- Risk_Areas: Validation bypass, incomplete exemption data, compliance violations
- Security_Considerations: Business rule enforcement, audit trail completeness
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Exemption validation with invalid reason code values
- Type: Input Validation
- Rationale: Protection against data corruption or injection
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Exemption validation during network connectivity issues
- Type: Network Resilience
- Rationale: Maintain validation integrity during connection problems
- Priority: P3
Test Case 32- Verify successful exemption completion with reason code selection and status updates
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_032
Title: Verify successful exemption completion with reason code selection and status updates Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of successful exemption workflow
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Database, Count Service, Audit Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Integration-Testing
- 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: Exemption service, database, count service, audit service
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds exemption completion
- Data_Requirements: Meter available for exemption, configured reason codes
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Exemption reason codes configured and accessible
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role with exemption permissions
- Test_Data: Target meter, reason codes (EX-01, EX-02, etc.), initial Exemptions count
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC030 (Modal display), TC031 (Validation enforcement)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Exemption completes successfully with reason code selection, proper status updates, and count changes
- Secondary_Verifications: Modal closure, audit trail, performance, data persistence
- Negative_Verification: No exemption failures, count discrepancies, or data loss
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: Exemption modal, reason code validation
- Blocked_Tests: Exception reporting, billing adjustments
- Parallel_Tests: Other completion workflow tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires valid exemption setup
Additional Information:
- Notes: Essential for proper exception handling and billing accuracy
- Edge_Cases: Long reason code descriptions, multiple rapid exemptions, system load
- Risk_Areas: Data synchronization, count accuracy, audit trail completeness
- Security_Considerations: Exemption authorization, reason code integrity
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Bulk exemption with reason code application
- Type: Efficiency
- Rationale: Processing multiple similar exemptions simultaneously
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Exemption reversal workflow for corrections
- Type: Error Recovery
- Rationale: Correcting mistakenly exempted readings
- Priority: P2
Test Case 33 - Verify exemption modal cancel functionality and state preservation
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_033
Title: Verify exemption modal cancel functionality and state preservation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
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: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Low
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of exemption cancellation workflow
- Integration_Points: UI Framework, State Management
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance, Module-Coverage
- Trend_Tracking: No
- 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: UI framework, state management service
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second modal closure
- Data_Requirements: Meter available for exemption testing
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Exemption modal functionality verified
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator role with exemption access
- Test_Data: Target meter, configured reason codes
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC030 (Modal display functionality)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Exemption modal cancellation closes without saving changes and preserves original state
- Secondary_Verifications: Multiple cancellation methods, state integrity, UI cleanup
- Negative_Verification: No unintended exemptions, audit entries, or state changes
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Exemption modal display
- Blocked_Tests: User workflow optimization
- Parallel_Tests: Other modal cancellation tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires exemption modal access
Additional Information:
- Notes: Important for user experience and preventing accidental exemptions
- Edge_Cases: Network interruptions during cancellation, rapid cancellation attempts
- Risk_Areas: State corruption, incomplete cleanup, modal persistence
- Security_Considerations: No security implications for cancellation
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Modal cancellation during network connectivity issues
- Type: Network Resilience
- Rationale: Ensure clean cancellation even with connection problems
- Priority: P4
- Scenario_2: Cancellation behavior with unsaved form data warnings
- Type: User Experience
- Rationale: Alert users about losing entered information
- Priority: P3
Test Case 34 - Verify adjustment modal displays both manual adjustment and estimation tabs
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_034
Title: Verify adjustment modal displays both manual adjustment and estimation tabs Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of adjustment modal interface
- Integration_Points: CxServices, UI Framework, Estimation Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, Module-Coverage
- 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: UI framework, estimation service, adjustment service
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second modal loading
- Data_Requirements: Meter 70581023 with adjustment capability
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with reading data available for adjustment
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with adjustment permissions
- Test_Data: Meter: 70581023, Previous: 6207, Current: 6, adjustable state
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC026 (Action buttons available)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Adjustment modal displays with both manual adjustment and estimation tabs properly structured
- Secondary_Verifications: Tab navigation, interface clarity, default states, action options
- Negative_Verification: No missing tabs, broken interfaces, or navigation issues
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Adjust button availability, supervisor permissions
- Blocked_Tests: Manual adjustment, estimation workflows
- Parallel_Tests: Other modal interface tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires adjustment-eligible meter
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for providing flexible reading correction options to supervisors
- Edge_Cases: Long estimation method lists, complex adjustment scenarios
- Risk_Areas: Tab switching issues, interface rendering problems
- Security_Considerations: Supervisor-only access, adjustment authorization
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Adjustment modal with insufficient data for estimation
- Type: Data Dependency
- Rationale: Estimation options may not be available for all meters
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Adjustment modal responsive design for different screen sizes
- Type: Responsive Design
- Rationale: Modal usability across various devices
- Priority: P3
Test Case 35 - Verify manual adjustment functionality with real-time consumption calculation
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_035
Title: Verify manual adjustment functionality with real-time consumption calculation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of manual adjustment functionality
- Integration_Points: Calculation Engine, Database, Real-time Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Integration-Testing
- 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: Calculation engine, real-time service, database
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms real-time calculation
- Data_Requirements: Meter with Previous: 3602, adjustable current reading
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Adjustment modal accessible with manual adjustment tab
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with manual adjustment permissions
- Test_Data: Previous Reading: 3602, test adjustment values
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC034 (Adjustment modal display)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Manual adjustment functionality works with accurate real-time consumption calculations
- Secondary_Verifications: Input validation, decimal precision, negative value handling, performance
- Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, input restrictions, or processing failures
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Adjustment modal, calculation engine
- Blocked_Tests: Billing adjustments, consumption reporting
- Parallel_Tests: Estimation adjustment tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires supervisor permissions
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for correcting reading errors and maintaining billing accuracy
- Edge_Cases: Very large values, extreme decimal precision, rapid value changes
- Risk_Areas: Calculation accuracy, input validation, data synchronization
- Security_Considerations: Supervisor authorization, adjustment audit trail
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Manual adjustment with input validation boundaries
- Type: Input Validation
- Rationale: Prevent unrealistic or harmful adjustment values
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Manual adjustment undo functionality
- Type: Error Recovery
- Rationale: Ability to reverse incorrect adjustments
- Priority: P2
Test Case 36 - Verify estimation tab functionality with available estimation methods and descriptions
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_036
Title: Verify estimation tab functionality with available estimation methods and descriptions Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of estimation interface functionality
- Integration_Points: Estimation Service, Database, Configuration Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Integration-Testing
- 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: Estimation service, configuration service, historical data
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second estimation option loading
- Data_Requirements: Meter with sufficient historical data for estimation
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Estimation rules configured and available
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with estimation permissions
- Test_Data: Meter with 3+ months history, estimation rules configured
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC034 (Adjustment modal tabs)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Estimation tab displays all available estimation methods with clear descriptions and proper selection interface
- Secondary_Verifications: Radio button functionality, rule loading, performance, configuration integration
- Negative_Verification: No missing estimation methods, broken descriptions, or selection issues
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Estimation service, configuration setup
- Blocked_Tests: Estimation execution, automated adjustments
- Parallel_Tests: Manual adjustment tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires estimation configuration
Additional Information:
- Notes: Essential for automated reading correction and missing data handling
- Edge_Cases: Insufficient historical data, configuration changes, method unavailability
- Risk_Areas: Configuration loading failures, method selection issues
- Security_Considerations: Estimation rule access, configuration integrity
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Estimation method availability based on data sufficiency
- Type: Data Dependency
- Rationale: Methods may not be available without sufficient historical data
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Custom estimation rule configuration
- Type: Configuration
- Rationale: Utilities may need organization-specific estimation methods
- Priority: P3
Test Case 37 - Verify tab switching preserves modal state and user selections
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_037
Title: Verify tab switching preserves modal state and user selections Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
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: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of modal state management
- Integration_Points: UI Framework, State Management Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance, Module-Coverage
- Trend_Tracking: No
- 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: UI framework, state management
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms tab switching
- Data_Requirements: Meter with adjustment capability
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Adjustment modal with both tabs functional
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with adjustment permissions
- Test_Data: Test adjustment values, estimation options
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC034, TC035, TC036 (Tab functionality)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Tab switching preserves user inputs and selections in both manual and estimation modes
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance during switching, state consistency, derived data preservation
- Negative_Verification: No data loss, state corruption, or interface inconsistencies
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Tab functionality, state management
- Blocked_Tests: User workflow optimization
- Parallel_Tests: Other state preservation tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires functional tab interfaces
Additional Information:
- Notes: Important for user experience and preventing data loss during complex adjustments
- Edge_Cases: Rapid tab switching, browser memory limitations, complex state scenarios
- Risk_Areas: State corruption, memory leaks, inconsistent interface behavior
- Security_Considerations: State isolation, data integrity
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: State preservation during network interruptions
- Type: Network Resilience
- Rationale: Maintain user inputs during connectivity issues
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: State preservation with browser memory constraints
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Ensure functionality under resource limitations
- Priority: P4
Test Case 38 - Verify Average Consumption estimation method calculation and application
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_038
Title: Verify Average Consumption estimation method calculation and application Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Average Consumption estimation
- Integration_Points: Estimation Service, Database, Historical Data Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Integration-Testing
- 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: Estimation service, historical data service, calculation engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds estimation calculation
- Data_Requirements: Meter with 3+ months of consumption history
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with sufficient historical consumption data
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with estimation permissions
- Test_Data: Historical consumption: Month1=298, Month2=301, Month3=295
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC036 (Estimation interface)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Average Consumption estimation calculates accurately using 3-month average and applies correctly
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance, decimal precision, audit trail, data persistence
- Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, data corruption, or application failures
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Historical data availability, estimation service
- Blocked_Tests: Missing reading resolution, billing adjustments
- Parallel_Tests: Other estimation method tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires sufficient historical data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Most commonly used estimation method for consistent consumption patterns
- Edge_Cases: Insufficient historical data, extreme consumption variations, data quality issues
- Risk_Areas: Historical data accuracy, calculation precision, seasonal variations
- Security_Considerations: Historical data access, estimation authorization
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Average estimation with incomplete historical data
- Type: Data Sufficiency
- Rationale: Handle scenarios with less than 3 months of data
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Average estimation with seasonal consumption patterns
- Type: Algorithm Enhancement
- Rationale: Account for seasonal usage variations in calculations
- Priority: P2
Test Case 39 - Verify Same Month Last Year estimation method accuracy and historical data lookup
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_039
Title: Verify Same Month Last Year estimation method accuracy and historical data lookup Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Same Month Last Year estimation
- Integration_Points: Estimation Service, Historical Data Service, Date Calculation
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Integration-Testing
- 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: Historical data service, date calculation service, estimation engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds historical lookup
- Data_Requirements: Meter with 12+ months of historical data
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with historical data spanning at least 12 months
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with estimation permissions
- Test_Data: Current month consumption reference available from previous year
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC036 (Estimation interface)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Same Month Last Year estimation accurately retrieves and applies consumption from exactly 12 months prior
- Secondary_Verifications: Date calculation accuracy, leap year handling, performance, audit trail
- Negative_Verification: No date calculation errors, incorrect historical lookups, or data corruption
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Historical data availability, date calculation service
- Blocked_Tests: Seasonal analysis, year-over-year reporting
- Parallel_Tests: Other estimation method tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires 12+ months historical data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Valuable for seasonal consumption patterns and year-over-year consistency
- Edge_Cases: Leap year transitions, missing historical data, meter replacement scenarios
- Risk_Areas: Date calculation errors, historical data corruption, timezone handling
- Security_Considerations: Historical data access permissions, data integrity
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Same month estimation with missing historical data
- Type: Data Availability
- Rationale: Handle scenarios where exact month data is unavailable
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Same month estimation across timezone changes
- Type: Temporal Edge Case
- Rationale: Accurate date calculation across different time zones
- Priority: P3
Test Case 40 - Verify Last Month Consumption estimation method with immediate historical reference
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_040
Title: Verify Last Month Consumption estimation method with immediate historical reference Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Last Month Consumption estimation
- Integration_Points: Estimation Service, Database, Recent Data Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Integration-Testing
- 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: Estimation service, database, recent data access
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second recent data lookup
- Data_Requirements: Meter with previous month consumption data
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with valid previous month consumption reading
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with estimation permissions
- Test_Data: Previous month consumption available and validated
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC036 (Estimation interface)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Last Month Consumption estimation accurately retrieves and applies previous month's consumption
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance, data availability checks, cross-month handling, audit trail
- Negative_Verification: No data retrieval errors, incorrect values, or availability issues
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Previous month data availability
- Blocked_Tests: Recent consumption analysis
- Parallel_Tests: Other estimation method tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires recent historical data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Simplest and fastest estimation method for stable consumption patterns
- Edge_Cases: Missing previous month data, month boundary transitions, data quality issues
- Risk_Areas: Recent data availability, cross-month calculations
- Security_Considerations: Recent data access permissions
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Last month estimation with no previous data
- Type: Data Availability
- Rationale: Graceful handling when previous month data unavailable
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Last month estimation performance under load
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Ensure fast access during high-volume processing
- Priority: P3
Test Case 41 - Verify estimation rule priority and fallback sequence when primary method fails
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_041
Title: Verify estimation rule priority and fallback sequence when primary method fails Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: Medium
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of estimation fallback logic
- Integration_Points: Estimation Service, Business Rules Engine, Data Availability Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Security-Validation, Module-Coverage
- 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: Estimation service, business rules engine, test data with limited history
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds fallback processing
- Data_Requirements: Meter with insufficient data for primary estimation method
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with limited historical data (< 12 months)
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with estimation permissions
- Test_Data: New meter or meter with incomplete historical data
- Prior_Test_Cases: Individual estimation methods verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Estimation rule priority and fallback sequence works correctly when primary methods fail
- Secondary_Verifications: User notification, audit trail, performance, error handling
- Negative_Verification: No estimation failures without proper fallback or user notification
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: High
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Estimation methods, business rules configuration
- Blocked_Tests: Production estimation reliability
- Parallel_Tests: Other business rule tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires limited historical data scenarios
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for ensuring estimation reliability with incomplete data
- Edge_Cases: Multiple simultaneous fallbacks, configuration changes, data corruption
- Risk_Areas: Infinite fallback loops, incorrect priority sequences, performance degradation
- Security_Considerations: Business rule integrity, estimation authorization
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Estimation priority configuration changes during operation
- Type: Configuration Management
- Rationale: Dynamic priority updates may affect active estimations
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Fallback performance with high-volume concurrent estimations
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: System behavior under load with multiple fallback scenarios
- Priority: P2
Test Case 42 - Verify estimation rule configuration dependency and dynamic rule loading
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_042
Title: Verify estimation rule configuration dependency and dynamic rule loading Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Integration
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of estimation configuration integration
- Integration_Points: Configuration Service, Estimation Rules Setup, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing, 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: Configuration service, estimation rules database, admin interface
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds rule loading
- Data_Requirements: Configurable estimation rules setup
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Access to estimation rules configuration system
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with configuration access
- Test_Data: Various estimation rule configurations
- Prior_Test_Cases: Basic estimation functionality verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Estimation rules are dynamically loaded from configuration with proper filtering and availability checks
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance, error handling, security, audit trail
- Negative_Verification: No configuration failures, incorrect rule loading, or access violations
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: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Configuration service, estimation rules setup
- Blocked_Tests: Rule customization, organizational configuration
- Parallel_Tests: Other configuration integration tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires configuration system access
Additional Information:
- Notes: Essential for organizational flexibility in estimation methodology
- Edge_Cases: Configuration service outages, invalid configurations, concurrent updates
- Risk_Areas: Configuration corruption, rule loading failures, permission issues
- Security_Considerations: Configuration access control, rule modification authorization
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Estimation rule hot-swapping during active operations
- Type: Dynamic Configuration
- Rationale: Update rules without system restart or user interruption
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Custom estimation rule development and deployment
- Type: Extensibility
- Rationale: Organization-specific estimation algorithms
- Priority: P4
Test Case 43 - Verify estimation accuracy and calculation validation across all three methods
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_043
Title: Verify estimation accuracy and calculation validation across all three methods Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of estimation calculation validation
- Integration_Points: Calculation Engine, Database, Historical Data Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Integration-Testing
- 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: Calculation engine, historical data with known values
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds calculation validation
- Data_Requirements: Meter with verified historical consumption data
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Meter with comprehensive historical data for all estimation methods
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with estimation permissions
- Test_Data: Known historical values: 3-month (298,301,295), last year (305), last month (298)
- Prior_Test_Cases: Individual estimation method functionality
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: All three estimation methods produce mathematically accurate and consistent results
- Secondary_Verifications: Calculation precision, performance, consistency, audit trail
- Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, precision loss, or inconsistent results
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: Historical data accuracy, calculation engine
- Blocked_Tests: Billing accuracy, revenue protection
- Parallel_Tests: Other calculation validation tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires comprehensive historical data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for ensuring billing accuracy and revenue protection through estimation
- Edge_Cases: Extreme consumption values, floating point precision, calculation boundaries
- Risk_Areas: Calculation errors, precision loss, algorithm inconsistencies
- Security_Considerations: Calculation integrity, audit trail completeness
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Estimation calculation validation with corrupted historical data
- Type: Data Integrity
- Rationale: Ensure accurate calculations even with data quality issues
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Bulk estimation calculation performance and accuracy
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Maintain accuracy during high-volume estimation processing
- Priority: P2
Test Case 44 - Verify real-time consumption calculation during manual adjustment with impact display
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_044
Title: Verify real-time consumption calculation during manual adjustment with impact display Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Automated
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: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of real-time consumption impact display
- Integration_Points: Calculation Engine, Real-time Service, UI Framework
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, Module-Coverage
- 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: Real-time calculation engine, UI framework
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms real-time calculation
- Data_Requirements: Meter with Previous Reading: 3602 for calculation base
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Manual adjustment modal functional with real-time calculations
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with manual adjustment permissions
- Test_Data: Previous Reading: 3602, test adjustment values for impact calculation
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC035 (Manual adjustment functionality)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Real-time consumption calculation displays accurately and immediately during manual adjustment
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance timing, negative value handling, decimal precision, visual indicators
- Negative_Verification: No calculation delays, errors, or display inconsistencies
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Manual adjustment interface, calculation engine
- Blocked_Tests: Adjustment decision workflows
- Parallel_Tests: Other real-time calculation tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires functional adjustment modal
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for user confidence in adjustment decisions and billing impact awareness
- Edge_Cases: Very large numbers, extreme precision, rapid input changes
- Risk_Areas: Calculation performance, UI responsiveness, precision handling
- Security_Considerations: Calculation integrity, impact accuracy
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Real-time calculation with network latency
- Type: Network Performance
- Rationale: Ensure calculation responsiveness under poor network conditions
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Real-time calculation memory optimization
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Efficient calculation updates without memory leaks
- Priority: P4
Test Case 45 - Verify consumption impact calculation accuracy and mathematical formula validation
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_045
Title: Verify consumption impact calculation accuracy and mathematical formula validation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of consumption impact calculation accuracy
- Integration_Points: Calculation Engine, Mathematical Validation Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, QA
- 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: Calculation engine with mathematical validation
- Performance_Baseline: < 100ms calculation accuracy
- Data_Requirements: Various test scenarios with known mathematical results
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Manual adjustment interface with consumption impact calculation
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with adjustment permissions
- Test_Data: Multiple test scenarios with predetermined calculation results
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC044 (Real-time calculation display)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Consumption impact calculations are mathematically accurate for all test scenarios
- Secondary_Verifications: Decimal precision, rounding consistency, edge case handling, performance
- Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, precision loss, or mathematical inconsistencies
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Calculation engine availability
- Blocked_Tests: Billing accuracy, financial calculations
- Parallel_Tests: Other mathematical accuracy tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires functional calculation interface
Additional Information:
- Notes: Foundation for all financial accuracy and billing integrity in the system
- Edge_Cases: Floating point precision limits, extreme value calculations, rounding edge cases
- Risk_Areas: Mathematical errors, precision loss, calculation inconsistencies
- Security_Considerations: Calculation integrity, financial accuracy
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Consumption calculation with meter rollover scenarios
- Type: Edge Case
- Rationale: Handle meter register overflow and reset scenarios
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Bulk calculation accuracy under system load
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Maintain accuracy during high-volume processing
- Priority: P2
Test Case 46 - Verify consumption impact display formatting, warnings, and visual hierarchy
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_046
Title: Verify consumption impact display formatting, warnings, and visual hierarchy Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: UI
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
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: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Low
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of consumption impact visual design
- Integration_Points: UI Framework, Design System
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
- Trend_Tracking: No
- 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: UI framework, design system
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second visual rendering
- Data_Requirements: Various consumption scenarios for visual testing
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Manual adjustment interface with consumption impact display
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with adjustment access
- Test_Data: Various consumption values for visual verification
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC044 (Real-time calculation display)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Consumption impact displays with appropriate visual formatting and warning indicators
- Secondary_Verifications: Color coding, iconography, number formatting, accessibility compliance
- Negative_Verification: No confusing visual cues, poor contrast, or unclear formatting
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: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Consumption calculation functionality
- Blocked_Tests: User experience optimization
- Parallel_Tests: Other UI design tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires functional consumption display
Additional Information:
- Notes: Important for user decision-making and error prevention through visual cues
- Edge_Cases: Very long numbers, extreme values, browser rendering differences
- Risk_Areas: Visual inconsistencies, accessibility violations, user confusion
- Security_Considerations: No security implications for visual design
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Consumption impact display in dark mode
- Type: Theme Variation
- Rationale: Ensure visual clarity across different interface themes
- Priority: P4
- Scenario_2: Consumption impact display for colorblind users
- Type: Accessibility
- Rationale: Ensure visual warnings accessible to colorblind users
- Priority: P3
Test Case 47 - Verify consumption impact persistence and accuracy after adjustment completion
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_047
Title: Verify consumption impact persistence and accuracy after adjustment completion Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
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: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of consumption impact persistence
- Integration_Points: Database, Calculation Engine, State Management
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing, 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: Database, calculation engine, state management
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds adjustment completion
- Data_Requirements: Meter with adjustable reading for persistence testing
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Functional adjustment workflow with consumption impact calculation
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with adjustment permissions
- Test_Data: Test meter with known baseline for impact verification
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC044 (Real-time calculation), TC035 (Manual adjustment)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Consumption impact persists accurately after adjustment completion across all views and sessions
- Secondary_Verifications: Cross-view consistency, database persistence, derived calculation updates
- Negative_Verification: No data loss, calculation inconsistencies, or persistence failures
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Adjustment completion, calculation accuracy
- Blocked_Tests: Billing integration, reporting accuracy
- Parallel_Tests: Other data persistence tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires functional adjustment workflow
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for ensuring adjustment decisions persist accurately for billing and reporting
- Edge_Cases: Network interruptions during persistence, concurrent adjustments, system restarts
- Risk_Areas: Data synchronization failures, calculation drift, persistence errors
- Security_Considerations: Data integrity, unauthorized modification prevention
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Consumption impact persistence during system failures
- Type: Resilience
- Rationale: Ensure data integrity during unexpected system issues
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Consumption impact rollback functionality
- Type: Error Recovery
- Rationale: Ability to reverse adjustments and restore original impact
- Priority: P3
Test Case 48 - Verify supervisor access to batch processing functionality and interface elements
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_048
Title: Verify supervisor access to batch processing functionality and interface elements Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Security
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Manual
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: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of supervisor batch access
- Integration_Points: Authorization Service, Role Management, Batch Processing Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
- 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: Authorization service, role management, batch processing service
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds batch interface loading
- Data_Requirements: Supervisor user account, multiple readings available for batch processing
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Supervisor user account configured with appropriate permissions
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with batch processing privileges
- Test_Data: Multiple meters available for batch operations, Missing Readings available
- Prior_Test_Cases: Basic validation functionality verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Supervisor role has access to all batch processing functionality and interface elements
- Secondary_Verifications: UI element visibility, feature availability, performance, role-specific access
- Negative_Verification: No unauthorized access restrictions or missing supervisor features
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: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Supervisor authentication, role assignment
- Blocked_Tests: Batch processing operations
- Parallel_Tests: Validator role restriction tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires supervisor role configuration
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for ensuring supervisors can efficiently manage large-scale validation operations
- Edge_Cases: Role changes during session, concurrent supervisor operations
- Risk_Areas: Unauthorized access, feature unavailability, performance issues
- Security_Considerations: Role-based access control, supervisor privilege management
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Supervisor batch access with concurrent validator sessions
- Type: Concurrency
- Rationale: Ensure supervisor features work with multiple active validator sessions
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Dynamic supervisor privilege updates
- Type: Role Management
- Rationale: Handle real-time changes to supervisor permissions
- Priority: P3
Test Case 49 - Verify "Estimate All" functionality for missing readings with bulk processing
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_049
Title: Verify "Estimate All" functionality for missing readings with bulk processing Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
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: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of bulk estimation functionality
- Integration_Points: Batch Service, Estimation Engine, Database, Count Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Integration-Testing
- 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: Batch processing service, estimation engine, database
- Performance_Baseline: < 30 seconds for bulk estimation processing
- Data_Requirements: Multiple missing readings (simulate 114 missing readings)
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Supervisor access verified, multiple missing readings available
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with batch processing permissions
- Test_Data: 114 missing readings, configured estimation rules
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC048 (Supervisor batch access)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: "Estimate All" successfully processes all missing readings with accurate estimation and count updates
- Secondary_Verifications: Processing performance, status updates, audit trail, calculation accuracy
- Negative_Verification: No processing failures, count discrepancies, or incomplete estimations
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: Supervisor access, missing readings availability
- Blocked_Tests: Billing completion, cycle closure
- Parallel_Tests: Other bulk processing tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires missing readings data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for efficient processing of large volumes of missing readings
- Edge_Cases: Very large datasets, estimation rule failures, concurrent processing
- Risk_Areas: Processing timeouts, partial failures, system overload
- Security_Considerations: Supervisor authorization, bulk operation audit trail
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Estimate All with mixed estimation rule availability
- Type: Data Dependency
- Rationale: Handle scenarios where not all missing readings support the selected method
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Estimate All performance with 1000+ missing readings
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Ensure scalability for large utility operations
- Priority: P2
Test Case 50 - Verify multi-select functionality and bulk action controls in List View
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_050
Title: Verify multi-select functionality and bulk action controls in List View Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of multi-select interface functionality
- Integration_Points: UI Framework, Batch Service, Selection Management
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance, 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: UI framework, selection management service
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds selection response
- Data_Requirements: Multiple meters available in List View for selection
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Supervisor access with List View containing multiple meters
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with multi-select capabilities
- Test_Data: Multiple meters available for selection operations
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC048 (Supervisor batch access)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Multi-select functionality works smoothly with proper visual feedback and bulk action controls
- Secondary_Verifications: Selection persistence, performance, state management, conditional button availability
- Negative_Verification: No selection failures, performance issues, or inconsistent state management
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: List View functionality, supervisor access
- Blocked_Tests: Bulk operations, batch processing
- Parallel_Tests: Other UI interaction tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires List View with multiple meters
Additional Information:
- Notes: Essential for efficient bulk operations and supervisor productivity
- Edge_Cases: Large datasets, browser performance limitations, rapid selection changes
- Risk_Areas: Performance degradation, selection state corruption, UI responsiveness
- Security_Considerations: Selection authorization, bulk operation permissions
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Multi-select with pagination across multiple pages
- Type: Pagination
- Rationale: Handle selections across paginated result sets
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Multi-select performance with 1000+ meters
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Ensure selection responsiveness with large datasets
- Priority: P3
Test Case 51 - Verify role-based restrictions for batch processing between Validator and Supervisor
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_051
Title: Verify role-based restrictions for batch processing between Validator and Supervisor Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Security
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of role-based batch processing restrictions
- Integration_Points: Authorization Service, Role Management, Access Control
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
- 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: Authorization service, role management, batch processing service
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second authorization check
- Data_Requirements: Validator and Supervisor user accounts
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Both Validator and Supervisor user accounts configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: Validator account (limited), Supervisor account (full batch access)
- Test_Data: Multiple meters available for batch operation testing
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC048 (Supervisor batch access)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Batch processing functionality properly restricted by role with Validators having limited access and Supervisors having full access
- Secondary_Verifications: UI element visibility, API security, audit trail accuracy, concurrent access
- Negative_Verification: No unauthorized access, privilege escalation, or security bypasses
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: Partial
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Role assignment, authorization service
- Blocked_Tests: Production security validation
- Parallel_Tests: Other role-based security tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires multiple role accounts
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for maintaining proper separation of duties and preventing unauthorized bulk operations
- Edge_Cases: Role changes during active sessions, permission inheritance, concurrent role conflicts
- Risk_Areas: Privilege escalation, unauthorized batch operations, data security breaches
- Security_Considerations: Role-based access control, session security, audit trail integrity
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Role escalation during active batch processing session
- Type: Security Edge Case
- Rationale: Handle role changes while batch operations are in progress
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Temporary supervisor delegation for batch operations
- Type: Administrative Feature
- Rationale: Allow temporary elevation of Validator privileges for specific operations
- Priority: P3
Test Case 52 - Verify new meter detection and "Add Meter to System" functionality with proper serialization
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_052
Title: Verify new meter detection and "Add Meter to System" functionality with proper serialization Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Onboarding
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of new meter addition workflow
- Integration_Points: CxServices, Database, Meter Management Service, Serialization Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, Module-Coverage
- 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: Meter management service, database, serialization service
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds meter addition
- Data_Requirements: New meter record NEW-86754 with reading data
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: New meter reading uploaded but not yet registered in system
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with meter management permissions
- Test_Data: NEW-86754 with initial reading 100, route assignment capability
- Prior_Test_Cases: Basic system access verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: New meter successfully detected and added to system with proper serialization and route assignment
- Secondary_Verifications: Auto-generation accuracy, route/premise assignment, status updates
- Negative_Verification: No serialization errors, duplicate numbers, or assignment failures
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: New reading upload, serialization service
- Blocked_Tests: Meter activation, billing setup
- Parallel_Tests: Other meter management tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires new meter reading data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for expanding utility service coverage and customer onboarding
- Edge_Cases: Duplicate device numbers, invalid route assignments, serialization conflicts
- Risk_Areas: Number generation failures, assignment errors, data corruption
- Security_Considerations: Meter registration authorization, data integrity
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: New meter addition with duplicate device number handling
- Type: Data Validation
- Rationale: Prevent conflicts with existing meter hardware
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Bulk new meter addition for large installations
- Type: Efficiency
- Rationale: Handle multiple new meter registrations simultaneously
- Priority: P3
Test Case 53 - Verify meter number auto-generation system and serialization consistency
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_053
Title: Verify meter number auto-generation system and serialization consistency Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Onboarding
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of meter number generation and serialization
- Integration_Points: Serialization Service, Database, Number Generation Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, QA
- 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: Serialization service, database, number generation algorithm
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds number generation
- Data_Requirements: Multiple new meters for sequence testing
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Serialization service functional with number generation capability
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with meter addition permissions
- Test_Data: Multiple new meter candidates for sequence testing
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC052 (Basic meter addition)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: Meter number auto-generation produces unique, properly formatted, sequential numbers consistently
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance, uniqueness validation, format consistency, error handling
- Negative_Verification: No duplicate numbers, format violations, or generation failures
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Serialization service, database integrity
- Blocked_Tests: Meter identification, billing setup
- Parallel_Tests: Other data integrity tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires functional number generation
Additional Information:
- Notes: Foundation for all meter identification and tracking throughout system lifecycle
- Edge_Cases: Number exhaustion, format changes, generation service failures
- Risk_Areas: Duplicate generation, sequence breaks, format inconsistencies
- Security_Considerations: Number predictability, generation algorithm security
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Meter number generation with custom organization formats
- Type: Configuration
- Rationale: Different utilities may require specific numbering schemes
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Number generation rollover and sequence reset handling
- Type: Edge Case
- Rationale: Handle sequence limits and reset scenarios
- Priority: P3
Test Case 54 - Verify route and premise assignment functionality for new meters
Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_054
Title: Verify route and premise assignment functionality for new meters Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Onboarding
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of route and premise assignment for new meters
- Integration_Points: Route Service, Premise Service, Database, Location Management
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing, Module-Coverage
- 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: Route service, premise service, location management
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds assignment completion
- Data_Requirements: Available routes and premises for assignment testing
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Route and premise data configured for current cycle
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with route assignment permissions
- Test_Data: Available routes, premises mapped to routes
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC052 (Meter addition modal)
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: New meters successfully assigned to routes and premises with proper validation and persistence
- Secondary_Verifications: Data relationship integrity, performance, audit trail, billing integration
- Negative_Verification: No invalid assignments, relationship violations, or data corruption
Test Results (Template):
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics:
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships:
- Blocking_Tests: Route configuration, premise setup
- Blocked_Tests: Meter activation, billing setup
- Parallel_Tests: Other assignment workflow tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires route and premise data
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for proper meter placement and billing accuracy
- Edge_Cases: Invalid route-premise combinations, missing location data
- Risk_Areas: Assignment validation failures, billing integration issues
- Security_Considerations: Assignment authorization, location data integrity
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: Route assignment with capacity limitations
- Type: Business Rule
- Rationale: Routes may have maximum meter capacity restrictions
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Dynamic route and premise updates during assignment
- Type: Real-time Integration
- Rationale: Handle configuration changes during meter addition process
- Priority: P3
Test Case 55 - Verify new meter validation, error handling, and data integrity checks
- Test Case ID: MX03US02_TC_055
Title: Verify new meter validation, error handling, and data integrity checks \Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification:
- Module/Feature: Photo Read Validation
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context:
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Onboarding
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics:
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking:
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of new meter validation and error handling
- Integration_Points: Validation Service, Error Handling Service, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting:
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, QA, Security-Validation
- 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: Validation service, error handling service, test data with conflicts
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds error validation
- Data_Requirements: Test scenarios with duplicate device numbers, invalid data
Prerequisites:
- Setup_Requirements: Test environment with validation rules and error scenarios
- User_Roles_Permissions: Supervisor role with meter addition permissions
- Test_Data: Duplicate device numbers, invalid formats, missing required data
- Prior_Test_Cases: Successful meter addition workflow verified
Test Procedure:
Verification Points:
- Primary_Verification: New meter validation prevents invalid additions with clear error handling and user guidance
- Secondary_Verifications: Error message clarity, recovery workflows, performance, audit logging
- Negative_Verification: No invalid meters added, unclear errors, or system crashes
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: Validation service, error handling configuration
- Blocked_Tests: Data quality assurance, system reliability
- Parallel_Tests: Other validation error tests
- Sequential_Tests: Requires error scenario setup
Additional Information:
- Notes: Critical for maintaining data quality and preventing invalid meter registrations
- Edge_Cases: Concurrent validation conflicts, validation service failures, complex error scenarios
- Risk_Areas: Invalid data acceptance, poor error communication, system instability
- Security_Considerations: Input validation security, error information disclosure
Missing Scenarios Identified:
- Scenario_1: New meter validation with network connectivity issues
- Type: Network Resilience
- Rationale: Ensure proper validation even with poor connectivity
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Bulk meter addition validation and error handling
- Type: Batch Validation
- Rationale: Handle validation errors in bulk operations efficiently
- Priority: P2
No Comments