Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations Test Cases - MX03US01
Test Case 1: Dashboard Summary Cards Display
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_001
Title: Verify Dashboard Displays Summary Cards with Total Readings Collected Including Real-time UpdatesÂ
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
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: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 8% of dashboard feature
- Integration_Points: CxServices, API, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, Revenue-Impact-Tracking
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, meter reading database, CxServices
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds page load
- Data_Requirements: Active read cycles with 42252 collected readings across zones
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Active read cycles: Savaii 202501 R2, commercial district, Savaii 202501 R4
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager login credentials
- Test_Data: 42252 total readings, 38465 validated readings, 17697 missing readings, 3 exempted readings
- Prior_Test_Cases: Login functionality must pass
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Total Readings Collected card displays correct aggregated count from all active read cycles
- Secondary_Verifications: Card icon (envelope), description text accuracy, visual styling consistency, real-time updates
- Negative_Verification: No error messages, no loading indicators stuck, no data inconsistencies
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Login functionality
- Blocked_Tests: All dashboard functionality tests
- Parallel_Tests: Browser compatibility tests
- Sequential_Tests: Other summary card validations
Additional Information
- Notes: Core dashboard functionality that impacts all user workflows
- Edge_Cases: Zero readings scenario, network timeout during updates
- Risk_Areas: Real-time updates, performance under load, data accuracy
- Security_Considerations: Ensure reading counts don't expose sensitive meter data
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Dashboard data refresh on browser focus/window activation
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: Users may switch between applications and need current data
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Dashboard behavior during backend maintenance
- Type: Error
- Rationale: System should gracefully handle service unavailability
- Priority: P2
Test Case 2: Dashboard Validation Completion Rate
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_002
Title: Verify Validation Completion Rate Calculation, Display, and Real-time Updates with Visual Progress Indicator Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 10% of dashboard feature
- Integration_Points: API, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Performance-Metrics, Revenue-Impact-Tracking
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, validation calculation service, real-time update service
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms for calculation updates
- Data_Requirements: 38465 validated readings, 42252 total collected readings
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Active read cycles with validation data: Savaii 202501 R2, commercial district
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager access permissions
- Test_Data: Validated: 38465, Total: 42252, Expected rate: 91.04%
- Prior_Test_Cases: MX03US01_TC_001 must pass
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Completion rate calculated as (Validated Readings / Total Collected Readings) * 100 with 2 decimal precision
- Secondary_Verifications: Progress bar visual indicator, real-time updates, smooth animations, proper rounding
- Negative_Verification: Rate should not exceed 100%, should not show negative values, should handle division by zero
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: Dashboard access, total readings display
- Blocked_Tests: Zone-specific validation rate tests
- Parallel_Tests: Exemption rate calculation tests
- Sequential_Tests: Progress indicator visual tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Critical business metric for billing accuracy and operational efficiency
- Edge_Cases: Zero validated readings, all readings validated (100%), fractional validation counts
- Risk_Areas: Calculation accuracy under high load, real-time update delays, visual indicator performance
- Security_Considerations: Ensure validation metrics don't expose individual reading details
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Completion rate behavior during batch validation operations
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Large batch operations could impact real-time calculation performance
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Historical completion rate trending display
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Management needs trend analysis for performance monitoring
- Priority: P3
Test Case 3: Dashboard Exemption Rate Display
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_003
Title: Verify Exemption Rate Calculation, Visual Indicator, and Edge Case Handling with Color-Coded Progress Display Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- 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: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 12% of dashboard feature
- Integration_Points: Database, API
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: QA
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Revenue-Impact-Tracking
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, exemption tracking service, real-time calculation engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms for rate calculations
- Data_Requirements: 3 exempted readings, 42252 total readings
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Active read cycles with exemption data: Savaii 202501 R2 (0 exempted), commercial district (0 exempted)
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager access permissions
- Test_Data: Exempted: 3, Total: 42252, Expected rate: 0.01%
- Prior_Test_Cases: MX03US01_TC_001, MX03US01_TC_002 must pass
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Exemption rate calculated as (Exempted Readings / Total Collected Readings) * 100 with 2 decimal precision
- Secondary_Verifications: Visual indicator color (blue to red), proper rounding, zero handling, high percentage display
- Negative_Verification: Rate should not show negative values, should not exceed 100%, should handle edge cases gracefully
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Dashboard access, total readings display
- Blocked_Tests: Exemption code management tests
- Parallel_Tests: Validation rate calculation tests
- Sequential_Tests: Exemption code configuration tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Low exemption rates indicate healthy reading collection, high rates may indicate systemic issues
- Edge_Cases: Zero exemptions, all readings exempted, decimal precision edge cases
- Risk_Areas: Calculation accuracy with large datasets, visual indicator performance, color accessibility
- Security_Considerations: Ensure exemption metrics don't expose sensitive location or customer data
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Exemption rate threshold alerting for management escalation
- Type: Business Rule
- Rationale: High exemption rates may indicate operational issues requiring immediate attention
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Exemption rate comparison across different time periods
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Trend analysis helps identify improving or degrading collection performance
- Priority: P3
Test Case 4: Active and Completed Read Cycles Tabs
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_004
Title: Verify Tab Toggle Between Active and Completed Read Cycles with Data Filtering and State Persistence Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: UI
- 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: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 15% of dashboard feature
- Integration_Points: Database, CxServices
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Module-Coverage, Cross-Browser-Results
- 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: SMART360 system, cycle data service, UI state management
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for tab switching
- Data_Requirements: 6 active cycles, multiple completed cycles in system
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Mixed cycle data: Active cycles (Savaii 202501 R2, commercial district, Savaii 202501 R4) and completed cycles
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager or Validator access
- Test_Data: Active cycles: 6, Completed cycles: Multiple historical records
- Prior_Test_Cases: Dashboard access must be successful
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Tabs toggle between active and completed cycles with correct data filtering and visual state management
- Secondary_Verifications: Cycle count accuracy, tab visual states, data consistency, performance requirements
- Negative_Verification: No data mixing between views, no broken state transitions, no performance degradation
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Dashboard access functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Zone card detailed view tests
- Parallel_Tests: Cross-browser compatibility tests
- Sequential_Tests: Zone card content validation tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Fundamental navigation component that affects user workflow efficiency
- Edge_Cases: No active cycles, no completed cycles, very large number of cycles
- Risk_Areas: State management, data filtering accuracy, performance with large datasets
- Security_Considerations: Ensure proper data filtering based on user permissions
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Tab behavior with mixed permissions (some cycles accessible, some restricted)
- Type: Security
- Rationale: Different user roles may have access to different subsets of cycles
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Tab state preservation during session timeout and re-authentication
- Type: Edge Case
- Rationale: User experience should maintain context across session boundaries
- Priority: P3
Test Case 5: Zone Card Date Range Display
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_005
Title: Verify Individual Zone Cards Display Reading Cycle Date Range with Proper Formatting Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- 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: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 15% of zone card functionality
- Integration_Points: Database, CxServices
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Module-Coverage, Cross-Browser-Results
- 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: SMART360 system, zone data service, date formatting service
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for zone card rendering
- Data_Requirements: Zone cycles with specific date ranges configured
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Zone cycles with configured date ranges (Apr 1, 2025 - Apr 30, 2025)
- User_Roles_Permissions: Standard user access to dashboard
- Test_Data: Zone cycles: "Savaii 202501 R2" (2025-08-05 to 2026-01-09), "commercial district", "Savaii 202501 R4"
- Prior_Test_Cases: Active cycles tab functionality (MX03US01_TC_004) must pass
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Each zone card displays accurate date range in YYYY-MM-DD format matching configured cycle periods
- Secondary_Verifications: Date format consistency, visual positioning, readability, support for different cycle types
- Negative_Verification: No missing dates, no invalid date formats, no display truncation issues
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Active cycles tab functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Zone card detailed interaction tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other zone card display tests
- Sequential_Tests: Zone card content validation tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Date range display provides essential context for cycle timing and operational planning
- Edge_Cases: Very long cycle periods, overlapping cycles, cycles with same dates
- Risk_Areas: Date formatting consistency, timezone handling, visual layout with varying date lengths
- Security_Considerations: Ensure date information doesn't expose sensitive operational patterns
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Date range display with timezone considerations
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Multi-timezone utilities may need timezone-aware date display
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Date range validation and conflict detection
- Type: Business Rule
- Rationale: Overlapping or invalid date ranges should be highlighted
- Priority: P4
Test Case 6: Zone Card Reading Method Display
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_006
Title: Verify Zone Cards Display Reading Method (Photo, Manual, Mixed) with Proper Visual Indicators Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- 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: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Low
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 18% of zone card functionality
- Integration_Points: Database, CxServices
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Module-Coverage, Cross-Browser-Results
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Low
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, zone configuration service, reading method classification
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for method indicator display
- Data_Requirements: Zones configured with different reading methods
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Zones with different reading methods: Photo, Manual, Mixed
- User_Roles_Permissions: Standard user access to zone information
- Test_Data: "Savaii 202501 R2" (Photo Meter), "commercial district" (Manual Meter), mixed method zones
- Prior_Test_Cases: Zone card display functionality must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Each zone card accurately displays the configured reading method with proper visual indicators
- Secondary_Verifications: Visual styling consistency, positioning uniformity, readability, support for all method types
- Negative_Verification: No missing method indicators, no incorrect method assignments, no visual display issues
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Zone card display functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Method-specific workflow tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other zone card content tests
- Sequential_Tests: Reading method workflow validation
Additional Information
- Notes: Reading method display helps users understand the data collection approach for each zone
- Edge_Cases: Zones with undefined methods, method changes during active cycles, legacy method types
- Risk_Areas: Method classification accuracy, visual indicator consistency, configuration data synchronization
- Security_Considerations: Ensure method information doesn't expose sensitive operational details
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Reading method change tracking and history display
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Understanding method evolution helps optimize data collection strategies
- Priority: P4
- Scenario_2: Method-based performance analytics and comparison
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Different methods may have varying accuracy and efficiency metrics
- Priority: P4
Test Case 7: Zone Card Progress Bars
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_007
Title: Verify Zone Cards Display Progress Bars for Collection, Validation, and Exemption Rates with Color Coding Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- 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: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 25% of zone card functionality
- Integration_Points: Database, API
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- 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: SMART360 system, progress calculation service, visual rendering engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for progress bar rendering
- Data_Requirements: Zone with specific completion rates for testing
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Zone with test data showing specific rates
- User_Roles_Permissions: Standard user access to zone progress information
- Test_Data: "Savaii 202501 R2" - Collection: 0%, Missing: 99.85%, Validation: 0%, Exemption: 0%
- Prior_Test_Cases: Zone card display functionality must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Progress bars accurately represent collection, validation, and exemption rates with proper color coding and proportional display
- Secondary_Verifications: Color scheme consistency, proportional bar lengths, percentage label accuracy, responsive design
- Negative_Verification: No progress bars exceeding 100%, no negative percentages, no color coding 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: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Zone card display, data calculation accuracy
- Blocked_Tests: Progress-based alerting and notification tests
- Parallel_Tests: Dashboard summary progress indicators
- Sequential_Tests: Progress trend analysis tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Progress bars provide critical visual feedback for operational status and completion tracking
- Edge_Cases: Zero progress scenarios, 100% completion, decimal precision edge cases
- Risk_Areas: Color accessibility, calculation accuracy, visual rendering performance
- Security_Considerations: Ensure progress data doesn't expose sensitive operational patterns
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Progress bar threshold alerting and color changes
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Visual alerts when progress falls below acceptable thresholds could improve operations
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Historical progress tracking and trend visualization
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Progress trends over time help identify operational improvements or issues
- Priority: P3
Test Case 8: Zone Card Staff Information
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_008
Title: Verify Zone Cards Display Meter Count, Assigned Validator, and Supervisor Information Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- 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: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 22% of zone card functionality
- Integration_Points: Database, CxServices
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Module-Coverage, 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: SMART360 system, staff assignment service, meter counting service
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for staff information display
- Data_Requirements: Zone with assigned staff and known meter count
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Zone with assigned validator and supervisor, known meter count
- User_Roles_Permissions: Access to staff assignment information
- Test_Data: Zone with 1305 meters, assigned validator "Bob Schneider", supervisor "Alt One John Mauli"
- Prior_Test_Cases: Zone card display functionality must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Zone cards display meter count, validator assignments, and supervisor assignments accurately and clearly
- Secondary_Verifications: Information layout consistency, null value handling, multi-assignment support, accessibility
- Negative_Verification: No missing information fields, no display errors for edge cases, no layout breaking
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Zone card display, staff assignment functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Staff workload analysis tests
- Parallel_Tests: Staff assignment management tests
- Sequential_Tests: Staff performance tracking tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Staff information display provides accountability and workload visibility for zone management
- Edge_Cases: Very long staff names, special characters in names, temporary assignments
- Risk_Areas: Data synchronization with staff assignments, information layout with varying content lengths
- Security_Considerations: Ensure staff information is only visible to authorized users
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Staff contact information and availability status display
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Managers may need quick access to staff contact information for coordination
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Staff workload indicators and capacity utilization
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Understanding staff workload helps optimize resource allocation
- Priority: P3
Test Case 9: View Cycle Button Functionality
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_009
Title: Verify "View Cycle" Button Provides Access to Detailed Zone Information and Navigation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- 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: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 30% of zone navigation functionality
- Integration_Points: End-to-End, CxServices
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, 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: SMART360 system, detailed cycle interface, navigation service
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for detailed view loading
- Data_Requirements: Active zone cycle with comprehensive meter reading data
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Active zone cycle with detailed meter reading data available
- User_Roles_Permissions: Access to detailed cycle information
- Test_Data: "Savaii 202501 R2" zone with meter readings and validation data
- Prior_Test_Cases: Zone card display functionality must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: "View Cycle" button successfully navigates to detailed zone information with complete data display
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance requirements, data accuracy, navigation context, return capability, accessibility
- Negative_Verification: No broken navigation links, no incorrect zone data display, no 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]Â
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Zone card display functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Detailed cycle workflow tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other navigation functionality tests
- Sequential_Tests: Detailed cycle operation tests
Additional Information
- Notes: "View Cycle" button is critical for accessing detailed operational data and performing validation tasks
- Edge_Cases: Network interruption during navigation, concurrent access to same cycle, browser back button behavior
- Risk_Areas: Navigation performance, data loading consistency, session state management
- Security_Considerations: Ensure detailed cycle access respects user permissions and data security
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Deep linking and bookmark support for detailed cycle views
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Users may need to bookmark or share direct links to specific cycles
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Navigation state preservation during session timeout
- Type: User Experience
- Rationale: Users should return to their previous context after re-authentication
- Priority: P3
Test Case 10: Configuration Section Access
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_010
Title: Verify Configuration Section Provides Access to All Configuration Options with Proper Permissions Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- 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: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 35% of configuration functionality
- Integration_Points: Database, CxServices
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- 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: SMART360 system, configuration management service, role-based access control
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for configuration section loading
- Data_Requirements: Complete configuration options with proper permissions
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Meter Manager role permissions for configuration access
- User_Roles_Permissions: Full configuration access rights
- Test_Data: All four configuration options should be available and accessible
- Prior_Test_Cases: Dashboard access must be successful
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Configuration section displays all four required options (Validation Rules, Estimation Rules, Validator Setup, Exemption Codes) with appropriate access controls
- Secondary_Verifications: Visual consistency, description accuracy, button availability, role-based access
- Negative_Verification: Unauthorized users cannot access configuration options, no missing configuration cards
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: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Dashboard access, role-based permissions
- Blocked_Tests: All individual configuration tests
- Parallel_Tests: Permission validation tests
- Sequential_Tests: Individual configuration functionality tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Configuration section access is fundamental for system administration and operational management
- Edge_Cases: Partial permissions, role changes during session, configuration availability during maintenance
- Risk_Areas: Permission enforcement accuracy, configuration availability, UI consistency
- Security_Considerations: Ensure configuration access is properly logged and monitored
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Configuration access audit logging and tracking
- Type: Security
- Rationale: All configuration access should be logged for compliance and security monitoring
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Configuration quick actions and shortcuts
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Frequently used configuration tasks could benefit from quick access shortcuts
- Priority: P4
Test Case 11: Validation Rules Configuration
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_011
Title: Verify Validation Rules Configuration Allows Enable/Disable of Individual Validation Checks with Proper Modal Interface Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 40% of validation configuration functionality
- Integration_Points: API, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, Security-Validation
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, validation configuration API, modal interface framework
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for modal operations
- Data_Requirements: Existing validation rules configuration
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Meter Manager permissions for configuration changes
- User_Roles_Permissions: Configuration modification access
- Test_Data: Existing validation rules in various enabled/disabled states
- Prior_Test_Cases: Configuration section access (MX03US01_TC_010) must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Individual validation rules can be enabled and disabled through toggle controls with proper persistence
- Secondary_Verifications: Modal interface functionality, rule descriptions accuracy, save operation success, state persistence
- Negative_Verification: Cannot save invalid configurations, proper error handling, no data loss during operations
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: Configuration section access
- Blocked_Tests: Validation rule application tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other configuration modal tests
- Sequential_Tests: Business rule enforcement tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Validation rules configuration directly impacts billing accuracy and data quality
- Edge_Cases: All rules disabled scenario, concurrent rule modifications, rule dependency conflicts
- Risk_Areas: Configuration persistence, rule application consistency, modal state management
- Security_Considerations: Ensure rule changes are properly authorized and audited
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Validation rule impact preview before saving changes
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Users should understand how rule changes will affect existing and future validations
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Validation rule performance impact analysis
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Some rules may have performance implications that should be communicated
- Priority: P3
Test Case 12: Five Validation Rules Support
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_012
Title: Verify System Supports At Least Five Different Validation Rules with Complete Functionality Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- 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: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 25% of validation rules functionality
- Integration_Points: API, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: QA
- 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: SMART360 system, validation rule engine, configuration interface
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for rule enumeration
- Data_Requirements: System configured with all required validation rules
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: All validation rules configured and available in system
- User_Roles_Permissions: Access to validation rules configuration
- Test_Data: Five validation rules with complete definitions and functionality
- Prior_Test_Cases: Validation Rules modal access (MX03US01_TC_011) must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: System provides exactly the five specified validation rules with complete functionality and descriptions
- Secondary_Verifications: Rule independence, description quality, toggle functionality, logical organization
- Negative_Verification: No missing required rules, no duplicate rules, no undefined functionality
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Validation rules modal access
- Blocked_Tests: Individual rule effectiveness tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other rule configuration tests
- Sequential_Tests: Rule application validation tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Complete validation rule coverage ensures comprehensive data quality control
- Edge_Cases: Rules with conflicting logic, performance impact of multiple rules, rule interaction effects
- Risk_Areas: Rule completeness, functional accuracy, performance implications, user comprehension
- Security_Considerations: Ensure rule definitions don't expose sensitive business logic
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Custom validation rule creation and configuration
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Advanced users may need custom validation logic for specific business requirements
- Priority: P4
- Scenario_2: Validation rule effectiveness tracking and analytics
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Understanding which rules are most effective helps optimize validation strategies
- Priority: P3
Test Case 13: Estimation Rules Priority ConfigurationÂ
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_013
Title: Verify Estimation Rules Configuration Allows Setting Priority Order for Different Methods with Modal Interface Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 25% of configuration feature
- Integration_Points: API, 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: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, estimation configuration service, modal UI components
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds modal load time
- Data_Requirements: Existing estimation methods with priority settings 1-5
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Meter Manager configuration permissions, existing estimation rules
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager with configuration access
- Test_Data: 5 estimation methods with priorities: Similar Customer Profile (1), Last Consumption Copy (2), Fixed Value (3), Seasonal Adjustment (4), Historical Average (5)
- Prior_Test_Cases: Configuration section access (MX03US01_TC_010) must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Estimation methods can be configured with priority order 1-5 and individual enable/disable toggles
- Secondary_Verifications: Priority badges display correctly, descriptions are accurate, expandable sections work, state persistence functions
- Negative_Verification: Cannot set duplicate priorities, disabled methods are skipped in estimation sequence, invalid configurations are rejected
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Configuration section access
- Blocked_Tests: Estimation logic validation tests
- Parallel_Tests: Validation rules configuration tests
- Sequential_Tests: Estimation method application tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Critical configuration that directly impacts billing accuracy through proper estimation fallback logic
- Edge_Cases: All methods disabled, only one method enabled, priority conflicts
- Risk_Areas: Configuration persistence, priority enforcement logic, modal state management
- Security_Considerations: Ensure only authorized users can modify estimation logic that affects billing
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Impact of estimation rule changes on in-progress reading cycles
- Type: Business Rule
- Rationale: Changes should not retroactively affect already processed readings
- Priority: P1
- Scenario_2: Estimation method performance tracking and success rates
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Understanding which methods are most accurate helps optimize configuration
- Priority: P3
Test Case 14: Five Estimation Methods Support
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_014
Title: Verify System Supports At Least Five Estimation Methods with Individual Toggle Controls and Priority Assignment Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- 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: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 22% of estimation management feature
- Integration_Points: API, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: QA
- 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: SMART360 system, estimation configuration service, modal UI framework
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds modal load time
- Data_Requirements: System configured with all required estimation methods
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: All estimation methods configured in system
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager configuration access
- Test_Data: Five estimation methods with priorities and descriptions
- Prior_Test_Cases: Estimation Rules modal access (MX03US01_TC_013) must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: System provides exactly the five specified estimation methods with complete functionality
- Secondary_Verifications: Method descriptions accuracy, individual toggle controls, priority assignments, expandable configurations
- Negative_Verification: No missing methods, no duplicate methods, no undefined priorities
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: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Estimation Rules modal access
- Blocked_Tests: Estimation method application tests
- Parallel_Tests: Validation rules configuration tests
- Sequential_Tests: Estimation priority configuration tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Complete estimation method coverage ensures accurate billing through comprehensive fallback logic
- Edge_Cases: Methods with identical priorities, missing method descriptions, toggle state conflicts
- Risk_Areas: Method availability validation, priority enforcement, configuration persistence
- Security_Considerations: Ensure estimation methods are properly authorized and changes are audited
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Estimation method effectiveness tracking and analytics
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Understanding which methods provide most accurate estimates helps optimize configuration
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Custom estimation method configuration capabilities
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Advanced utilities may need custom estimation algorithms
- Priority: P4
Test Case 15: Validator Search Functionality
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_015
Title: Verify Validator Setup Allows Searching for Validators and Supervisors by Name with Real-time Filtering Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- 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: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 18% of staff management feature
- Integration_Points: Database, CxServices
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Module-Coverage, Cross-Browser-Results
- 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: SMART360 system, staff directory service, search functionality
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for search results
- Data_Requirements: Multiple validators and supervisors in system directory
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Staff members in system: "Bob Schneider", "Koki Mate", "Alt One John Mauli", "Supervisor"
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager with staff assignment permissions
- Test_Data: Diverse staff names for comprehensive search testing
- Prior_Test_Cases: Configuration section access (MX03US01_TC_010) must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Search functionality filters staff by name for both validators and supervisors with real-time results
- Secondary_Verifications: Partial name matching, full name precision, no results handling, performance requirements
- Negative_Verification: Search doesn't break with special characters, handles empty results gracefully, no performance degradation
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Configuration section access, modal functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Staff assignment functionality tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other search functionality tests
- Sequential_Tests: Multiple staff assignment tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Search functionality is essential for efficient staff management in large organizations
- Edge_Cases: Very large staff directories, duplicate names, partial matches with multiple results
- Risk_Areas: Search performance with large datasets, special character handling, real-time update responsiveness
- Security_Considerations: Ensure search only returns staff members appropriate for user's access level
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Advanced search filters by role, department, or availability status
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Large organizations may need more sophisticated staff filtering capabilities
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Search result sorting and pagination for large staff directories
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Improved usability for organizations with hundreds of staff members
- Priority: P3
Test Case 16: Multiple Staff Assignment Support
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_016
Title: Verify Validator Setup Supports Assigning Multiple Validators and Supervisors to Each Reading Cycle with Tag Management Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- 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: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 25% of staff management feature
- Integration_Points: Database, CxServices
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- 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: SMART360 system, staff assignment service, tag management UI
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for assignment operations
- Data_Requirements: Multiple reading cycles and available staff members
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Reading cycles: "commercial district", "Savaii 202501 R4", "Savaii 202501 R2", "Savaii water Cycle 3"
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager with full staff assignment permissions
- Test_Data: Available staff: "Bob Schneider", "Koki Mate", "Alt One John Mauli", "Supervisor"
- Prior_Test_Cases: Validator Setup modal access (MX03US01_TC_015) must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Multiple validators and supervisors can be assigned to each reading cycle with proper tag management and individual removal capabilities
- Secondary_Verifications: Visual tag display (blue for validators, green for supervisors), individual removal functionality, cross-cycle assignments, persistence
- Negative_Verification: Cannot assign same person multiple times to same role, assignment limits respected, no data loss during operations
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Validator Setup modal access, search functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Workload distribution validation tests
- Parallel_Tests: Configuration change restriction tests
- Sequential_Tests: Staff assignment audit tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Multiple staff assignment is critical for workload distribution and redundancy in large validation operations
- Edge_Cases: Maximum assignment limits, staff availability conflicts, overlapping assignments
- Risk_Areas: Tag management performance, assignment persistence, visual display consistency
- Security_Considerations: Ensure staff assignments respect organizational hierarchy and permission boundaries
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Bulk staff assignment across multiple cycles simultaneously
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Efficiency improvement for large-scale staff management operations
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Staff assignment workload balancing and analytics
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Optimal staff utilization requires workload visibility and balancing tools
- Priority: P3
Test Case 17: Existing Exemption Codes Display
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_017
Title: Verify Exemption Codes Management Displays Existing Codes with Descriptions and Management Controls Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- 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: 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: 15% of exemption management feature
- Integration_Points: Database, API
- 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: SMART360 system, exemption code management service, modal UI framework
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds modal load time
- Data_Requirements: Existing exemption codes in system database
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Existing exemption code: "Test" with description "Test"
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager configuration access
- Test_Data: Sample exemption code for display verification
- Prior_Test_Cases: Configuration section access (MX03US01_TC_010) must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Existing exemption codes display with codes, descriptions, and management controls (edit/delete icons)
- Secondary_Verifications: Visual styling consistency, icon functionality, proper layout organization, modal structure
- Negative_Verification: No display errors for codes without descriptions, proper handling of special characters in codes/descriptions
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Configuration section access, modal functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Exemption code creation, modification, deletion tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other configuration modal tests
- Sequential_Tests: Exemption code management operation tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Proper exemption code display is essential for maintaining standardized exemption documentation
- Edge_Cases: Very long code descriptions, special characters in codes, empty description fields
- Risk_Areas: Modal performance with many codes, visual layout with varying description lengths
- Security_Considerations: Ensure code display respects user permissions and doesn't expose restricted codes
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Exemption code usage statistics and frequency analysis
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Understanding code usage patterns helps optimize exemption code management
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Exemption code search and filtering capabilities
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Large organizations may have many exemption codes requiring search functionality
- Priority: P3
Test Case 18: New Exemption Code Creation
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_018
Title: Verify System Allows Adding New Exemption Codes with Abbreviation and Description Including Form Validation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Automated
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 20% of exemption management feature
- Integration_Points: API, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, 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: SMART360 system, exemption code creation API, form validation service
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for code creation
- Data_Requirements: Clean exemption code database for testing new code creation
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Meter Manager configuration permissions, access to exemption code management
- User_Roles_Permissions: Configuration modification rights for exemption codes
- Test_Data: New code details - Code: "NI", Description: "Not Inspected"
- Prior_Test_Cases: Exemption Codes modal access (MX03US01_TC_017) must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: New exemption codes can be created with abbreviation and description, appearing immediately in existing codes list
- Secondary_Verifications: Form validation for required fields, duplicate prevention, form clearing after creation, error message clarity
- Negative_Verification: Cannot create codes without required information, cannot create duplicate codes, proper error handling
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 codes modal access
- Blocked_Tests: Exemption code modification and deletion tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other configuration creation tests
- Sequential_Tests: Exemption code usage validation tests
Additional Information
- Notes: New exemption code creation is essential for adapting to changing operational requirements
- Edge_Cases: Very long codes/descriptions, special characters, multilingual characters
- Risk_Areas: Form validation logic, duplicate detection accuracy, API error handling
- Security_Considerations: Ensure new code creation is properly authorized and audited
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Exemption code templates and quick creation from predefined standards
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Standardized exemption codes across utility companies could be pre-configured
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Bulk exemption code import from external systems
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Large organizations may need to import exemption codes from existing systems
- Priority: P4
Test Case 19: Exemption Code Remarks Configuration
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_019
Title: Verify System Supports Configuring Remark Options for Each Exemption Code with CRUD Operations Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- 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: Yes
- 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: 25% of exemption management feature
- Integration_Points: Database, API
- 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: SMART360 system, remark management service, CRUD operation APIs
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for remark operations
- Data_Requirements: Existing exemption codes with configurable remark options
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Exemption codes with remark options configured in system
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager with exemption code management permissions
- Test_Data: Test exemption code with existing remark options for modification testing
- Prior_Test_Cases: Exemption code display (MX03US01_TC_017) must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Remark options can be configured for each exemption code with full CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete) operations
- Secondary_Verifications: Remark count accuracy, input validation, change persistence, user interface responsiveness
- Negative_Verification: Cannot create invalid remarks, cannot delete remarks that are in active use, proper validation enforcement
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Exemption code display functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Exemption code usage in validation workflow
- Parallel_Tests: Other configuration CRUD operations
- Sequential_Tests: Remark usage tracking tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Remark configuration provides standardized documentation options improving compliance and audit capabilities
- Edge_Cases: Very long remark text, special characters in remarks, maximum number of remarks per code
- Risk_Areas: Data validation logic, CRUD operation performance, user interface state management
- Security_Considerations: Ensure remark modifications are properly authorized and changes are auditable
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Remark option templates and standardization across utility companies
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Industry-standard remark options could improve consistency and compliance
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Remark usage analytics and optimization recommendations
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Understanding remark usage patterns helps optimize available options
- Priority: P4
Test Case 20: Exemption Code Management
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_020
Title: Verify System Allows Editing and Deleting Exemption Codes When Appropriate with Business Rule Enforcement Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 30% of exemption management feature
- Integration_Points: API, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, exemption code management API, business rule validation service
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for edit/delete operations
- Data_Requirements: Mix of exemption codes - some in active use, some unused
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Exemption codes in various states: active usage and unused for testing business rules
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager with full exemption code management permissions
- Test_Data: "Test" code (unused), "NI" code (potentially in active use)
- Prior_Test_Cases: Exemption code display and creation (MX03US01_TC_017, MX03US01_TC_018) must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Exemption codes can be edited and deleted when appropriate business rules allow, with proper validation and audit trails
- Secondary_Verifications: Edit interface functionality, delete confirmation process, business rule enforcement, audit logging
- Negative_Verification: Cannot delete codes in active use, cannot create invalid edits, proper error messaging and protection
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Exemption code display and creation functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Exemption code usage tracking tests
- Parallel_Tests: Configuration change restriction tests
- Sequential_Tests: Audit trail verification tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Proper exemption code management with business rule enforcement prevents data integrity issues
- Edge_Cases: Codes with complex usage patterns, simultaneous edit/delete attempts, cascading deletion impacts
- Risk_Areas: Business rule validation accuracy, audit trail completeness, data consistency during operations
- Security_Considerations: Ensure management operations are properly authorized and all changes are auditable
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Exemption code usage impact analysis before deletion
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Users should understand the full impact of code deletion before confirmation
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Exemption code archiving instead of deletion for historical preservation
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Regulatory requirements may need historical exemption code preservation
- Priority: P3
Test Case 21 - Edge Cases & Error Scenarios
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_021
Title: Verify Dashboard Handles Zero Readings Data Gracefully with Proper Visual States Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P3-Medium
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Low
- Business_Priority: Could-Have
- Customer_Journey: System-Setup
- 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: Low
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 5% of edge case handling
- Integration_Points: Database, API
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: QA
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Cross-Browser-Results
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Low
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, test data management service
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds dashboard load
- Data_Requirements: Test environment with zero readings data
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Test environment configured with zero readings across all cycles
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager access to dashboard
- Test_Data: Zero readings scenario: 0 collected, 0 validated, 0 missing, 0 exempted
- Prior_Test_Cases: Basic dashboard access must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Dashboard handles zero readings data without errors, showing appropriate zero values and empty states
- Secondary_Verifications: Progress bar empty states, percentage calculations (0.00%), user messaging clarity
- Negative_Verification: No division by zero errors, no visual display issues, no broken functionality
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Basic dashboard functionality
- Blocked_Tests: None
- Parallel_Tests: Other edge case tests
- Sequential_Tests: Large dataset performance tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Zero data handling is important for new system deployments and edge case robustness
- Edge_Cases: Null vs zero distinctions, empty collections, undefined calculations
- Risk_Areas: Division by zero operations, visual layout with empty states, user experience clarity
- Security_Considerations: Ensure zero data states don't expose system information inappropriately
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Partial zero data scenarios (some zones with data, others empty)
- Type: Edge Case
- Rationale: Mixed data states may reveal additional edge case handling issues
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Zero data recovery and first data entry workflows
- Type: User Experience
- Rationale: Users need clear guidance on how to populate an empty system
- Priority: P3
Test case 22 - Large Dataset Performance Test
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_022
Title: Verify Dashboard Performance with Large Dataset (100,000+ readings) and Responsive UI Behavior Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Performance
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Performance
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: Medium
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of performance requirements
- Integration_Points: API, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Performance-Metrics, Quality-Dashboard, Customer-Segment-Analysis
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Performance Testing
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, large dataset, performance monitoring tools
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds dashboard load, < 500ms API responses
- Data_Requirements: 100,000+ meter readings across multiple zones and cycles
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Performance test environment with large dataset (100K+ readings)
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager access with full data visibility
- Test_Data: 100,000+ readings distributed across multiple zones and cycles
- Prior_Test_Cases: Basic dashboard functionality must work with normal datasets
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Dashboard maintains performance requirements (<3s load, <500ms API, <2s updates) with 100,000+ readings
- Secondary_Verifications: Memory stability, UI responsiveness, concurrent user support, navigation performance
- Negative_Verification: No memory leaks, no UI freezing, no timeout errors, no data inconsistencies
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
- Maintenance_Effort: High
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Basic dashboard functionality
- Blocked_Tests: None
- Parallel_Tests: Concurrent user tests
- Sequential_Tests: Stress testing scenarios
Additional Information
- Notes: Performance validation ensures system scalability for large utility companies
- Edge_Cases: Peak usage times, data import scenarios, system resource constraints
- Risk_Areas: Memory management, API scalability, database query optimization, UI rendering performance
- Security_Considerations: Ensure performance testing doesn't expose sensitive data patterns
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Performance degradation monitoring and alerting thresholds
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: System should alert when performance approaches unacceptable levels
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Performance optimization recommendations based on usage patterns
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: System could provide insights for performance optimization
- Priority: P3
Test Case 23: Dashboard Data Retrieval API
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_023
Title: Verify Dashboard Data Retrieval API Returns Accurate Summary Statistics with Performance Validation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: API
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of dashboard API functionality
- Integration_Points: API, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: API-Test-Results, Integration-Testing, Performance-Metrics
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: API Testing
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+ (for browser-based API testing)
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 API endpoints, authentication service, database
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms API response time
- Data_Requirements: Active reading cycles with known data values for validation
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: API authentication credentials, test data with known values
- User_Roles_Permissions: API access credentials for dashboard data
- Test_Data: Known dataset: 42252 total, 38465 validated, 17697 missing, 3 exempted
- Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication and basic API connectivity must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Dashboard API returns accurate summary statistics matching database values within 500ms performance requirement
- Secondary_Verifications: JSON structure compliance, calculated percentage accuracy, error handling, concurrent request support
- Negative_Verification: Proper error responses for invalid requests, no data inconsistencies, no performance degradation under load
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: API authentication, database connectivity
- Blocked_Tests: Dashboard UI functionality tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other API endpoint tests
- Sequential_Tests: API performance stress tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Dashboard API is critical for real-time data display and system integration
- Edge_Cases: Network timeouts, large dataset responses, concurrent high-volume requests
- Risk_Areas: Data accuracy under load, response time consistency, error handling completeness
- Security_Considerations: Ensure API responses don't expose sensitive data beyond authorization scope
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: API rate limiting and throttling behavior validation
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: API should handle excessive request rates gracefully without system impact
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: API versioning and backward compatibility testing
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: API changes should maintain compatibility with existing integrations
- Priority: P3
Test Case 24: Validation Rules Configuration API
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_024
Title: Verify Validation Rules Configuration API Functionality with CRUD Operations and Business Rule Enforcement Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: API
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 7 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of configuration API functionality
- Integration_Points: API, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: API-Test-Results, Security-Validation, Integration-Testing
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: API Testing
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+ (for browser-based API testing)
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 configuration API, authentication service, validation rule engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms for configuration operations
- Data_Requirements: Test validation rules configuration and active reading cycles
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: API authentication, test configuration data, active reading cycles for business rule testing
- User_Roles_Permissions: Configuration API access with modification permissions
- Test_Data: Validation rules: Consumption Check, Zero Consumption Alert, etc.
- Prior_Test_Cases: API authentication and basic configuration access must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Configuration API supports full CRUD operations for validation rules with proper business rule enforcement and audit trails
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance requirements, security validation, concurrent request handling, data persistence
- Negative_Verification: Business rule violations prevented, unauthorized access blocked, invalid configurations rejected
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: API authentication, configuration UI functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Validation rule application tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other configuration API tests
- Sequential_Tests: Business rule impact validation tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Configuration API is critical for system administration and automated configuration management
- Edge_Cases: Network interruptions during configuration, complex rule interdependencies, bulk configuration updates
- Risk_Areas: Configuration consistency, business rule enforcement, security validation, audit completeness
- Security_Considerations: Ensure configuration changes are properly authorized and all modifications are auditable
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Configuration change impact preview before application
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Users should understand the impact of configuration changes before applying them
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Configuration template management and deployment automation
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Standardized configurations could be deployed across multiple environments
- Priority: P3
Test Case 25: Meter Manager Access Control
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_025
Title: Verify Meter Manager Has Full Access to All Dashboard Features with Comprehensive Permission Validation Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Meter Manager role permissions
- Integration_Points: CxServices, API
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Quality-Dashboard, Customer-Segment-Analysis
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Security Testing
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, role-based access control service, audit logging
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for permission validation
- Data_Requirements: Meter Manager account with full permissions
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Meter Manager role account configured with full system permissions
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager with complete dashboard and configuration access
- Test_Data: Full access account credentials and comprehensive test data
- Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication system must be functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Meter Manager role has complete access to all dashboard features, configuration options, and data management capabilities
- Secondary_Verifications: Audit trail access, real-time data access, cross-module navigation, configuration modification rights
- Negative_Verification: No restricted areas, no permission denied errors, no data access limitations
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Authentication system functionality
- Blocked_Tests: All administrative function tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other role-based access tests
- Sequential_Tests: Permission boundary validation tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Meter Manager role requires comprehensive system access for operational management and oversight
- Edge_Cases: Session timeout scenarios, concurrent permission changes, role inheritance complexities
- Risk_Areas: Permission escalation vulnerabilities, audit trail completeness, cross-module security consistency
- Security_Considerations: Ensure all access is properly logged and monitored for compliance and security auditing
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Meter Manager permission delegation and temporary access granting
- Type: Security
- Rationale: Managers may need to delegate specific permissions temporarily during absences
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Role-based data filtering and visibility controls
- Type: Security
- Rationale: Different managers may need access to different geographical or operational areas
- Priority: P3
Test Case 26: Validator Limited Access
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_026
Title: Verify Validator Has Limited Access to Assigned Cycles Only with Proper Access Restrictions Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Validator role restrictions
- Integration_Points: CxServices, API
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Security Testing
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, role-based access control, validator assignment service
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for permission checks
- Data_Requirements: Validator account assigned to specific cycles only
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Validator role account assigned to "Savaii 202501 R2" cycle only
- User_Roles_Permissions: Limited Validator access to assigned cycles
- Test_Data: Validator account with restricted assignments
- Prior_Test_Cases: Role assignment functionality (MX03US01_TC_016) must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Validator role has access only to assigned cycles with all administrative functions blocked
- Secondary_Verifications: Data filtering accuracy, configuration access denial, audit trail restrictions, session persistence
- Negative_Verification: Cannot access unassigned cycles, cannot modify configurations, cannot access administrative functions
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Daily
- Maintenance_Effort: Medium
- Automation_Candidate: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Role assignment functionality, authentication system
- Blocked_Tests: Validator workflow validation tests
- Parallel_Tests: Other role-based restriction tests
- Sequential_Tests: Access escalation prevention tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Validator access restrictions are critical for data security and operational boundaries
- Edge_Cases: Role changes during active sessions, assignment modifications mid-workflow, cross-cycle data references
- Risk_Areas: Permission bypass vulnerabilities, data leakage between cycles, session security maintenance
- Security_Considerations: Ensure all access attempts are logged and unauthorized attempts trigger appropriate alerts
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Validator access to related cycle data and cross-references
- Type: Security
- Rationale: Validators may need limited access to related historical or comparative data
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Temporary access elevation for emergency situations
- Type: Security
- Rationale: Emergency procedures may require temporary access expansion with proper controls
- Priority: P3
Test Case 27: Chrome Browser Compatibility
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_027
Title: Verify Dashboard Functionality in Chrome Browser with Cross-Version Compatibility Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Compatibility
- 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: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of browser compatibility requirements
- Integration_Points: End-to-End
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: QA
- Report_Categories: Cross-Browser-Results, Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Cross-Browser Testing
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Chrome 114
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, browser testing infrastructure
- Performance_Baseline: Consistent performance across browser versions
- Data_Requirements: Standard test dataset for functionality validation
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Multiple Chrome browser versions installed for testing
- User_Roles_Permissions: Standard user access for browser testing
- Test_Data: Consistent test data across browser testing scenarios
- Prior_Test_Cases: Core functionality must work in primary browser
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Dashboard functionality works consistently across Chrome 115+ and Chrome 114 with identical user experience
- Secondary_Verifications: Visual consistency, performance parity, responsive design, error handling consistency
- Negative_Verification: No browser-specific bugs, no functionality degradation, no visual rendering issues
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Core dashboard functionality
- Blocked_Tests: None
- Parallel_Tests: Other browser compatibility tests (Firefox, Safari, Edge)
- Sequential_Tests: Mobile browser compatibility tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Chrome browser compatibility ensures broad user accessibility and consistent experience
- Edge_Cases: Browser extension conflicts, different Chrome profiles, incognito mode behavior
- Risk_Areas: CSS rendering differences, JavaScript version compatibility, performance variations
- Security_Considerations: Ensure security features work consistently across browser versions
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Browser extension impact assessment and compatibility
- Type: Compatibility
- Rationale: Common browser extensions may affect dashboard functionality
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Browser memory usage and performance optimization across versions
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Different browser versions may have varying memory efficiency
- Priority: P3
Test Case 28: Estimation Rules Modal Advanced Interactions
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_028
Title: Verify Estimation Rules Modal Advanced Interactions, Validation, and Error Handling Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 30% of configuration feature
- Integration_Points: API, 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: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, estimation configuration API, modal framework
- Performance_Baseline: < 500ms for toggle state changes
- Data_Requirements: All 5 estimation methods configured with various states
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Meter Manager permissions, active reading cycles for impact testing
- User_Roles_Permissions: Configuration modification access
- Test_Data: Estimation methods in mixed states (some enabled, some disabled)
- Prior_Test_Cases: MX03US01_TC_013 must pass
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Modal provides comprehensive estimation method configuration with proper validation and error handling
- Secondary_Verifications: Accessibility compliance, performance under rapid changes, dependency validation, visual feedback quality
- Negative_Verification: Prevents invalid configurations, handles rapid input correctly, maintains data integrity
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: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Basic estimation rules modal access
- Blocked_Tests: Estimation method application validation
- Parallel_Tests: Validation rules modal testing
- Sequential_Tests: Configuration change impact tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Comprehensive modal interaction testing ensures robust configuration management
- Edge_Cases: Network interruption during save, browser refresh during configuration, concurrent user modifications
- Risk_Areas: Modal state management, configuration validation logic, API communication
- Security_Considerations: Ensure configuration changes are properly authenticated and authorized
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Configuration change audit logging and rollback capabilities
- Type: Security
- Rationale: Changes to estimation logic should be fully auditable for compliance
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Configuration templates and presets for different utility types
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Different utility companies may have standard estimation preferences
- Priority: P3
Test Case 29: Exemption Code Remark Options Management
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_029
Title: Verify Exemption Code Remark Options Expand/Collapse Functionality and Management Capabilities Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- 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: Yes
- 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: 20% of exemption management feature
- Integration_Points: Database, API
- 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: SMART360 system, exemption code management service, expand/collapse UI components
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for expand/collapse operations
- Data_Requirements: Existing exemption codes with configured remark options
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Exemption codes with remark options: "Test" code with "(3)" remark options
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager configuration access
- Test_Data: Test code with 3 remark options: "Access blocked", "Safety hazard", "Unable to locate"
- Prior_Test_Cases: Exemption Codes modal access must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Remark options can be expanded/collapsed with accurate count display and individual management capabilities
- Secondary_Verifications: Smooth animations, accurate count updates, individual remark CRUD operations, performance requirements
- Negative_Verification: Cannot delete remarks in active use, count accurately reflects actual remark quantity
Test Results (Template)
- Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
- Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
- Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
- Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
- Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
- Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
- Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
Execution Analytics
- Execution_Frequency: Weekly
- Maintenance_Effort: Low
- Automation_Candidate: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Exemption codes modal access
- Blocked_Tests: Exemption code application in readings
- Parallel_Tests: Other configuration modal tests
- Sequential_Tests: Exemption code usage validation
Additional Information
- Notes: Remark options provide standardized documentation for exemption reasons improving audit capability
- Edge_Cases: No remark options configured, very large number of remarks, long remark text
- Risk_Areas: UI performance with many remarks, data consistency, expand/collapse state management
- Security_Considerations: Ensure remark modifications are properly authorized and logged
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Remark option usage tracking and analytics
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Understanding which remarks are most commonly used helps optimize the list
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Bulk remark option import/export functionality
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Large utilities may need to manage many standardized remark options
- Priority: P4
Test Case 30: Real-time Dashboard Updates
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_030
Title: Verify Real-time Dashboard Metric Updates When Reading Validations Occur Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Integration
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 7 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 35% of dashboard feature
- Integration_Points: API, Database, CxServices
- 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+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, real-time update service, WebSocket connections, validation processing service
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for metric updates
- Data_Requirements: Active reading cycles with pending validations
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Active reading cycles with unvalidated readings available for testing
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager access to dashboard and validation capabilities
- Test_Data: Baseline metrics: 42252 total, 38465 validated, 17697 missing, 3 exempted
- Prior_Test_Cases: Dashboard display functionality must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Dashboard metrics update in real-time (within 2 seconds) when validation activities occur without requiring page refresh
- Secondary_Verifications: Calculation accuracy, visual animation smoothness, network interruption recovery, concurrent user support
- Negative_Verification: No duplicate updates, no stale data display, proper error handling during connectivity 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: Dashboard display, validation interface access
- Blocked_Tests: Multi-user workflow tests
- Parallel_Tests: Performance monitoring tests
- Sequential_Tests: Data consistency validation tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Real-time updates are critical for operational efficiency and user experience in high-volume validation environments
- Edge_Cases: Very high validation volume, network instability, browser tab inactive state
- Risk_Areas: WebSocket connection management, update frequency optimization, data consistency under load
- Security_Considerations: Ensure real-time updates don't expose unauthorized data to users
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Real-time update behavior when browser tab is inactive or minimized
- Type: Performance
- Rationale: Background tabs may have reduced update frequency affecting user experience
- Priority: P2
- Scenario_2: Real-time update conflict resolution when multiple users modify same data
- Type: Integration
- Rationale: Concurrent modifications need proper conflict resolution and user notification
- Priority: P2
Test Case 31: Cycle Status Transitions
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_031
Title: Verify Reading Cycle Status Transitions from Active to Completed with Data Integrity Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 40% of cycle management feature
- Integration_Points: API, 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: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, cycle management service, validation completion service
- Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds for status transition
- Data_Requirements: Near-complete active reading cycle ready for completion
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Active reading cycle "Savaii 202501 R2" with 95%+ validation completion
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager with cycle management permissions
- Test_Data: Cycle with 1305 meters, 1240+ validated, minimal missing readings
- Prior_Test_Cases: Dashboard display and cycle validation functionality must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Reading cycles can transition from Active to Completed status with complete data integrity and proper access control changes
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance requirements, audit logging, dashboard metric updates, read-only enforcement
- Negative_Verification: Cannot complete cycles prematurely, cannot modify completed cycles, proper error handling for failed transitions
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: Planned
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Dashboard access, cycle validation completion
- Blocked_Tests: Historical reporting tests
- Parallel_Tests: Performance monitoring tests
- Sequential_Tests: Completed cycle access tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Cycle completion is a critical business process that finalizes billing data and triggers downstream processes
- Edge_Cases: Network failure during transition, concurrent completion attempts, partial validation scenarios
- Risk_Areas: Data integrity during transition, audit trail completeness, downstream system notification
- Security_Considerations: Ensure only authorized users can complete cycles and all actions are properly logged
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Bulk cycle completion for multiple cycles simultaneously
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Large utilities may need to complete multiple cycles at month-end
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Cycle completion rollback capabilities for error correction
- Type: Business Rule
- Rationale: Incorrect completions may need reversal with proper audit controls
- Priority: P2
Test Cae 32 : Configuration Change Impact Analysis
Test Case ID: MX03US01_TC_032
Title: Verify Configuration Changes Do Not Retroactively Affect In-Progress Reading Cycles Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 17, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- 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: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 50% of configuration management
- Integration_Points: API, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Integration-Testing, Quality-Dashboard
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: SMART360 system, configuration management service, active cycle protection service
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for configuration validation
- Data_Requirements: Active reading cycle with partially completed validations
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Active cycle "Savaii 202501 R2" with some readings already validated using current rules
- User_Roles_Permissions: Meter Manager with configuration modification rights
- Test_Data: Active cycle with 500 readings validated, 800 pending, current validation rules applied
- Prior_Test_Cases: Configuration access and validation functionality must work
Test Procedure
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Configuration changes are prevented during active reading cycles with clear error messaging and complete state preservation
- Secondary_Verifications: Consistent enforcement across all configuration types, clear user guidance, proper access restoration after cycle completion
- Negative_Verification: No retroactive application of changes, no partial configuration updates, no bypass mechanisms
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: Yes
Test Relationships
- Blocking_Tests: Configuration access functionality
- Blocked_Tests: Configuration change audit tests
- Parallel_Tests: Active cycle management tests
- Sequential_Tests: Post-completion configuration tests
Additional Information
- Notes: Critical business rule preventing billing data corruption through retroactive configuration changes
- Edge_Cases: Multiple concurrent active cycles, configuration changes attempted during cycle transitions
- Risk_Areas: Business rule bypass possibilities, partial restriction enforcement, audit trail gaps
- Security_Considerations: Ensure no administrative override capabilities that could compromise data integrity
Missing Scenarios Identified
- Scenario_1: Configuration change scheduling for future application
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Users may want to schedule configuration changes to take effect when cycles complete
- Priority: P3
- Scenario_2: Configuration change impact analysis and preview
- Type: Enhancement
- Rationale: Users should understand the scope of impact before making configuration changes
- Priority: P2
No Comments