Request Tracker Test Cases - CSS01US10

Test Scenario Analysis Based on User Story

A. Functional Test Scenarios

Dashboard KPI Functionality: Total Outstanding ($400), Active Requests (8), Completed This Month (1), Overdue Payments (0)
Search and Filter Capabilities: Multi-ID search (RE2384, TC2374, etc.), type and status filtering with AND logic
Request List Management: Reference ID, Type, Status, Created Date, Actions columns with eye icon
Request Detail Views: Service, Complaint, Disconnection, Reconnection, Transfer with specific tabs
Notes and Timeline Management: User notes, back-office notes with timestamps, activity tracking
New Request Navigation: Button redirects to Service & Support page

B. Integration Test Scenarios

Financial System Integration: Outstanding amount calculation, payment status tracking
Service Settings Integration: Service codes, descriptions, category mappings
Back-office System Integration: Status updates, notes synchronization

C. Business Rules Validation

Status Transitions: Pending→In Progress→Completed workflow validation
KPI Calculations: Active requests (pending + in progress + on hold), monthly completion tracking
Filter Logic: AND operation for multiple filter combinations

Test Case 1: Total Outstanding Amount Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_001
Title: Verify Total Outstanding Amount Displays $400 Sum of All Unpaid Service Charges from KPI Card
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Dashboard], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/Customer-Segment-Analysis/Revenue-Impact-Tracking/Product/Engineering], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-[Financial-System], Financial-KPI, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Financial System API, Consumer Services
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Revenue-Impact-Tracking, Customer-Segment-Analysis
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC01, Business Rules - Total Outstanding KPI
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_002, CSS01US10_TC_004

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Financial Service API, Consumer Authentication Service, Request Management Service
Performance_Baseline: Page load < 3 seconds
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with $400 unpaid service charges

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account configured with pending service charges totaling $400
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Consumer Account: test.consumer@utility.com, Unpaid Service Charges: SR-345621 ($150), SR-346892 ($250), Total: $400
Prior_Test_Cases: Login functionality verified

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to https://consumer-staging.bynry.com/login/{tenant_alias}	Login page displays with email and password fields	tenant_alias: demo	Replace with actual tenant alias
2	Enter valid consumer credentials in email and password fields, click Login button	User authenticated successfully, dashboard loads	Email: test.consumer@utility.com, Password: TestPass123!	Consumer with $400 outstanding charges
3	Click hamburger menu icon in top-left corner, select "Request Tracker" option	Request Tracker page loads with dashboard summary cards visible	N/A	Navigation from main menu
4	Locate "Services Outstanding" KPI card in top section of dashboard	KPI card displays with red dollar sign icon and amount $400	Expected Amount: $400	First KPI card from left
5	Verify currency formatting and visual indicators on Outstanding card	Amount shows "$400" with dollar symbol, red color theme, "No trend data available" text	Currency Format: $400 (not $400.00)	Financial formatting validation
6	Cross-reference with sample data from user story	Outstanding amount matches sum of unpaid services from sample data	SR-345621: $150 + SR-346892: $250 = $400	Business rule validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Services Outstanding KPI card displays exactly $400 matching sum of unpaid service charges
Secondary_Verifications: Red dollar sign icon visible, proper currency formatting, "No trend data available" text displayed
Negative_Verification: Amount does not include paid charges or pending payments

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record actual KPI amount and formatting]
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: CSS01US10_TC_004 (Overdue Payments)
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_002, CSS01US10_TC_003
Sequential_Tests: Must run after authentication

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for revenue tracking and customer financial awareness
Edge_Cases: Zero outstanding amount, negative balances, currency conversion
Risk_Areas: Financial data accuracy, real-time calculation updates
Security_Considerations: Financial data encryption, consumer data isolation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Outstanding amount updates when payment processed during session
Type: Integration
Rationale: Real-time financial data synchronization critical for consumer experience
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 2 : Active Requests Count Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_002
Title: Verify Active Requests Count Shows 8 Including Pending, In Progress, and On Hold Status Requests
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Dashboard], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/Module-Coverage/Customer-Segment-Analysis/Product/User-Acceptance], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-[Request-Management-System], Status-Tracking, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Request Management System, Status Tracking Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC02, Business Rules - Active Requests KPI calculation
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_003, CSS01US10_TC_005

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Request Management Service, Status Tracking API, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Page load < 3 seconds, KPI calculation < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with 8 active requests across different statuses

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with requests in pending, in progress, and on hold statuses
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Active Requests: RE2384 (In Progress), RE2383 (Pending), TC2374 (Pending), plus 5 additional on hold requests, Total Active: 8
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001 (Login and navigation verified)

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker page using steps from TC_001	Request Tracker dashboard loads with KPI cards visible	N/A	Following AC01 navigation flow
2	Locate "Active Requests" KPI card (second card from left)	Card displays with blue clock icon and count of 8	Expected Count: 8	Blue clock icon indicates active status
3	Verify card shows "No trend data available" text	Text appears below the count number	Text: "No trend data available"	Consistent with user story wireframe
4	Scroll down to request list table to validate active request count	Identify requests with statuses: Pending, In Progress, On Hold	Pending: RE2383, TC2374; In Progress: RE2384; On Hold: 5 additional	Status validation in list view
5	Count manually the active status requests in the table	Manual count equals 8 matching the KPI card	Manual Count: 8 (2 Pending + 1 In Progress + 5 On Hold)	Business rule validation
6	Verify completed and rejected requests are NOT counted in active	RE2371 (Completed) and RE2372 (Rejected) not included in count	Excluded: RE2371 (Completed), RE2372 (Rejected)	Negative validation
7	Verify visual formatting of active requests count	Number displays prominently with proper styling	Display Format: Large font, blue theme	UI consistency check

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Active Requests KPI shows count of 8 matching sum of pending, in progress, and on hold requests
Secondary_Verifications: Blue clock icon displayed, "No trend data available" text, proper visual formatting
Negative_Verification: Completed, rejected, and closed requests not included in active count

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record actual active count and validation results]
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: CSS01US10_TC_001
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_005 (Real-time updates)
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_003, CSS01US10_TC_004
Sequential_Tests: Requires request list validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for customer service workload visibility and request management
Edge_Cases: Zero active requests, status transitions during page load, bulk status updates
Risk_Areas: Status calculation accuracy, real-time synchronization with back-office systems
Security_Considerations: Consumer-specific request visibility, data isolation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Active count updates when request status changes from pending to completed
Type: Integration
Rationale: Real-time status synchronization affects customer understanding of active workload
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Active count accuracy with maximum number of requests (100+ requests)
Type: Performance
Rationale: Ensure KPI calculation performs well with large datasets
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 3 : Completed Requests Count Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_003
Title: Verify Completed This Month Count Shows 1 Request with Completed Status in Current Calendar Month
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Dashboard], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/Module-Coverage/Customer-Segment-Analysis/User-Acceptance/Regression-Coverage], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-[Request-Management-System], Completion-Tracking, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Request Management System, Date/Time Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC03, Business Rules - Completed This Month KPI
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_002, CSS01US10_TC_010

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Request Management Service, Date/Time Calculation Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Page load < 3 seconds, date calculation < 200ms
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with 1 completed request in current month (August 2025)

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with completed request in current calendar month
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Completed Request: RE2371 (Completed on 7/31/2025 - previous month), Current Month: August 2025, Expected Count: 1 if any completed in August
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_002

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Access Request Tracker dashboard using established navigation	Dashboard loads with all KPI cards visible	N/A	From previous test cases
2	Locate "Completed This Month" KPI card (third card from left)	Card displays with green checkmark icon and count of 1	Expected Count: 1	Green checkmark indicates completion
3	Verify "No trend data available" text appears below count	Text displayed consistently with other KPI cards	Text: "No trend data available"	Consistent UI pattern
4	Scroll to request list and identify completed requests	Locate requests with "COMPLETED" status badge in green	Completed Status: Green badge with "COMPLETED" text	Visual status validation
5	Verify completed request dates fall within current calendar month	Check created/completion dates against current month (August 2025)	Current Month: August 2025, Check dates: 8/*/2025	Calendar month validation
6	Confirm previous month completed requests (July) not counted	RE2371 completed 7/31/2025 should not be included in August count	Previous Month Request: RE2371 (7/31/2025)	Month boundary validation
7	Validate count calculation matches calendar month logic	Manual count of August completed requests equals KPI display	Manual Count: 1 (August completions only)	Business rule verification

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Completed This Month KPI shows count of 1 for current calendar month completions
Secondary_Verifications: Green checkmark icon displayed, "No trend data available" text, month boundary logic
Negative_Verification: Previous month completed requests not included in current month count

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record actual completed count and month validation]
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: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_002
Blocked_Tests: Monthly reporting features
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_004
Sequential_Tests: Date-dependent test execution

Additional Information

Notes: Important for customer satisfaction tracking and monthly performance metrics
Edge_Cases: Month boundary transitions, timezone considerations, leap year February
Risk_Areas: Date calculation accuracy, timezone handling, month-end processing
Security_Considerations: Temporal data integrity, consumer-specific completion tracking

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Month transition boundary testing (completing request at 11:59 PM on last day of month)
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Month boundary logic critical for accurate monthly reporting
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Timezone impact on completion date calculation
Type: Integration
Rationale: Multi-timezone utility companies need accurate local time calculations
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 4 : Overdue Payments Count Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_004
Title: Verify Overdue Payments Count Shows 0 for Completed Requests with No Unpaid Amounts
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Financial], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/Revenue-Impact-Tracking/Customer-Segment-Analysis/Product/Engineering], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-[Financial-System], Payment-Tracking, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 25%
Integration_Points: Financial System, Payment Processing Service, Request Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Revenue-Impact-Tracking, Quality-Dashboard, Customer-Segment-Analysis
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC04, Business Rules - Overdue Payments KPI calculation
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Financial System API, Payment Processing Service, Request Management Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Page load < 3 seconds, financial calculation < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with completed requests and current payment status

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with completed service requests and payment history
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Completed Requests: All completed requests have associated payments processed, Expected Overdue Count: 0
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_002, CSS01US10_TC_003

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker dashboard using established flow	Dashboard loads with all four KPI cards visible	N/A	From previous test validation
2	Locate "Overdue Payments" KPI card (fourth card from right)	Card displays with orange warning triangle icon and count of 0	Expected Count: 0	Orange warning icon for overdue indicator
3	Verify "No trend data available" text below the count	Text consistent with other KPI cards	Text: "No trend data available"	UI consistency validation
4	Scroll to request list and identify all completed requests	Locate requests with "COMPLETED" status in green badges	Completed Requests: RE2371 and any other completed	Status filtering
5	Cross-reference completed requests with payment status in financial system	Verify each completed request has corresponding payment processed	Payment Verification: Check each completed request has payment	Financial integration check
6	Validate business rule: only completed requests with unpaid amounts count as overdue	Confirm calculation logic excludes pending/in-progress requests from overdue calculation	Business Rule: Completed + Unpaid = Overdue	Calculation validation
7	Verify visual indicator for zero overdue payments	Orange warning triangle still displays even with zero count	Visual State: Warning triangle with "0" count	UI state verification

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Overdue Payments KPI shows count of 0 when all completed requests have payments processed
Secondary_Verifications: Orange warning triangle icon displayed, "No trend data available" text, business rule validation
Negative_Verification: Pending or in-progress requests not included in overdue calculation

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record actual overdue count and payment verification]
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: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_003
Blocked_Tests: Payment processing workflows
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_002
Sequential_Tests: Requires financial system integration

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for revenue collection and customer payment awareness
Edge_Cases: Partial payments, payment reversals, refunded services
Risk_Areas: Financial data synchronization, payment processing delays, calculation accuracy
Security_Considerations: Financial data encryption, payment history access control

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Overdue count updates when payment is processed for completed request
Type: Integration
Rationale: Real-time financial synchronization critical for accurate customer billing awareness
Priority: P1-Critical
Scenario_2: Partial payment handling (request partially paid but not fully paid)
Type: Business Rule
Rationale: Business logic clarity needed for partial payment scenarios
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 5: Real-time KPI Updates

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_005
Title: Verify KPI Cards Update with Auto-refresh When Request Statuses Change via Back-office System
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Integration
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Integration], [Consumer Services], [Real-time], MOD-RequestTracker, P2-High, Phase-Integration, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-[Engineering/Integration-Testing/Quality-Dashboard/Module-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-[Back-office-System], Real-time-Updates, Integration-Testing

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Real-time integration)
Integration_Points: Back-office System, Real-time Notification Service, Request Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Integration-Layer
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Integration-Testing, Engineering, Quality-Dashboard
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC05, Real-time Updates business requirement
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_002, CSS01US10_TC_003, CSS01US10_TC_004

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Back-office Admin System, Real-time Notification Service, WebSocket/Polling Service, Request Management API
Performance_Baseline: Auto-refresh interval < 30 seconds, status update propagation < 10 seconds
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with modifiable requests, Back-office admin access

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Back-office admin access configured, Real-time update service active
User_Roles_Permissions: Consumer role + Back-office Admin role (separate session)
Test_Data: Active Request: RE2383 (PENDING status), Back-office Admin: admin@utility.com
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_002, CSS01US10_TC_003, CSS01US10_TC_004

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Request Tracker as consumer and record baseline KPI values	KPI values recorded: Outstanding: $400, Active: 8, Completed: 1, Overdue: 0	Baseline Active: 8, Baseline Completed: 1	Establish baseline state
2	Open separate browser session/tab for back-office admin portal	Back-office admin portal loads successfully	Admin URL: admin-staging.bynry.com, Admin User: admin@utility.com	Separate admin session
3	In back-office system, locate request RE2383 (currently PENDING)	Request found in admin system with PENDING status	Request ID: RE2383, Current Status: PENDING	Admin system validation
4	Change request RE2383 status from PENDING to COMPLETED via back-office	Status update processed successfully in admin system	Status Change: PENDING → COMPLETED	Back-office action
5	Return to consumer Request Tracker page and wait for auto-refresh	Page auto-refreshes or KPI values update without manual refresh	Expected Refresh: Within 30 seconds	Auto-refresh validation
6	Verify Active Requests count decreased from 8 to 7	Active Requests KPI shows 7 (reduced by 1)	New Active Count: 7 (was 8)	Active count decreased
7	Verify Completed This Month count increased from 1 to 2	Completed This Month KPI shows 2 (increased by 1)	New Completed Count: 2 (was 1)	Completed count increased
8	Check request list to confirm RE2383 status shows COMPLETED	Request RE2383 displays green "COMPLETED" badge in status column	Status Badge: Green "COMPLETED" for RE2383	Visual status confirmation
9	Validate other KPI values remain unchanged	Outstanding ($400) and Overdue (0) values remain same	Outstanding: $400, Overdue: 0	Unaffected KPIs stable

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: KPI cards update automatically within 30 seconds when back-office changes request status
Secondary_Verifications: Active count decreases, Completed count increases, visual status badges update
Negative_Verification: Unrelated KPI values remain stable during status updates

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record KPI changes and timing of updates]
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: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_002, CSS01US10_TC_003, CSS01US10_TC_004
Blocked_Tests: Advanced real-time notification features
Parallel_Tests: None (requires sequential execution)
Sequential_Tests: Must execute after baseline KPI validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for maintaining data consistency between consumer and back-office systems
Edge_Cases: Multiple simultaneous status changes, network interruptions during updates, browser tab switching
Risk_Areas: Real-time synchronization delays, WebSocket connection stability, concurrent user updates
Security_Considerations: Cross-system data integrity, authorized status change validation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Multiple rapid status changes within refresh interval
Type: Performance
Rationale: System should handle rapid successive changes without data corruption
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Auto-refresh behavior when browser tab is inactive/background
Type: UI/UX
Rationale: Page refresh logic may differ when tab is not in focus
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 6 : Search Functionality Across All Request IDs

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_006
Title: Verify Search Functionality Works for Complaint ID, Service ID, Disconnection ID, Reconnection ID, and Transfer ID with Partial Matching
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Search], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Regression-Coverage], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Search-Service], Search-Functionality, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Search functionality)
Integration_Points: Search Service, Request Database, Consumer Authentication
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC06, Business Rules - Search by complaint ID, service ID, disconnection ID, reconnection ID, transfer ID
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_007, CSS01US10_TC_008, CSS01US10_TC_009

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Search Service API, Request Database, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Search response < 500ms, page load < 3 seconds
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with diverse request types and IDs from user story sample data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with all request types: Service, Complaint, Transfer, Disconnection, Reconnection
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Service: RE2384, RE2371; Complaint: RE2383, RE2372; Transfer: TC2374; Disconnection: DR-2024-001; Reconnection: RR-2024-001
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001 (Navigation verified)

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker and locate search bar	Search bar visible with placeholder "Search requests by ID or subject..."	Search Bar Location: Below "Service Requests" header	Search interface validation
2	Click in search input field and enter Service Request ID	Search field accepts input and cursor active	Search Term: "RE2384"	Service ID search
3	Press Enter or wait for search results	Single result displays RE2384 Service request with IN PROGRESS status	Expected Result: 1 row showing RE2384, Type: Service, Status: IN PROGRESS	Exact match validation
4	Clear search field using clear button or select all + delete	Search field clears and full request list redisplays	Clear Action: All requests visible again	Reset functionality
5	Enter Complaint Request ID in search field	Search returns matching complaint request	Search Term: "RE2383"	Complaint ID search
6	Verify complaint result shows correct details	Result displays RE2383 Complaint with PENDING status	Expected Result: RE2383, Type: Complaint, Status: PENDING	Complaint validation
7	Clear search and enter Transfer Request ID	Search returns transfer request	Search Term: "TC2374"	Transfer ID search
8	Verify transfer result accuracy	Result shows TC2374 Transfer with PENDING status	Expected Result: TC2374, Type: Transfer, Status: PENDING	Transfer validation
9	Test partial matching with "RE23"	Multiple results display for requests starting with RE23	Search Term: "RE23"	Partial match testing
10	Verify partial results include RE2384, RE2383, RE2372, RE2371	All matching requests displayed in results	Expected Results: 4 requests (RE2384, RE2383, RE2372, RE2371)	Partial match validation
11	Test case-insensitive search with lowercase	Search works regardless of case	Search Term: "re2384"	Case sensitivity testing
12	Test invalid/non-existent ID search	"No results found" message displays	Search Term: "INVALID123"	Error handling

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Search returns accurate results for all request ID types (Service, Complaint, Transfer, Disconnection, Reconnection)
Secondary_Verifications: Partial matching works, case-insensitive search, clear functionality
Negative_Verification: Invalid searches show appropriate "No results found" message

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record search results for each ID type and partial matches]
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: CSS01US10_TC_001
Blocked_Tests: Advanced search features
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_007, CSS01US10_TC_008
Sequential_Tests: Search before filter testing

Additional Information

Notes: Essential for customer self-service efficiency and request location
Edge_Cases: Special characters in search, very long search terms, SQL injection attempts
Risk_Areas: Search performance with large datasets, database query optimization
Security_Considerations: Input sanitization, consumer data isolation in search results

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Search performance with 100+ requests in consumer account
Type: Performance
Rationale: Ensure search remains responsive with large datasets
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Search functionality during concurrent user sessions
Type: Performance
Rationale: Multi-user search performance validation
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 7 : Request Type Filtering

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_007
Title: Verify Filter by Request Type Shows Service, Complaint, Disconnection, Reconnection, Transfer Options with Accurate Results
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Filter], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Regression-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Request-Management-System], Filter-Functionality, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Request type filtering)
Integration_Points: Request Management System, Filter Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC07, Business Rules - Filter by type (Service, Complaint, Disconnection, Reconnection, Transfer)
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_006, CSS01US10_TC_008, CSS01US10_TC_009

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Request Management System, Filter Service API, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Filter response < 500ms, page load < 3 seconds
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with all request types from user story sample data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with diverse request types
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Service: RE2384, RE2371; Complaint: RE2383, RE2372; Transfer: TC2374; All request types represented
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_006

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker and locate "Show Filters" button	"Show Filters" button visible in top-right area of request list	Button Location: Right side of request list header	Filter access point
2	Click "Show Filters" button to open filter panel	Filter panel expands showing Status and Request Type filter sections	Filter Panel: Two sections visible	Filter UI validation
3	Locate "Request Type" dropdown in filter panel	Dropdown shows "All Types" as default selection with dropdown arrow	Default Value: "All Types"	Initial state validation
4	Click on Request Type dropdown to view available options	Dropdown opens showing: All Types, Service, Complaint, Transfer, Disconnect Permanent, Reconnection	Available Options: 6 total options	Type options validation
5	Select "Service" from Request Type dropdown	Dropdown closes with "Service" selected	Selected Value: "Service"	Service selection
6	Click "Apply Filters" button	Request list filters to show only Service type requests	Expected Results: RE2384 (Service, IN PROGRESS), RE2371 (Service, COMPLETED)	Service filter results
7	Verify only Service requests display in filtered list	List contains only requests with Type column showing "Service"	Service Requests: RE2384, RE2371	Service validation
8	Reset filter by selecting "All Types" and apply	Full request list redisplays with all types visible	Reset Result: All requests visible again	Reset functionality
9	Select "Complaint" from Request Type dropdown and apply	List filters to show only Complaint requests	Expected Results: RE2383 (Complaint, PENDING), RE2372 (Complaint, REJECTED)	Complaint filter results
10	Verify complaint filter accuracy	Only complaints visible with Type column showing "Complaint"	Complaint Requests: RE2383, RE2372	Complaint validation
11	Select "Transfer" type and apply filter	List shows only transfer requests	Expected Results: TC2374 (Transfer, PENDING)	Transfer filter results
12	Test "Disconnect Permanent" and "Reconnection" options	Filters work for all request types (may show empty if no data)	Disconnection/Reconnection: Test functionality even if no results	All type options tested

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Request Type filter accurately displays only selected type requests
Secondary_Verifications: All request types available in dropdown, proper reset functionality, accurate result counts
Negative_Verification: Filtered results exclude non-matching request types

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record filter results for each request type]
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: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_006
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_009 (Combined filtering)
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_008
Sequential_Tests: Filter before combination testing

Additional Information

Notes: Important for organizing large numbers of requests by type
Edge_Cases: No requests of selected type, all requests of same type, type changes during filter
Risk_Areas: Filter performance, type classification accuracy, UI state management
Security_Considerations: Consumer-specific request type access, data isolation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Filter performance with 50+ requests per type
Type: Performance
Rationale: Ensure filtering remains responsive with large datasets
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Filter state persistence across page refresh
Type: UI/UX
Rationale: User experience improvement for maintaining filter preferences
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 8 : Status Filtering

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_008
Title: Verify Filter by Status with All Available Status Options Including Created, Approved, Completed, Rejected, In Progress, Canceled, Pending, On Hold, Closed
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 7 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Status filtering)
Integration_Points: Request Management System, Status Tracking Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC08, Business Rules - Filter by status with all available status options
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_006, CSS01US10_TC_007, CSS01US10_TC_009

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Request Management System, Status Tracking Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Filter response < 500ms, status query < 300ms
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with requests across different status values

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with requests in various statuses
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: IN PROGRESS: RE2384; PENDING: RE2383, TC2374; REJECTED: RE2372; COMPLETED: RE2371; All status types represented
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_007

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Request Tracker filter panel using "Show Filters" button	Filter panel opens with Status and Request Type sections visible	Filter Panel: Status section on left side	Filter access verification
2	Locate Status filter section with "All Statuses" dropdown	Status dropdown shows "All Statuses" as default with dropdown arrow	Default Selection: "All Statuses"	Initial status state
3	Click on Status dropdown to view all available options	Dropdown expands showing complete list of status options	Available Statuses: CREATED, APPROVED, COMPLETED, REJECTED, IN PROGRESS, CANCELED, PENDING, ON HOLD, CLOSED	All status options visible
4	Verify all 9 status options are present in dropdown	Count and verify each status option exists	Status Count: 9 options total (plus "All Statuses")	Complete status coverage
5	Select "IN PROGRESS" from Status dropdown	"IN PROGRESS" becomes selected value in dropdown	Selected Status: "IN PROGRESS"	In progress selection
6	Click "Apply Filters" button to execute status filter	Request list filters to show only IN PROGRESS requests	Expected Result: RE2384 (Service, IN PROGRESS)	In progress filter results
7	Verify only IN PROGRESS requests display with yellow status badge	List shows requests with yellow "IN PROGRESS" status badges only	Status Badge: Yellow "IN PROGRESS" for RE2384	Visual status validation
8	Reset filter and select "PENDING" status	Filter resets, then shows only PENDING requests	Expected Results: RE2383 (Complaint, PENDING), TC2374 (Transfer, PENDING)	Pending filter results
9	Verify PENDING requests display with orange status badges	Pending requests show orange "PENDING" badges	Status Badges: Orange "PENDING" for RE2383, TC2374	Pending status validation
10	Test "COMPLETED" status filter	Filter shows only completed requests	Expected Result: RE2371 (Service, COMPLETED)	Completed filter results
11	Verify COMPLETED requests display with green status badges	Completed requests show green "COMPLETED" badges	Status Badge: Green "COMPLETED" for RE2371	Completed status validation
12	Test "REJECTED" status filter	Filter shows only rejected requests	Expected Result: RE2372 (Complaint, REJECTED)	Rejected filter results
13	Verify REJECTED requests display with red status badges	Rejected requests show red "REJECTED" badges	Status Badge: Red "REJECTED" for RE2372	Rejected status validation
14	Test remaining status options (CREATED, APPROVED, CANCELED, ON HOLD, CLOSED)	Filters work for all statuses (may show empty results if no data)	Additional Statuses: Test functionality for complete coverage	All status options tested

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Status filter accurately displays only requests matching selected status
Secondary_Verifications: All 9 status options available, correct status badge colors, proper reset functionality
Negative_Verification: Filtered results exclude requests with non-matching statuses

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record filter results for each status type and badge colors]
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: CSS01US10_TC_001, CSS01US10_TC_007
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_009 (Combined filtering)
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_006
Sequential_Tests: Status filtering before combination testing

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for customers to track request progress and identify actions needed
Edge_Cases: Status transitions during filtering, multiple requests with same status, status color consistency
Risk_Areas: Status synchronization, filter performance, color-coding accuracy
Security_Considerations: Status visibility permissions, consumer data isolation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Status filter behavior during real-time status updates
Type: Integration
Rationale: Filter results should update when status changes occur
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Status badge color consistency across different browsers
Type: Cross-Browser
Rationale: Ensure status colors display consistently for all users
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 9 : Simultaneous Type and Status Filtering

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_009
Title: Verify Simultaneous Application of Type and Status Filters Using AND Logic for Combined Results
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Filter], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Regression-Coverage/Module-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Request-Management-System], Combined-Filtering, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Combined filtering logic)
Integration_Points: Request Management System, Filter Service, Database Query Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC09, Business Rules - Simultaneous application of type and status filters
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_007, CSS01US10_TC_008

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Request Management System, Filter Service API, Database Query Engine, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Combined filter response < 500ms, query optimization < 300ms
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with requests across multiple type-status combinations

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with diverse request type and status combinations
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Service+IN PROGRESS: RE2384; Complaint+PENDING: RE2383; Complaint+REJECTED: RE2372; Service+COMPLETED: RE2371; Transfer+PENDING: TC2374
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_007, CSS01US10_TC_008

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Request Tracker filter panel and verify both filter sections	Filter panel shows Status and Request Type sections side by side	Filter Sections: Status (left), Request Type (right)	Combined filter setup
2	Select "Service" from Request Type dropdown	Request Type shows "Service" selected	Selected Type: "Service"	Type selection first
3	Select "IN PROGRESS" from Status dropdown	Status shows "IN PROGRESS" selected	Selected Status: "IN PROGRESS"	Status selection second
4	Click "Apply Filters" button to execute combined filter	Results show only Service requests that are also IN PROGRESS	Expected Result: RE2384 (Service, IN PROGRESS)	AND logic validation
5	Verify only one result matching both criteria displays	Single request RE2384 visible meeting both Service AND IN PROGRESS criteria	Filtered Result: 1 row (RE2384)	Combined criteria match
6	Reset filters using "Reset Filters" button	Both filters reset to "All Types" and "All Statuses"	Reset State: All requests visible	Filter reset functionality
7	Apply "Complaint" type AND "PENDING" status combination	Results show only Complaint requests that are also PENDING	Expected Result: RE2383 (Complaint, PENDING)	Second combination test
8	Verify complaint+pending combination accuracy	Single result RE2383 displayed meeting both criteria	Filtered Result: RE2383 only	Complaint+Pending validation
9	Test "Complaint" type AND "REJECTED" status combination	Results show only Complaint requests that are also REJECTED	Expected Result: RE2372 (Complaint, REJECTED)	Third combination test
10	Verify rejected complaint result	Single result RE2372 displayed with red REJECTED badge	Filtered Result: RE2372 with red badge	Rejected complaint validation
11	Test combination with no matching results	Apply filters that yield no matches	Test Combination: Transfer + REJECTED (if no such requests exist)	No results scenario
12	Verify "No results found" message for empty combinations	Appropriate message displays when no requests match both criteria	No Results Message: "No requests match your criteria"	Empty result handling
13	Test Service + COMPLETED combination	Results show completed service requests	Expected Result: RE2371 (Service, COMPLETED)	Service+Completed test
14	Verify multiple matching results scenario (if applicable)	If multiple requests match both criteria, all display correctly	Multiple Results: All matching requests shown	Multiple results validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Combined filters use AND logic showing only requests matching both type AND status criteria
Secondary_Verifications: Reset functionality works for both filters, proper handling of empty results
Negative_Verification: Results exclude requests matching only one criterion

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record combine

Test Case 10 : Request List Display and Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_010
Title: Verify Request List Displays Reference ID, Type, Status, Created Date, Actions Columns with Proper Sorting and View Actions
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [UI], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Regression-Coverage], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Request-Management-System], List-Display, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Request list display)
Integration_Points: Request Management System, UI Component Library
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC10, AC11, AC12, AC13 - Request list display requirements
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_006, CSS01US10_TC_014

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Request Management System, UI Framework, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: List rendering < 2 seconds, sorting < 300ms
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with diverse requests for complete list display testing

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with multiple requests across different types and statuses
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Sample requests: RE2384, RE2383, RE2372, RE2371, TC2374 with varying dates and statuses
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker and scroll to request list section	Request list table displays below KPI cards with proper column headers	Table Location: Below summary cards and search/filter section	List visibility validation
2	Verify all required column headers are present	Table shows columns: Reference ID, Type, Status, Created Date, Actions	Required Columns: 5 total columns	Column header validation
3	Verify Reference ID column displays all request IDs accurately	All request IDs visible and properly formatted	Sample IDs: RE2384, RE2383, RE2372, RE2371, TC2374	Reference ID accuracy
4	Verify Type column shows correct request types	Type column displays: Service, Complaint, Transfer as appropriate	Request Types: Service, Complaint, Transfer	Type classification
5	Verify Status column displays color-coded status badges	Status badges show with appropriate colors: yellow (IN PROGRESS), orange (PENDING), red (REJECTED), green (COMPLETED)	Status Colors: Yellow, Orange, Red, Green badges	Visual status indicators
6	Verify Created Date column shows dates in MM/DD/YYYY format	Dates displayed consistently in MM/DD/YYYY format	Date Format: 8/1/2025, 7/31/2025	Date formatting validation
7	Verify Actions column contains eye icon for each request	Each row has clickable eye icon in Actions column	Action Icon: Eye icon for all requests	Action accessibility
8	Verify default sorting by Created Date in descending order	Newest requests appear at top of list (most recent dates first)	Default Sort: Latest dates first (8/1/2025 before 7/31/2025)	Default sort validation
9	Click on Created Date column header to test sorting	Column sorting toggles between ascending and descending	Sort Test: Click header to change order	Column sorting functionality
10	Test eye icon click functionality for one request	Clicking eye icon opens request detail view	Test Action: Click eye icon for RE2384	View action functionality
11	Verify request list responsive behavior	Table adjusts appropriately within page layout	Responsive Test: Resize browser window	Responsive design
12	Verify row hover effects and visual feedback	Table rows provide visual feedback on hover	Hover Effect: Row highlighting or color change	UI interaction feedback

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Request list displays all required columns with accurate data and proper formatting
Secondary_Verifications: Default sorting by created date descending, eye icon actions functional, proper visual styling
Negative_Verification: No missing columns, no data corruption, no broken action buttons

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record column display, sorting behavior, and action functionality]
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: CSS01US10_TC_001
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_014 (Detail views)
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_006, CSS01US10_TC_007, CSS01US10_TC_008
Sequential_Tests: List display before detail navigation

Additional Information

Notes: Foundation for all request tracking functionality and user navigation
Edge_Cases: Empty request list, single request, very long request IDs, date edge cases
Risk_Areas: Performance with large request lists, sorting algorithm efficiency, UI responsiveness
Security_Considerations: Consumer-specific data display, action button security

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Request list performance with 100+ requests
Type: Performance
Rationale: Ensure list remains responsive with large datasets
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Column width adjustment and text overflow handling
Type: UI/UX
Rationale: Long request IDs or descriptions should not break layout
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 11: View Action in Actions Column

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_011
Title: Verify View Action Eye Icon in Actions Column for Each Request Provides Access to Detail View
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Low
Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (View action functionality)
Integration_Points: Request Management System, Detail View Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC11 - System must provide view action in Actions column for each request
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010, CSS01US10_TC_014

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Request Management System, Detail View Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: View action response < 2 seconds, detail view load < 3 seconds
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with diverse request types for comprehensive view action testing

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with multiple requests of different types
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Sample requests: RE2384 (Service), RE2383 (Complaint), TC2374 (Transfer), all with view actions
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker request list section	Request list displays with Actions column visible for all requests	Request List: Multiple requests visible	Actions column verification
2	Locate Actions column header and verify it's properly labeled	Column header shows "Actions" text clearly	Column Header: "Actions"	Column identification
3	Verify eye icon presence in Actions column for each request row	Each request row contains clickable eye icon in Actions column	Eye Icons: Present for RE2384, RE2383, TC2374, RE2372, RE2371	Icon availability
4	Verify eye icon visual styling and accessibility	Eye icons are clearly visible, properly sized, and accessible	Icon Style: Standard eye/view icon, appropriate size	Visual validation
5	Click eye icon for Service request RE2384	Service request detail view opens displaying Service Request card	Target Request: RE2384 (Service, IN PROGRESS)	Service view action
6	Verify detail view loads with correct service request information	Detail view shows RE2384 with Service Request card and proper data	Service Details: Service ID, Status, Service Code, etc.	Service detail accuracy
7	Return to request list using browser back button or navigation	Request list redisplays with same state and filters	Return Navigation: List view restored	Back navigation
8	Click eye icon for Complaint request RE2383	Complaint detail view opens displaying Complaint card	Target Request: RE2383 (Complaint, PENDING)	Complaint view action
9	Verify complaint detail view loads with correct information	Detail view shows RE2383 with Complaint card and proper data	Complaint Details: Complaint ID, Status, Complaint Code, etc.	Complaint detail accuracy
10	Return to list and click eye icon for Transfer request TC2374	Transfer detail view opens displaying Transfer Request card	Target Request: TC2374 (Transfer, PENDING)	Transfer view action
11	Verify transfer detail view loads with correct information	Detail view shows TC2374 with Transfer Request card and proper data	Transfer Details: Transfer Type, Status, Account Balance, etc.	Transfer detail accuracy
12	Test eye icon hover effects	Eye icons provide visual feedback on hover	Hover Effect: Color change, cursor pointer, or tooltip	Hover interaction
13	Verify eye icon accessibility for keyboard navigation	Eye icons accessible via Tab key and Enter key activation	Keyboard Access: Tab navigation and Enter activation	Accessibility validation
14	Test view action for requests with different statuses	All request statuses (IN PROGRESS, PENDING, REJECTED, COMPLETED) have functional view actions	Status Variety: Test across all status types	Status-independent functionality

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Each request in Actions column has functional eye icon that opens correct detail view
Secondary_Verifications: Visual styling consistent, hover effects work, keyboard accessibility supported
Negative_Verification: No broken view actions, no incorrect detail views, no navigation failures

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record view action success for each request type and navigation 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: CSS01US10_TC_010
Blocked_Tests: All detail view test cases (TC_014, TC_018, etc.)
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_012, CSS01US10_TC_013
Sequential_Tests: List display before view actions

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for customer access to detailed request information
Edge_Cases: Rapid clicking, double-clicking, clicking during page load
Risk_Areas: Navigation performance, detail view loading, session management
Security_Considerations: Consumer-specific request access, unauthorized view prevention

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: View action performance with slow network conditions
Type: Performance
Rationale: Ensure view actions remain responsive under poor network conditions
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: View action behavior with concurrent user sessions
Type: Performance
Rationale: Multi-user access validation for shared system resources
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Casec12: Default Sorting by Created Date Descending

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_012
Title: Verify Request List Sorts by Created Date in Descending Order by Default with Newest Requests First
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Sorting], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Regression-Coverage], Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Request-Management-System], Default-Sorting, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Low
Complexity_Level: Low
Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Low

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Default sorting functionality)
Integration_Points: Request Management System, Sorting Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC12 - System must sort requests by Created Date in descending order by default
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010, CSS01US10_TC_013

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Request Management System, Sorting Algorithm, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Sorting operation < 300ms, page load < 3 seconds
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with requests created on different dates

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with requests spanning multiple creation dates
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Requests with different creation dates: RE2384 (8/1/2025), RE2383 (8/1/2025), RE2371 (7/31/2025), TC2374 (7/31/2025)
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker and observe initial request list order	Request list displays with newest requests at top by default	Default State: No user-applied sorting	Initial sort validation
2	Verify Created Date column header shows default sort indicator	Created Date column header displays sort indicator (down arrow) showing descending order	Sort Indicator: Down arrow or desc indicator	Default sort visual
3	Examine first request in list and verify it has most recent date	Top request shows most recent creation date	Expected Top: RE2384 or RE2383 (8/1/2025)	Newest first validation
4	Examine last request in list and verify it has oldest date	Bottom request shows oldest creation date	Expected Bottom: RE2371 or TC2374 (7/31/2025)	Oldest last validation
5	Verify complete order of requests by creation date	All requests sorted with 8/1/2025 requests before 7/31/2025 requests	Order Sequence: 8/1/2025 requests at top, 7/31/2025 requests at bottom	Complete order validation
6	Check requests created on same date maintain consistent sub-ordering	Requests with identical creation dates show consistent secondary ordering	Same Date: RE2384 and RE2383 both 8/1/2025	Same-date handling
7	Refresh page and verify default sorting maintained	Page refresh maintains descending date sort as default	Refresh Test: Default sort preserved	Persistence validation
8	Apply filter and verify default sorting maintained within filtered results	Filtered results still show newest first within filter criteria	Filter Test: Apply status filter, verify date sorting maintained	Filter + sort interaction
9	Clear filter and verify default sorting restored	Clearing filters returns to full list with newest first sorting	Clear Filter: Default sort maintained	Filter clear behavior
10	Navigate away and return to Request Tracker	Returning to page shows default descending date sort	Navigation Test: Default sort on return	Navigation persistence

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Request list displays with newest requests first by default using Created Date descending sort
Secondary_Verifications: Sort indicator visible, consistent sub-ordering for same dates, persistence across page actions
Negative_Verification: No random ordering, no ascending default sort, no sorting failures

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record default sort order and persistence 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: CSS01US10_TC_010
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_013 (Column sorting)
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_011
Sequential_Tests: Default sort before manual sorting

Additional Information

Notes: Important for customer experience to see newest requests first
Edge_Cases: Identical timestamps, timezone differences, rapid request creation
Risk_Areas: Sorting algorithm performance, date comparison accuracy
Security_Considerations: Consumer-specific request ordering, data isolation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Default sorting with 50+ requests performance
Type: Performance
Rationale: Ensure sorting remains fast with large datasets
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Default sorting with requests created in different timezones
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Timezone handling for accurate chronological ordering
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 13 : Column Sorting Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_013
Title: Verify Column Sorting Functionality Allows Manual Sorting of Request List by Different Columns
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Sorting], MOD-RequestTracker, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Regression-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Request-Management-System], Column-Sorting, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Column sorting functionality)
Integration_Points: Request Management System, Sorting Service, UI Framework
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC13 - System must support column sorting functionality
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010, CSS01US10_TC_012

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Request Management System, Sorting Algorithm, UI Framework, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Sort operation < 500ms, visual feedback < 200ms
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with diverse requests for comprehensive sorting testing

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with requests having different values across sortable columns
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Diverse requests: RE2384 (Service), RE2383 (Complaint), TC2374 (Transfer), with various statuses and dates
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_012

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker and identify sortable column headers	Column headers for Reference ID, Type, Status, Created Date show clickable styling	Sortable Columns: Reference ID, Type, Status, Created Date	Sortable identification
2	Click on Reference ID column header	Reference ID column sorts alphabetically, sort indicator changes	Sort Test: RE2371, RE2372, RE2383, RE2384, TC2374	Reference ID sorting
3	Click Reference ID header again to toggle sort direction	Reference ID sorting reverses to descending alphabetical order	Reverse Order: TC2374, RE2384, RE2383, RE2372, RE2371	Sort direction toggle
4	Verify sort indicator shows current direction	Column header displays up/down arrow indicating current sort direction	Sort Indicator: Up arrow for ascending, down arrow for descending	Visual sort feedback
5	Click on Type column header	Type column sorts alphabetically by request type	Type Sort: Complaint, Service, Transfer (alphabetical)	Type sorting
6	Verify Type sorting groups same types together	Requests of same type grouped together in sorted order	Type Grouping: All Complaints together, all Services together	Type grouping
7	Click on Status column header	Status column sorts by status values alphabetically	Status Sort: COMPLETED, IN PROGRESS, PENDING, REJECTED	Status sorting
8	Verify Status sorting with visual badges maintained	Status badges maintain colors while column is sorted	Badge Consistency: Colors preserved during sorting	Visual consistency
9	Click on Created Date column header (override default)	Created Date sorting toggles from default descending to ascending	Date Sort: 7/31/2025 requests before 8/1/2025 requests	Date override
10	Click Created Date header again to return to descending	Created Date returns to descending order (newest first)	Date Restore: 8/1/2025 requests before 7/31/2025 requests	Default restoration
11	Test sorting with active filters applied	Sorting works correctly within filtered result set	Filter + Sort: Apply Complaint filter, then sort by date	Filter interaction
12	Verify sorting persists through filter changes	Sort order maintained when filters applied/removed	Sort Persistence: Order preserved through filter operations	Sort persistence
13	Test rapid column clicking	System handles multiple rapid sort requests gracefully	Rapid Click: Click different columns quickly	Performance validation
14	Verify Actions column is not sortable	Actions column header does not provide sorting functionality	Non-sortable: Actions column no sort indicator	Non-sortable validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All sortable columns (Reference ID, Type, Status, Created Date) provide bidirectional sorting functionality
Secondary_Verifications: Sort indicators accurate, visual styling maintained, filter interaction works
Negative_Verification: Actions column not sortable, no sorting errors, no data corruption during sorts

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_012
Blocked_Tests: Advanced sorting features
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_011
Sequential_Tests: Default sort before manual sorting

Additional Information

Notes: Important for customer organization of large request lists
Edge_Cases: Null values, identical values, sorting during data updates
Risk_Areas: Sorting algorithm performance, UI responsiveness, data consistency
Security_Considerations: Consumer-specific sorting, data isolation during operations

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Column sorting performance with 100+ requests
Type: Performance
Rationale: Ensure sorting remains responsive with large datasets
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Sorting behavior during real-time status updates
Type: Integration
Rationale: Sort order should handle dynamic data changes appropriately
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 14 : Service Request Detail View

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_014
Title: Verify Service Request Detail View Contains All Required Fields Including Service ID, Status, Service Code, Dates, Categories, Fees, and Notes/Timeline Tabs
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Detail-View], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Integration-Testing], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-[Service-Settings], Service-Details, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Service request detail view)
Integration_Points: Service Settings API, Request Management System, Financial System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC14, AC15, AC16, AC17 - Service request detail view and functionality
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010, CSS01US10_TC_016

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Service Settings API, Request Management System, Financial System API, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Detail view load < 2 seconds, service settings retrieval < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Service request RE2384 with complete service settings and customer data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service request with complete data including service settings integration
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Service Request RE2384: IN PROGRESS status, Service Code WSC-001, Category: Water Services, Sub Category: New Connection, Service Fee: $150.00, Payment Status: Pending
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	From request list, click eye icon for service request RE2384	Service request detail view opens in new page or modal	Target Request: RE2384 (Service, IN PROGRESS)	Detail navigation
2	Verify "Service Request" card header displays prominently	Card title shows "Service Request" clearly at top of detail view	Card Header: "Service Request"	Card identification
3	Verify Service ID field matches reference ID from list	Service ID displays as RE2384 matching the list view	Service ID: RE2384	ID consistency
4	Verify Status field shows current status with proper styling	Status displays "IN PROGRESS" with yellow styling	Status: IN PROGRESS (yellow badge/text)	Status display
5	Verify Service Code field displays code from service settings	Service Code shows WSC-001 from integrated service settings	Service Code: WSC-001	Service settings integration
6	Verify Created Date field shows proper date formatting	Created Date displays 8/1/2025 in MM/DD/YYYY format	Created Date: 8/1/2025	Date formatting
7	Verify Category and Sub Category fields display service classification	Category: Water Services, Sub Category: New Connection	Category: Water Services, Sub Category: New Connection	Service classification
8	Verify Service Fees field shows monetary amount with proper formatting	Service Fees displays $150.00 with currency formatting	Service Fees: $150.00	Financial formatting
9	Verify Payment Status field shows current payment state	Payment Status displays "Pending"	Payment Status: Pending	Payment integration
10	Verify Service Description field shows description from service settings	Description shows "New water service connection installation"	Service Description: From service settings	Settings integration
11	Verify Preferred Date and Time fields display customer selections	Preferred Date: 8/15/2025, Preferred Time: 10:00 AM	Preferred Date: 8/15/2025, Preferred Time: 10:00 AM	Customer preferences
12	Verify Additional Information field shows customer notes	Additional Information displays "Please call before arrival"	Additional Information: Customer input text	Customer notes
13	Verify rejection reason field (if applicable for rejected status)	If status is rejected, rejection reason should display	Rejection Reason: N/A for IN PROGRESS status	Conditional field
14	Verify Notes and Timeline tabs are visible and accessible	Two tabs displayed: "Notes" and "Timeline"	Tab Names: Notes, Timeline	Tab navigation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Service request detail view displays all required fields with accurate data from service settings integration
Secondary_Verifications: Proper formatting for dates and currency, correct status styling, tab accessibility
Negative_Verification: No missing fields, no data corruption, no broken service settings integration

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record all field values and integration accuracy]
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: CSS01US10_TC_010
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_016 (Notes and Timeline)
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_018 (Complaint details)
Sequential_Tests: Detail view before tab functionality

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for customer understanding of service request details and status
Edge_Cases: Missing service settings data, null values, very long text fields
Risk_Areas: Service settings API integration, data synchronization, performance with complex requests
Security_Considerations: Consumer-specific service data access, financial information security

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Service detail view with missing service settings data
Type: Integration
Rationale: Graceful handling when service settings API is unavailable
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Service detail view performance with complex service configurations
Type: Performance
Rationale: Ensure detail loading remains fast with extensive service data
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 15: Service Request Rejection Reason Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_015
Title: Verify Service Request Detail View Shows Rejection Reason When Request Status is Rejected
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Negative], [Consumer Services], [Detail-View], MOD-RequestTracker, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Regression-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Request-Management-System], Rejection-Handling, Negative

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Rejection reason display)
Integration_Points: Request Management System, Back-office System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC17 (inferred from sequence) - System must show rejection reason when request status is rejected
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_014, CSS01US10_TC_021

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Request Management System, Back-office System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Detail view load < 2 seconds, rejection data retrieval < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Service request with REJECTED status and rejection reason

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service request configured with REJECTED status and rejection reason from back-office
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Service Request: SR-REJECTED-001 with Status: REJECTED, Rejection Reason: "Incomplete documentation - missing proof of identity"
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_014

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker and locate rejected service request	Rejected service request visible in list with red REJECTED status badge	Target Request: SR-REJECTED-001 (Service, REJECTED)	Rejected request identification
2	Click eye icon to open rejected service request detail view	Service Request detail view opens showing rejected status	Status Display: REJECTED with red styling	Detail view access
3	Verify Service Request card displays REJECTED status prominently	Status field shows "REJECTED" with appropriate red styling/badge	Status Field: "REJECTED" in red	Status prominence
4	Locate rejection reason field in the service request card	Rejection reason field visible and populated with explanation	Field Label: "Rejection Reason" or "Rejected Reason"	Rejection field presence
5	Verify rejection reason displays complete explanation text	Full rejection reason text visible and readable	Rejection Text: "Incomplete documentation - missing proof of identity"	Complete reason display
6	Verify rejection reason formatting and readability	Text properly formatted, adequate spacing, appropriate font styling	Text Format: Clear, readable, proper line breaks	Formatting validation
7	Verify rejection reason appears in logical position within card	Rejection reason positioned appropriately relative to other fields	Field Position: Near status field or at bottom of key information	Logical placement
8	Compare with non-rejected service request for contrast	Open non-rejected service request to confirm rejection reason field absent	Comparison Request: RE2384 (IN PROGRESS)	Conditional display validation
9	Verify non-rejected request does not show rejection reason field	Rejection reason field not displayed for non-rejected requests	Non-rejected: No rejection reason field visible	Negative validation
10	Return to rejected request and verify rejection reason persistence	Rejection reason consistently displays on return visits	Persistence Test: Reason shows on repeated access	Data persistence
11	Verify rejection reason does not interfere with other field display	All other service request fields display normally alongside rejection reason	Field Interaction: Normal display of Service ID, Status, Fees, etc.	Field coexistence

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Rejected service requests display complete rejection reason in detail view
Secondary_Verifications: Proper formatting, logical placement, conditional display for rejected status only
Negative_Verification: Non-rejected requests do not show rejection reason field

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record rejection reason display, formatting, and conditional 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: CSS01US10_TC_014
Blocked_Tests: None
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_021 (Complaint rejection)
Sequential_Tests: Detail view before rejection reason validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for customer understanding of rejection rationale and next steps
Edge_Cases: Very long rejection reasons, special characters, HTML content
Risk_Areas: Text truncation, character encoding, field overflow
Security_Considerations: Rejection reason content filtering, sensitive information protection

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Rejection reason display with very long text (500+ characters)
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Ensure UI handles extensive rejection explanations appropriately
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Rejection reason with special characters or formatting
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Proper handling of complex text content in rejection reasons
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 16 : Service Request Notes and Timeline Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_016
Title: Verify Service Request Notes and Timeline Tabs Allow User Note Addition, Display Back-office Notes, and Show Complete Activity Log
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Notes], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Integration-Testing/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Back-office-System], Notes-Timeline, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Notes and Timeline functionality)
Integration_Points: Back-office System, Notes Service, Activity Logging Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC16, AC17 - Notes and Timeline functionality for service requests
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_014, CSS01US10_TC_033

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Back-office System, Notes Service API, Activity Logging Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Notes load < 1 second, note save < 2 seconds, timeline load < 1 second
Data_Requirements: Service request RE2384 with existing back-office notes and activity history

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service request with existing notes and activity history from back-office
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with note-adding permissions
Test_Data: Service Request RE2384 with existing back-office note: "Service team assigned - 8/2/2025 2:30 PM by BackOffice User"
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_014

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open service request RE2384 detail view using previous test steps	Service detail view displays with Notes and Timeline tabs visible	Service Request: RE2384	From previous test case
2	Click on "Notes" tab to open notes section	Notes tab becomes active, notes section displays	Active Tab: Notes	Tab switching
3	Verify existing back-office notes display with proper formatting	Back-office notes show with timestamp, author, and read-only styling	Existing Note: "Service team assigned - 8/2/2025 2:30 PM by BackOffice User"	Back-office notes display
4	Locate user note input field or "Add Note" button	Note input field or add button visible and accessible	Input Element: Text area or Add Note button	User input access
5	Add new user note by typing in input field	Text input accepts user typing	Test Note: "When will technician arrive? Need to schedule time off work."	User note input
6	Submit/save the new user note	Note saves successfully and appears in notes list	Save Action: Click Save or Submit button	Note persistence
7	Verify new user note displays with timestamp and user identification	User note shows with current timestamp and clear user attribution	Expected Format: "When will technician arrive? Need to schedule time off work. - 8/14/2025 [current time] by Consumer"	User note formatting
8	Verify chronological order of notes	Notes display in chronological order (latest first or oldest first consistently)	Note Order: Back-office note and user note in time sequence	Chronological display
9	Verify visual distinction between user and back-office notes	Clear visual difference between user-added and system-added notes	Visual Distinction: Different styling, colors, or icons	Note type identification
10	Click on "Timeline" tab to open activity log section	Timeline tab becomes active, activity log displays	Active Tab: Timeline	Tab switching
11	Verify timeline shows complete activity history	All request activities displayed with timestamps and actions	Timeline Activities: Request Created, Assigned to Team, Status Updated, Note Added	Complete activity log
12	Verify timeline entry formatting	Each entry shows timestamp, action type, and responsible party	Entry Format: "8/1/2025 9:00 AM - Request Created by John Smith"	Timeline formatting
13	Verify timeline is read-only for consumers	Timeline cannot be edited or modified by consumer	Read-only Status: No edit options visible	Consumer access control
14	Verify latest activity includes the note addition from step 6	Timeline shows new entry for note addition activity	Latest Entry: Note added activity with current timestamp	Activity tracking

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Notes tab allows user note addition and displays back-office notes with clear attribution
Secondary_Verifications: Timeline shows complete activity log in proper format, chronological ordering works correctly
Negative_Verification: Timeline is read-only, notes display proper author identification

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record note addition success, timeline accuracy, and formatting]
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: CSS01US10_TC_014
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_033 (Cross-request notes)
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_018 (Complaint notes)
Sequential_Tests: Detail view before notes/timeline testing

Additional Information

Notes: Important for customer-support communication and request status understanding
Edge_Cases: Very long notes, special characters, concurrent note additions, network interruptions
Risk_Areas: Note synchronization, activity logging accuracy, user permission validation
Security_Considerations: Note access control, consumer data privacy, activity log integrity

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Note character limit validation and handling
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Prevent system issues with extremely long notes
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Concurrent note addition by multiple users (consumer and back-office)
Type: Integration
Rationale: Ensure data consistency with simultaneous note additions
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 17: Service Request Notes and Timeline Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_017
Title: Verify Service Request Provides Notes Tab for User Note Addition and Timeline Tab for Complete Activity Log
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
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: Medium
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Service request Notes and Timeline functionality)
Integration_Points: Back-office System, Notes Service, Activity Logging Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC18, AC19 - Notes and Timeline functionality for service requests
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_014, CSS01US10_TC_016

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Back-office System, Notes Service API, Activity Logging Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Notes load < 1 second, note save < 2 seconds, timeline load < 1 second
Data_Requirements: Service request RE2384 with existing back-office notes and activity history

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service request with existing notes and activity history from back-office
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with note-adding permissions
Test_Data: Service Request RE2384 with existing back-office note: "Service team assigned - 8/2/2025 2:30 PM by BackOffice User"
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_014

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open service request RE2384 detail view	Service detail view displays with Notes and Timeline tabs visible	Service Request: RE2384	From previous test case
2	Click on "Notes" tab to open notes section	Notes tab becomes active, notes section displays	Active Tab: Notes	Tab switching
3	Verify existing back-office notes display with timestamps	Back-office notes show with timestamp, author, and read-only styling	Existing Note: "Service team assigned - 8/2/2025 2:30 PM by BackOffice User"	Back-office notes display
4	Add new user note using input field	User note saves and displays with proper attribution	Test Note: "When will technician arrive?"	User note addition
5	Click on "Timeline" tab to open activity log	Timeline displays complete activity history	Activities: Request Created, Status Updates, Note Added	Timeline functionality
6	Verify timeline shows chronological order	Activities displayed in reverse chronological order	Latest Activity: Most recent at top	Timeline ordering

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Service request provides functional Notes and Timeline tabs
Secondary_Verifications: User can add notes, timeline shows complete activity log
Negative_Verification: Timeline is read-only for consumers

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record notes and timeline functionality]
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: CSS01US10_TC_014
Blocked_Tests: Cross-request notes testing
Parallel_Tests: Other detail view tests
Sequential_Tests: Detail view before notes/timeline testing

Additional Information

Notes: Important for customer-support communication
Edge_Cases: Long notes, special characters, concurrent additions
Risk_Areas: Note synchronization, activity logging accuracy
Security_Considerations: Note access control, data privacy

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Note character limit validation
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Prevent system issues with extremely long notes
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 19: Service Request Timeline Tab

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_019
Title: Verify Service Request Timeline Tab Shows Complete Activity Log for the Request with Proper Formatting
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Timeline], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Integration-Testing/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Activity-Logging-Service], Service-Timeline, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Disconnection notes and timeline functionality)
Integration_Points: Notes Service, Activity Logging Service, Disconnection Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC28 - System must provide Notes and Timeline tabs with appropriate functionality
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_022, CSS01US10_TC_033, CSS01US10_TC_040

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Notes Service, Activity Logging Service, Disconnection Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Notes/Timeline load < 1 second, note save < 2 seconds
Data_Requirements: Disconnection request with notes and activity history

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Disconnection request with existing notes and activity history
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with note-adding permissions
Test_Data: Disconnection DR-2024-001 with back-office notes and activity timeline
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_022

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Disconnection DR-2024-001 detail view	Detail view displays with Notes and Timeline tabs visible	Disconnection: DR-2024-001	Tab access
2	Click Notes tab to open notes section	Notes tab opens with existing disconnection-related notes	Notes Tab: Disconnection notes interface	Notes functionality
3	Verify user can add notes to disconnection request	Note input field allows user note addition	Test Note: "Scheduling disconnection for moving date"	User note capability
4	Verify back-office notes display for disconnection	Back-office notes visible with timestamps and attribution	Back-office Note: Disconnection-specific system notes	Back-office integration
5	Click Timeline tab to open activity log	Timeline displays disconnection-specific activities	Timeline Activities: Request Submitted, Scheduled, Processing	Timeline functionality
6	Verify timeline shows disconnection workflow activities	Activities include scheduling, meter reading, disconnection process	Disconnection Activities: Workflow-specific events	Activity tracking
7	Verify Notes and Timeline tabs work identically to other request types	Same functionality, formatting, and behavior as service/complaint tabs	Consistency: Identical to other request types	Cross-request consistency
8	Verify timeline is read-only for disconnection requests	No edit options available in timeline	Read-only: Consumer cannot modify timeline	Access control

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Disconnection request provides fully functional Notes and Timeline tabs with appropriate disconnection-specific content
Secondary_Verifications: User note addition works, back-office notes display, timeline shows disconnection activities
Negative_Verification: Timeline remains read-only, no functional differences from other request types

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record disconnection notes and timeline functionality]
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: CSS01US10_TC_022
Blocked_Tests: Advanced disconnection features
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_031 (Reconnection tabs)
Sequential_Tests: Disconnection detail before tab functionality

Additional Information

Notes: Important for disconnection process communication and tracking
Edge_Cases: Emergency disconnections, concurrent notes, scheduling conflicts
Risk_Areas: Note synchronization, activity logging accuracy
Security_Considerations: Disconnection note privacy, activity log integrity

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Disconnection notes during emergency procedures
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Emergency disconnections may require special note handling
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 20: Complaint Detail View Fields

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_020
Title: Verify Complaint Detail View Displays All Required Fields Including Complaint ID, Status, Code, Dates, Categories, and Descriptions
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Complaint detail field display)
Integration_Points: Complaint Management System, Complaint Settings Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC20 - System must display Complaint card with all specified fields
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_018, CSS01US10_TC_021

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Complaint Management System, Complaint Settings Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Detail view load < 2 seconds, complaint data retrieval < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Complaint RE2383 with complete field data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Complaint request with complete data across all required fields
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Complaint RE2383: Code WQ-001, Category: Water Quality, Sub Category: Taste/Odor, Name: Poor water taste, Incident Date: 7/30/2025
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_018

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Complaint RE2383 detail view	Complaint detail page opens with Complaint card	Target Request: RE2383 (Complaint, PENDING)	Detail access
2	Verify Complaint ID field display	Complaint ID shows RE2383 matching list view	Complaint ID: RE2383	ID consistency
3	Verify Status field with proper styling	Status displays "PENDING" with orange badge/styling	Status: PENDING (orange)	Status display
4	Verify Complaint Code field	Complaint Code shows WQ-001 from system settings	Complaint Code: WQ-001	System code integration
5	Verify Created Date field formatting	Created Date displays 8/1/2025 in MM/DD/YYYY format	Created Date: 8/1/2025	Date formatting
6	Verify Category field displays complaint classification	Category shows "Water Quality"	Category: Water Quality	Primary classification
7	Verify Sub Category field shows detailed classification	Sub Category displays "Taste/Odor"	Sub Category: Taste/Odor	Secondary classification
8	Verify Complaint Name field shows descriptive title	Complaint Name displays "Poor water taste"	Complaint Name: Poor water taste	Descriptive naming
9	Verify Incident Date field shows when issue occurred	Incident Date displays 7/30/2025	Incident Date: 7/30/2025	Incident timing
10	Verify Complaint Description field shows detailed explanation	Description displays full complaint details	Description: "Water has metallic taste and unusual odor"	Detailed description
11	Verify Expected Resolution field shows customer expectations	Expected Resolution displays resolution expectations	Expected Resolution: "Water quality testing and resolution within 48 hours"	Customer expectations
12	Verify all fields are properly labeled and formatted	Each field has clear labels and consistent formatting	Field Labels: Clear, descriptive, properly positioned	UI consistency

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Complaint detail view displays all required fields with accurate data and proper formatting
Secondary_Verifications: Date formatting consistent, classification fields accurate, description complete
Negative_Verification: No missing fields, no data truncation, no formatting errors

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record all complaint field values and formatting accuracy]
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: CSS01US10_TC_018
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_023, CSS01US10_TC_024
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_021
Sequential_Tests: Basic detail view before field validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for complaint handling and customer communication
Edge_Cases: Very long descriptions, special characters, missing optional fields
Risk_Areas: Data integration, text field overflow, date accuracy
Security_Considerations: Complaint data privacy, field access control

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Complaint detail with very long description (1000+ characters)
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Ensure UI handles extensive complaint descriptions appropriately
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 21: Complaint Rejection Reason Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_021
Title: Verify Complaint Detail View Shows Rejection Reason When Complaint Status is Rejected
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Negative], [Consumer Services], [Detail-View], MOD-RequestTracker, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Regression-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Complaint-Management-System], Complaint-Rejection, Negative

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
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: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Complaint rejection reason display)
Integration_Points: Complaint Management System, Back-office System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC21 - System must show rejection reason when complaint status is rejected
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_018, CSS01US10_TC_015

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Complaint Management System, Back-office System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Detail view load < 2 seconds, rejection data retrieval < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Complaint request with REJECTED status and rejection reason

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Complaint request configured with REJECTED status and rejection reason
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Complaint RE2372: Status REJECTED, Rejection Reason: "Insufficient evidence - unable to verify complaint details"
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_018

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker and locate rejected complaint RE2372	Rejected complaint visible with red REJECTED status badge	Target Request: RE2372 (Complaint, REJECTED)	Rejected complaint identification
2	Click eye icon to open rejected complaint detail view	Complaint detail view opens showing rejected status	Status Display: REJECTED with red styling	Detail view access
3	Verify Complaint card displays REJECTED status prominently	Status field shows "REJECTED" with red styling	Status Field: "REJECTED" in red	Status prominence
4	Locate rejection reason field in complaint card	Rejection reason field visible and populated	Field Label: "Rejection Reason" or "Rejected Reason"	Rejection field presence
5	Verify rejection reason displays complete explanation	Full rejection reason text visible and readable	Rejection Text: "Insufficient evidence - unable to verify complaint details"	Complete reason display
6	Verify rejection reason formatting and positioning	Text properly formatted and logically positioned	Text Format: Clear, readable, appropriate placement	Formatting validation
7	Compare with non-rejected complaint for conditional display	Open non-rejected complaint to confirm rejection reason absent	Comparison: RE2383 (PENDING)	Conditional display validation
8	Verify rejection reason persistence across sessions	Rejection reason consistently displays on return visits	Persistence Test: Reason shows on repeated access	Data persistence

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Rejected complaints display complete rejection reason in detail view
Secondary_Verifications: Proper formatting, conditional display, data persistence
Negative_Verification: Non-rejected complaints do not show rejection reason field

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record rejection reason display and conditional 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: CSS01US10_TC_018
Blocked_Tests: None
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_015 (Service rejection)
Sequential_Tests: Detail view before rejection validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for complaint transparency and customer understanding
Edge_Cases: Very long rejection reasons, special formatting
Risk_Areas: Text handling, character encoding
Security_Considerations: Rejection content filtering, data protection

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Complaint rejection reason with complex formatting
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Ensure proper handling of structured rejection explanations
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 22: Disconnection Detail View

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_022
Title: Verify Disconnection Request Detail View Contains All Required Fields Including Service Meter Information and Notes/Timeline Tabs
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Detail-View], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Integration-Testing], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-[Disconnection-Management-System], Disconnection-Details, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
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% (Disconnection detail view)
Integration_Points: Disconnection Management System, Meter Management Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC25, AC26, AC27, AC28 - Disconnection detail view and service meter information
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Disconnection Management System, Meter Management Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Detail view load < 2 seconds, meter data retrieval < 1 second
Data_Requirements: Disconnection request with complete data and meter information

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Disconnection request with complete service meter information
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Disconnection DR-2024-001: Status PENDING, Reason: Relocation, Device No: DEV-12345, Meter No: MTR-67890
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	From request list, click eye icon for disconnection request	Disconnection detail view opens (create test data if needed)	Target Request: DR-2024-001 (Disconnection, PENDING)	Detail navigation
2	Verify "Disconnection Request" card header	Card title shows "Disconnection Request"	Card Header: "Disconnection Request"	Card identification
3	Verify Request ID field matches reference	Request ID displays as DR-2024-001	Request ID: DR-2024-001	ID consistency
4	Verify Status field shows current status	Status displays "PENDING" with appropriate styling	Status: PENDING	Status display
5	Verify Reason field shows disconnection reason	Reason displays "Relocation"	Reason: Relocation	Disconnection reason
6	Verify Reason Code field shows system code	Reason Code displays REL-001	Reason Code: REL-001	System code
7	Verify Created Date field formatting	Created Date shows proper format	Created Date: 8/1/2025	Date formatting
8	Verify Preferred Date and Time fields	Customer preferences for disconnection	Preferred Date: 8/20/2025, Time: 2:00 PM	Customer scheduling
9	Verify Description field shows disconnection details	Description displays detailed explanation	Description: "Moving to new city"	Disconnection details
10	Verify Additional Information field	Additional customer notes visible	Additional Information: "Final reading required"	Customer notes
11	Verify Service Meter Information section displays	Dedicated section for meter details visible	Section Header: "Service Meter Information"	Meter section
12	Verify Utility Service field in meter section	Service type displayed (Water, Electric, Gas)	Utility Service: Water	Service type
13	Verify Device Number field in meter section	Device number displayed accurately	Device No: DEV-12345	Device identification
14	Verify Meter Number field in meter section	Meter number displayed accurately	Meter No: MTR-67890	Meter identification
15	Verify Last Reading field with value and units	Last reading with appropriate units	Last Reading: 1250 gallons	Reading value
16	Verify Last Reading Date field	Date of last meter reading	Last Reading Date: 7/25/2025	Reading date
17	Verify Notes and Timeline tabs available	Two tabs visible and accessible	Tab Names: Notes, Timeline	Tab structure

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Disconnection detail view displays all required fields including comprehensive service meter information
Secondary_Verifications: Proper meter data integration, date formatting, tab accessibility
Negative_Verification: No missing meter information, no data inconsistencies

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record all field values and meter information accuracy]
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: CSS01US10_TC_010
Blocked_Tests: Disconnection-specific workflow tests
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_026 (Reconnection details)
Sequential_Tests: Detail view before meter validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for service termination and final billing accuracy
Edge_Cases: Missing meter data, multiple meters, meter reading errors
Risk_Areas: Meter system integration, data synchronization
Security_Considerations: Service data access control, meter information privacy

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Disconnection detail with missing meter information
Type: Integration
Rationale: Graceful handling when meter system is unavailable
Priority: P1-Critical

Test Case 23: Complaint Notes Tab

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_023
Title: Verify Complaint Notes Tab Allows User and Back-office Note Management with Proper Attribution
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Complaint notes functionality)
Integration_Points: Notes Service, Back-office System, Complaint Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC23 - System must provide Notes tab for user and back-office note management
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_020, CSS01US10_TC_033

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Notes Service, Back-office System, Complaint Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Notes load < 1 second, note save < 2 seconds
Data_Requirements: Complaint RE2383 with existing back-office notes

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Complaint with existing back-office notes and note-adding capability
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with note-adding permissions
Test_Data: Complaint RE2383 with back-office note: "Complaint under investigation - 8/2/2025 3:15 PM by Support Team"
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_020

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Complaint RE2383 detail view and click Notes tab	Notes tab opens showing existing back-office notes	Complaint: RE2383	Notes access
2	Verify existing back-office notes display	Back-office notes visible with timestamp and author	Existing Note: "Complaint under investigation - 8/2/2025 3:15 PM by Support Team"	Back-office note display
3	Verify back-office notes are read-only	Back-office notes cannot be edited by consumer	Read-only: No edit options on back-office notes	Access control
4	Locate user note input field	Note input field or "Add Note" button available	Input Element: Text area or Add Note button	User input access
5	Add new user note to complaint	User note saves successfully with proper attribution	Test Note: "Any update on water quality testing timeline?"	User note addition
6	Verify user note displays with proper formatting	User note shows with timestamp and consumer attribution	Note Format: User attribution, current timestamp	User note display
7	Verify chronological ordering of notes	Notes display in proper chronological order	Order: Latest notes first or consistent pattern	Note ordering
8	Verify visual distinction between note types	Clear difference between user and back-office notes	Visual Distinction: Different styling, colors, or icons	Note type identification

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Complaint Notes tab allows user note addition and displays back-office notes with proper attribution
Secondary_Verifications: Chronological ordering, visual distinction, read-only back-office notes
Negative_Verification: Back-office notes cannot be modified by consumers

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record complaint notes functionality and attribution]
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: CSS01US10_TC_020
Blocked_Tests: Advanced complaint features
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_024
Sequential_Tests: Complaint detail before notes testing

Additional Information

Notes: Important for complaint resolution communication
Edge_Cases: Long notes, concurrent note additions, special characters
Risk_Areas: Note synchronization, data consistency
Security_Considerations: Note access control, complaint privacy

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Complaint notes with urgent priority indicators
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: High-priority complaints may need special note handling
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 24: Complaint Timeline Tab

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_024
Title: Verify Complaint Timeline Tab Shows Complete Activity Log for Complaint with Investigation Activities
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
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: 100% (Complaint timeline functionality)
Integration_Points: Activity Logging Service, Complaint Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC24 - System must provide Timeline tab showing complete activity log for the complaint
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_020, CSS01US10_TC_023

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Activity Logging Service, Complaint Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Timeline load < 1 second, activity retrieval < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Complaint RE2383 with comprehensive activity history

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Complaint with rich activity history including investigation activities
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Complaint RE2383 with activities: Complaint Filed, Evidence Uploaded, Under Investigation, Response Due
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_020

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Complaint RE2383 detail view and click Timeline tab	Timeline tab opens showing complaint activity log	Complaint: RE2383	Timeline access
2	Verify timeline shows complaint-specific activities	Activities include: Complaint Filed, Evidence Uploaded, Under Investigation, Response Due	Complaint Activities: Investigation lifecycle events	Complaint activity validation
3	Verify evidence-related activities in timeline	Timeline includes evidence upload and review activities	Evidence Activities: "Evidence Uploaded", "Evidence Under Review"	Evidence tracking
4	Verify investigation activities in timeline	Investigation milestones tracked in timeline	Investigation Activities: "Under Investigation", "Assigned to Specialist"	Investigation tracking
5	Verify timeline entry formatting consistency	Each entry shows timestamp, action type, and responsible party	Entry Format: "8/1/2025 2:30 PM - Complaint Filed by John Smith"	Timeline formatting
6	Verify reverse chronological order	Latest activities appear at top, oldest at bottom	Order: Most recent first	Chronological ordering
7	Verify timeline is read-only for consumers	No edit options or modification capabilities available	Read-only: No edit buttons or input fields	Access control

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Complaint Timeline tab displays complete activity log including complaint-specific investigation activities
Secondary_Verifications: Evidence tracking, investigation milestones, proper formatting
Negative_Verification: No edit capabilities, no missing investigation activities

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record complaint timeline functionality and investigation tracking]
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: CSS01US10_TC_020
Blocked_Tests: Advanced complaint tracking
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_023
Sequential_Tests: Complaint detail before timeline

Additional Information

Notes: Important for complaint transparency and investigation tracking
Edge_Cases: Long investigation timelines, concurrent activities
Risk_Areas: Activity logging accuracy, investigation milestone tracking
Security_Considerations: Investigation data privacy, timeline integrity

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Complaint timeline with escalation activities
Type: Integration
Rationale: Track complaint escalation through management levels
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 25: Disconnection Request Detail Fields

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_025
Title: Verify Disconnection Request Detail View Displays All Required Fields Including Request ID, Status, Reason, Dates, and Description Information
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Detail-View], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Integration-Testing], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-[Disconnection-Management-System], Disconnection-Field-Validation, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Disconnection detail field display)
Integration_Points: Disconnection Management System, Service Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC25 - System must display Disconnection Request card with all specified fields
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_022, CSS01US10_TC_027

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Disconnection Management System, Service Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Detail view load < 2 seconds, disconnection data retrieval < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Disconnection request DR-2024-001 with complete field data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Disconnection request with complete data across all required fields
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Disconnection DR-2024-001: Status PENDING, Reason: Relocation, Reason Code: REL-001, Created Date: 8/1/2025, Preferred Date: 8/20/2025, Preferred Time: 2:00 PM
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_022

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Disconnection DR-2024-001 detail view	Disconnection detail page opens with Disconnection Request card	Target Request: DR-2024-001 (Disconnection, PENDING)	Detail access
2	Verify Request ID field matches reference	Request ID displays as DR-2024-001	Request ID: DR-2024-001	ID consistency
3	Verify Status field with proper styling	Status displays "PENDING" with appropriate styling	Status: PENDING	Status display
4	Verify Reason field shows disconnection reason	Reason displays "Relocation"	Reason: Relocation	Disconnection reason
5	Verify Reason Code field shows system code	Reason Code displays REL-001	Reason Code: REL-001	System code integration
6	Verify Created Date field with proper formatting	Created Date displays 8/1/2025 in MM/DD/YYYY format	Created Date: 8/1/2025	Date formatting
7	Verify Preferred Date field shows customer preference	Preferred Date displays 8/20/2025	Preferred Date: 8/20/2025	Customer scheduling preference
8	Verify Preferred Time field shows time preference	Preferred Time displays 2:00 PM	Preferred Time: 2:00 PM	Time preference
9	Verify Description field shows disconnection details	Description displays "Moving to new city"	Description: Moving to new city	Disconnection context
10	Verify Additional Information field shows customer notes	Additional Information displays "Final reading required"	Additional Information: Final reading required	Customer input
11	Verify all fields are properly labeled and formatted	Each field has clear labels and consistent formatting	Field Labels: Clear, descriptive, properly positioned	UI consistency
12	Verify date and time fields use consistent formatting	All date/time fields follow same format pattern	Date Format: MM/DD/YYYY, Time Format: HH:MM AM/PM	Formatting consistency

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Disconnection detail view displays all required fields with accurate data and proper formatting
Secondary_Verifications: Date/time formatting consistent, reason code integration, customer preference display
Negative_Verification: No missing fields, no data truncation, no formatting errors

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record all disconnection field values and formatting accuracy]
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: CSS01US10_TC_022
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_027, CSS01US10_TC_028
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_026 (Reconnection fields)
Sequential_Tests: Basic detail view before field validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for disconnection accuracy and customer communication
Edge_Cases: Emergency disconnections, missing preferred dates, complex reasons
Risk_Areas: Data integration, date/time accuracy, reason code mapping
Security_Considerations: Disconnection data privacy, field access control

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Disconnection detail with emergency priority handling
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Emergency disconnections may have different field requirements
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Disconnection detail with complex reason descriptions
Type: Integration
Rationale: Ensure proper handling of detailed disconnection explanations
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 26: Reconnection Detail View

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_026
Title: Verify Reconnection Detail View Contains All Required Fields and Notes/Timeline Tabs Functionality
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Detail-View], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Integration-Testing], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-[Reconnection-Management-System], Reconnection-Details, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Reconnection detail view)
Integration_Points: Reconnection Management System, Service Management
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC29, AC30, AC31 - Reconnection detail view and functionality
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010, CSS01US10_TC_022

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Reconnection Management System, Service Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Detail view load < 2 seconds, service data retrieval < 1 second
Data_Requirements: Reconnection request with complete data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Reconnection request with complete service information
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Reconnection RR-2024-001: Status APPROVED, Reason: Service Restored, Reason Code: SRV-001
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	From request list, click eye icon for reconnection request	Reconnection detail view opens (create test data if needed)	Target Request: RR-2024-001 (Reconnection, APPROVED)	Detail navigation
2	Verify "Reconnection" card header displays	Card title shows "Reconnection" clearly	Card Header: "Reconnection"	Card identification
3	Verify Request ID field matches reference	Request ID displays as RR-2024-001	Request ID: RR-2024-001	ID consistency
4	Verify Status field shows current status with styling	Status displays "APPROVED" with appropriate styling	Status: APPROVED	Status display
5	Verify Reason field shows reconnection reason	Reason displays "Service Restored"	Reason: Service Restored	Reconnection reason
6	Verify Reason Code field shows system code	Reason Code displays SRV-001	Reason Code: SRV-001	System code
7	Verify Created Date field with proper formatting	Created Date shows 8/3/2025 format	Created Date: 8/3/2025	Date formatting
8	Verify Preferred Date field shows customer preference	Preferred Date displays 8/25/2025	Preferred Date: 8/25/2025	Customer scheduling
9	Verify Preferred Time field shows time preference	Preferred Time displays 10:00 AM	Preferred Time: 10:00 AM	Time preference
10	Verify Description field shows reconnection details	Description displays "Reconnection after payment"	Description: Reconnection after payment	Reconnection context
11	Verify Additional Information field	Additional Information shows "All dues cleared"	Additional Information: All dues cleared	Customer notes
12	Verify Notes and Timeline tabs are available	Two tabs visible and accessible	Tab Names: Notes, Timeline	Tab structure
13	Test Notes tab functionality	Notes tab works same as other request types	Notes Test: User and back-office notes	Notes consistency
14	Test Timeline tab functionality	Timeline shows reconnection-specific activities	Timeline Activities: Request Created, Approved, Scheduled	Timeline functionality

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Reconnection detail view displays all required fields with accurate data
Secondary_Verifications: Proper date/time formatting, Notes and Timeline tabs functional
Negative_Verification: No missing fields, no data inconsistencies

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record all field values and tab functionality]
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: CSS01US10_TC_010
Blocked_Tests: Reconnection workflow tests
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_022 (Disconnection details)
Sequential_Tests: Detail view before functionality testing

Additional Information

Notes: Important for service restoration and customer communication
Edge_Cases: Missing approval data, scheduling conflicts
Risk_Areas: Service restoration timing, approval workflow
Security_Considerations: Reconnection authorization, service access

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Reconnection detail with approval workflow status
Type: Integration
Rationale: Track approval process through multiple stages
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Reconnection detail with payment verification
Type: Integration
Rationale: Ensure payment status is properly reflected in reconnection details
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 27: Disconnection Rejection Reason Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_027
Title: Verify Disconnection Request Shows Rejection Reason When Request Status is Rejected
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Negative], [Consumer Services], [Detail-View], MOD-RequestTracker, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Regression-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-[Disconnection-Management-System], Disconnection-Rejection, Negative

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
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: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Disconnection rejection reason display)
Integration_Points: Disconnection Management System, Back-office System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC27 - System must show rejection reason when disconnection request status is rejected
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_022, CSS01US10_TC_015, CSS01US10_TC_021

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Disconnection Management System, Back-office System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Detail view load < 2 seconds, rejection data retrieval < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Disconnection request with REJECTED status and rejection reason

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Disconnection request configured with REJECTED status and rejection reason
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Disconnection DR-REJECTED-001: Status REJECTED, Rejection Reason: "Outstanding balance must be cleared before disconnection"
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_022

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker and locate rejected disconnection request	Rejected disconnection visible with red REJECTED status badge	Target Request: DR-REJECTED-001 (Disconnection, REJECTED)	Rejected request identification
2	Click eye icon to open rejected disconnection detail view	Disconnection detail view opens showing rejected status	Status Display: REJECTED with red styling	Detail view access
3	Verify Disconnection Request card displays REJECTED status	Status field shows "REJECTED" with red styling	Status Field: "REJECTED" in red	Status prominence
4	Locate rejection reason field in disconnection card	Rejection reason field visible and populated	Field Label: "Rejection Reason" or "Rejected Reason"	Rejection field presence
5	Verify rejection reason displays complete explanation	Full rejection reason text visible and readable	Rejection Text: "Outstanding balance must be cleared before disconnection"	Complete reason display
6	Verify rejection reason formatting and positioning	Text properly formatted and logically positioned	Text Format: Clear, readable, appropriate placement	Formatting validation
7	Compare with non-rejected disconnection for conditional display	Open non-rejected disconnection to confirm rejection reason absent	Comparison: Non-rejected disconnection	Conditional display validation
8	Verify rejection reason persistence across sessions	Rejection reason consistently displays on return visits	Persistence Test: Reason shows on repeated access	Data persistence

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Rejected disconnection requests display complete rejection reason in detail view
Secondary_Verifications: Proper formatting, conditional display, data persistence
Negative_Verification: Non-rejected disconnections do not show rejection reason field

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record rejection reason display and conditional 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: CSS01US10_TC_022
Blocked_Tests: None
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_015, CSS01US10_TC_021
Sequential_Tests: Disconnection detail before rejection validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for disconnection transparency and customer understanding
Edge_Cases: Very long rejection reasons, financial-related rejections
Risk_Areas: Text handling, business rule explanations
Security_Considerations: Rejection content appropriateness, data protection

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Disconnection rejection with financial balance details
Type: Integration
Rationale: Financial-related rejections need clear balance information
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 28: Disconnection Notes and Timeline Tabs

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_028
Title: Verify Disconnection Request Provides Notes and Timeline Tabs with Appropriate Functionality
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Notes-Timeline], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Integration-Testing/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Notes-Service], Disconnection-Notes-Timeline, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Disconnection notes and timeline functionality)
Integration_Points: Notes Service, Activity Logging Service, Disconnection Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC28 - System must provide Notes and Timeline tabs with appropriate functionality
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_022, CSS01US10_TC_033, CSS01US10_TC_040

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Notes Service, Activity Logging Service, Disconnection Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Notes/Timeline load < 1 second, note save < 2 seconds
Data_Requirements: Disconnection request with notes and activity history

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Disconnection request with existing notes and activity history
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with note-adding permissions
Test_Data: Disconnection DR-2024-001 with back-office notes and activity timeline
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_022

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Disconnection DR-2024-001 detail view	Detail view displays with Notes and Timeline tabs visible	Disconnection: DR-2024-001	Tab access
2	Click Notes tab to open notes section	Notes tab opens with existing disconnection-related notes	Notes Tab: Disconnection notes interface	Notes functionality
3	Verify user can add notes to disconnection request	Note input field allows user note addition	Test Note: "Scheduling disconnection for moving date"	User note capability
4	Verify back-office notes display for disconnection	Back-office notes visible with timestamps and attribution	Back-office Note: Disconnection-specific system notes	Back-office integration
5	Click Timeline tab to open activity log	Timeline displays disconnection-specific activities	Timeline Activities: Request Submitted, Scheduled, Processing	Timeline functionality
6	Verify timeline shows disconnection workflow activities	Activities include scheduling, meter reading, disconnection process	Disconnection Activities: Workflow-specific events	Activity tracking
7	Verify Notes and Timeline tabs work identically to other request types	Same functionality, formatting, and behavior as service/complaint tabs	Consistency: Identical to other request types	Cross-request consistency
8	Verify timeline is read-only for disconnection requests	No edit options available in timeline	Read-only: Consumer cannot modify timeline	Access control

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Disconnection request provides fully functional Notes and Timeline tabs with appropriate disconnection-specific content
Secondary_Verifications: User note addition works, back-office notes display, timeline shows disconnection activities
Negative_Verification: Timeline remains read-only, no functional differences from other request types

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record disconnection notes and timeline functionality]
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: CSS01US10_TC_022
Blocked_Tests: Advanced disconnection features
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_031 (Reconnection tabs)
Sequential_Tests: Disconnection detail before tab functionality

Additional Information

Notes: Important for disconnection process communication and tracking
Edge_Cases: Emergency disconnections, concurrent notes, scheduling conflicts
Risk_Areas: Note synchronization, activity logging accuracy
Security_Considerations: Disconnection note privacy, activity log integrity

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Disconnection notes during emergency procedures
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Emergency disconnections may require special note handling
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 29 : Transfer Detail View

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_029
Title: Verify Transfer Request Detail View Contains All Required Fields Including Documents Tab and Financial Information
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Detail-View], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Integration-Testing], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-[Transfer-Management-System], Transfer-Details, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
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: 100% (Transfer detail view)
Integration_Points: Transfer Management System, Document Storage Service, Financial System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC32, AC33, AC34, AC35 - Transfer request detail view and document management
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010, CSS01US10_TC_044

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Transfer Management System, Document Storage Service, Financial System API, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Detail view load < 2 seconds, document loading < 3 seconds
Data_Requirements: Transfer request TC2374 with complete data and uploaded documents

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Transfer request with complete data including uploaded documents
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Transfer TC2374: Status PENDING, Transfer Type: Address Change, Account Balance: $125.50, Documents uploaded
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_010

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	From request list, click eye icon for transfer request TC2374	Transfer detail view opens displaying Transfer Request card	Target Request: TC2374 (Transfer, PENDING)	Detail navigation
2	Verify "Transfer Request" card header displays prominently	Card title shows "Transfer Request" clearly	Card Header: "Transfer Request"	Card identification
3	Verify Request ID field matches reference	Request ID displays as TC2374	Request ID: TC2374	ID consistency
4	Verify Status field shows current status with styling	Status displays "PENDING" with orange styling	Status: PENDING (orange badge)	Status display
5	Verify Transfer Type field shows type of transfer	Transfer Type displays "Address Change"	Transfer Type: Address Change	Transfer classification
6	Verify Code field shows system transfer code	Code displays ADDR-001	Code: ADDR-001	System code
7	Verify Change Billing Address field shows boolean value	Field shows "Yes" indicating billing address change	Change Billing Address: Yes	Billing address flag
8	Verify Created Date field with proper formatting	Created Date displays 7/31/2025	Created Date: 7/31/2025	Date formatting
9	Verify Account Balance field shows financial information	Account Balance displays $125.50 with proper currency formatting	Account Balance: $125.50	Financial data
10	Verify Financial Responsibility field shows ownership	Financial Responsibility displays "Current Owner"	Financial Responsibility: Current Owner	Responsibility assignment
11	Verify Description field shows transfer details	Description displays "Moving to new address"	Description: Moving to new address	Transfer explanation
12	Verify Additional Information field shows customer notes	Additional Information displays "Same ownership"	Additional Information: Same ownership	Customer input
13	Verify three tabs available: Documents, Notes, Timeline	Three tabs visible and accessible	Tab Names: Documents, Notes, Timeline	Tab structure
14	Click Documents tab to open document management	Documents tab opens showing uploaded documents interface	Documents Tab: Document list with details	Document access
15	Verify document display with required metadata	Document shows: proof_of_address.pdf, Upload Date: 7/31/2025, Document Type: Address Proof	Document Details: Upload date, type, verification status	Document metadata
16	Verify document verification status display	Verification Status shows "Pending" for uploaded document	Verification Status: Pending	Status tracking
17	Verify document view functionality	Document can be opened for viewing	View Option: PDF viewer or download	Document access
18	Test Notes and Timeline tabs functionality	Both tabs function correctly with standard features	Notes/Timeline: Standard functionality	Tab consistency

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Transfer detail view displays all required fields including financial information and Documents tab functionality
Secondary_Verifications: Document metadata accuracy, verification status display, financial data formatting
Negative_Verification: No missing financial data, no broken document features

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record all field values, financial data, and document functionality]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: High
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_010
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_044 (Document management)
Parallel_Tests: Other detail view tests
Sequential_Tests: Detail view before document testing

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for service transfer and ownership management
Edge_Cases: Missing documents, large files, financial data errors
Risk_Areas: Document storage integration, financial system synchronization
Security_Considerations: Document access control, financial data protection

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Transfer detail with missing required documents
Type: Integration
Rationale: Handle incomplete document submissions gracefully
Priority: P1-Critical
Scenario_2: Transfer detail with financial calculation errors
Type: Integration
Rationale: Ensure accurate financial data display
Priority: P1-Critical

Test Case 30: Reconnection Rejection Reason Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_030
Title: Verify Reconnection Request Shows Rejection Reason When Request Status is Rejected
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Negative], [Consumer Services], [Detail-View], MOD-RequestTracker, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Regression-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-[Reconnection-Management-System], Reconnection-Rejection, Negative

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
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: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Reconnection rejection reason display)
Integration_Points: Reconnection Management System, Back-office System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC30 - System must show rejection reason when reconnection request status is rejected
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_026, CSS01US10_TC_027

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Reconnection Management System, Back-office System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Detail view load < 2 seconds, rejection data retrieval < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Reconnection request with REJECTED status and rejection reason

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Reconnection request configured with REJECTED status and rejection reason
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Reconnection RR-REJECTED-001: Status REJECTED, Rejection Reason: "Previous disconnection balance not cleared - $150.00 outstanding"
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_026

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker and locate rejected reconnection request	Rejected reconnection visible with red REJECTED status badge	Target Request: RR-REJECTED-001 (Reconnection, REJECTED)	Rejected request identification
2	Click eye icon to open rejected reconnection detail view	Reconnection detail view opens showing rejected status	Status Display: REJECTED with red styling	Detail view access
3	Verify Reconnection card displays REJECTED status prominently	Status field shows "REJECTED" with red styling	Status Field: "REJECTED" in red	Status prominence
4	Locate rejection reason field in reconnection card	Rejection reason field visible and populated	Field Label: "Rejection Reason" or "Rejected Reason"	Rejection field presence
5	Verify rejection reason displays complete explanation	Full rejection reason text visible and readable	Rejection Text: "Previous disconnection balance not cleared - $150.00 outstanding"	Complete reason display
6	Verify rejection reason includes financial details if applicable	Rejection shows specific balance amounts when relevant	Financial Detail: $150.00 outstanding balance	Financial transparency
7	Verify rejection reason formatting and positioning	Text properly formatted and logically positioned	Text Format: Clear, readable, appropriate placement	Formatting validation
8	Compare with non-rejected reconnection for conditional display	Open approved reconnection to confirm rejection reason absent	Comparison: RR-2024-001 (APPROVED)	Conditional display validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Rejected reconnection requests display complete rejection reason including financial details when applicable
Secondary_Verifications: Proper formatting, conditional display, financial transparency
Negative_Verification: Non-rejected reconnections do not show rejection reason field

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record rejection reason display including financial details]
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: CSS01US10_TC_026
Blocked_Tests: None
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_027
Sequential_Tests: Reconnection detail before rejection validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for reconnection transparency and financial clarity
Edge_Cases: Multiple rejection reasons, complex financial calculations
Risk_Areas: Financial data accuracy, reason explanation clarity
Security_Considerations: Financial information display, rejection content appropriateness

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Reconnection rejection with multiple outstanding balances
Type: Integration
Rationale: Complex financial situations need comprehensive rejection explanations
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 31: Reconnection Notes and Timeline Tabs

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_031
Title: Verify Reconnection Request Provides Notes and Timeline Tabs with Appropriate Functionality
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Reconnection notes and timeline functionality)
Integration_Points: Notes Service, Activity Logging Service, Reconnection Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC31 - System must provide Notes and Timeline tabs with appropriate functionality
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_026, CSS01US10_TC_028, CSS01US10_TC_033

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Notes Service, Activity Logging Service, Reconnection Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Notes/Timeline load < 1 second, note save < 2 seconds
Data_Requirements: Reconnection request with notes and activity history

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Reconnection request with existing notes and activity history
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with note-adding permissions
Test_Data: Reconnection RR-2024-001 with back-office notes and activity timeline
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_026

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Reconnection RR-2024-001 detail view	Detail view displays with Notes and Timeline tabs visible	Reconnection: RR-2024-001	Tab access
2	Click Notes tab to open notes section	Notes tab opens with existing reconnection-related notes	Notes Tab: Reconnection notes interface	Notes functionality
3	Verify user can add notes to reconnection request	Note input field allows user note addition	Test Note: "Confirming reconnection appointment time"	User note capability
4	Verify back-office notes display for reconnection	Back-office notes visible with timestamps and attribution	Back-office Note: Reconnection-specific system notes	Back-office integration
5	Click Timeline tab to open activity log	Timeline displays reconnection-specific activities	Timeline Activities: Request Created, Approved, Scheduled	Timeline functionality
6	Verify timeline shows reconnection workflow activities	Activities include approval, scheduling, reconnection process	Reconnection Activities: Workflow-specific events	Activity tracking
7	Verify Notes and Timeline tabs work identically to other request types	Same functionality, formatting, and behavior as other request tabs	Consistency: Identical to other request types	Cross-request consistency
8	Verify timeline is read-only for reconnection requests	No edit options available in timeline	Read-only: Consumer cannot modify timeline	Access control

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Reconnection request provides fully functional Notes and Timeline tabs with appropriate reconnection-specific content
Secondary_Verifications: User note addition works, back-office notes display, timeline shows reconnection activities
Negative_Verification: Timeline remains read-only, no functional differences from other request types

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record reconnection notes and timeline functionality]
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: CSS01US10_TC_026
Blocked_Tests: Advanced reconnection features
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_028 (Disconnection tabs)
Sequential_Tests: Reconnection detail before tab functionality

Additional Information

Notes: Important for reconnection process communication and scheduling
Edge_Cases: Rush reconnections, concurrent notes, approval workflows
Risk_Areas: Note synchronization, activity logging accuracy
Security_Considerations: Reconnection note privacy, activity log integrity

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Reconnection notes during expedited processing
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Expedited reconnections may require special note handling
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 32 : Transfer Request Detail Fields

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_032
Title: Verify Transfer Request Detail View Displays All Required Fields Including Financial Information and Transfer Specifications
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Detail-View], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Integration-Testing], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-[Transfer-Management-System], Transfer-Field-Validation, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
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% (Transfer detail field display)
Integration_Points: Transfer Management System, Financial System, Account Management Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC32 - System must display Transfer Request card with all specified fields
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_029, CSS01US10_TC_034

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Transfer Management System, Financial System, Account Management Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Detail view load < 2 seconds, financial data retrieval < 1 second
Data_Requirements: Transfer request TC2374 with complete field data and financial information

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Transfer request with complete data across all required fields including financial information
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Transfer TC2374: Type: Address Change, Code: ADDR-001, Billing Address: Yes, Account Balance: $125.50, Financial Responsibility: Current Owner
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_029

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Transfer TC2374 detail view	Transfer detail page opens with Transfer Request card	Target Request: TC2374 (Transfer, PENDING)	Detail access
2	Verify Request ID field matches reference	Request ID displays as TC2374	Request ID: TC2374	ID consistency
3	Verify Status field with proper styling	Status displays "PENDING" with orange styling	Status: PENDING (orange)	Status display
4	Verify Transfer Type field shows type of transfer	Transfer Type displays "Address Change"	Transfer Type: Address Change	Transfer classification
5	Verify Code field shows system transfer code	Code displays ADDR-001	Code: ADDR-001	System code integration
6	Verify Change Billing Address field shows boolean indicator	Field shows "Yes" indicating billing address will change	Change Billing Address: Yes	Billing address flag
7	Verify Created Date field with proper formatting	Created Date displays 7/31/2025 in MM/DD/YYYY format	Created Date: 7/31/2025	Date formatting
8	Verify Account Balance field shows current financial status	Account Balance displays $125.50 with proper currency formatting	Account Balance: $125.50	Financial data display
9	Verify Financial Responsibility field shows ownership assignment	Financial Responsibility displays "Current Owner"	Financial Responsibility: Current Owner	Responsibility assignment
10	Verify Description field shows transfer explanation	Description displays "Moving to new address"	Description: Transfer explanation	Transfer context
11	Verify Additional Information field shows customer notes	Additional Information displays "Same ownership"	Additional Information: Customer notes	Customer input
12	Verify all financial fields are properly formatted	Currency fields show proper $ symbol and decimal formatting	Financial Format: $125.50 (not 125.5)	Financial formatting
13	Verify Documents, Notes, Timeline tabs are available	Three tabs visible and accessible	Tab Names: Documents, Notes, Timeline	Tab structure

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Transfer detail view displays all required fields including accurate financial information and proper formatting
Secondary_Verifications: Financial data formatting, transfer type accuracy, tab accessibility
Negative_Verification: No missing financial data, no formatting errors

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record all transfer field values and financial data accuracy]
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: CSS01US10_TC_029
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_034, CSS01US10_TC_035
Parallel_Tests: Other detail view field validations
Sequential_Tests: Basic detail view before field validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for transfer accuracy and financial transparency
Edge_Cases: Complex transfers, multiple billing addresses, negative balances
Risk_Areas: Financial data integration, transfer type classification
Security_Considerations: Financial data protection, transfer authorization

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Transfer detail with complex financial calculations
Type: Integration
Rationale: Multi-service transfers may have complex financial implications
Priority: P1-Critical
Scenario_2: Transfer detail with negative account balance
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Ensure proper handling of credit balances and overpayments
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 33: Notes Functionality Across All Request Types

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_033
Title: Verify Notes Functionality Works Consistently Across All Request Types with User and Back-office Note Management
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Cross-Module], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Integration-Testing/Module-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Notes-Service], Cross-Request-Notes, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Cross-request notes functionality)
Integration_Points: Notes Service, Back-office System, All Request Management Systems
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC36, AC37, AC38, AC39 - Notes functionality criteria across all request types
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_014, CSS01US10_TC_018, CSS01US10_TC_022, CSS01US10_TC_026, CSS01US10_TC_029

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Notes Service API, Back-office System, All Request Management Systems, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Note addition < 2 seconds, note loading < 1 second
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with requests of all types (Service, Complaint, Transfer, Disconnection, Reconnection)

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with diverse request types, back-office notes capability
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with note-adding permissions
Test_Data: Service: RE2384, Complaint: RE2383, Transfer: TC2374, Disconnection: DR-2024-001, Reconnection: RR-2024-001
Prior_Test_Cases: All detail view test cases (TC_014, TC_018, TC_022, TC_026, TC_029)

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Service request RE2384 Notes tab	Notes tab opens with existing back-office notes	Service Request: RE2384	Service notes baseline
2	Add user note to service request	Note saves successfully with timestamp and user attribution	Test Note: "Service inquiry - when will work begin?"	Service note addition
3	Verify service note formatting and chronological order	Note displays properly ordered with clear user identification	Note Format: User attribution, timestamp, proper ordering	Service note validation
4	Open Complaint request RE2383 Notes tab	Notes tab opens with complaint-specific notes capability	Complaint Request: RE2383	Complaint notes access
5	Add user note to complaint request	Note saves successfully maintaining same functionality	Test Note: "Complaint follow-up - any update on resolution?"	Complaint note addition
6	Verify complaint note consistency with service notes	Same note functionality, formatting, and behavior	Consistency Check: Identical note features across request types	Cross-request consistency
7	Open Transfer request TC2374 Notes tab	Notes tab provides same note management functionality	Transfer Request: TC2374	Transfer notes access
8	Add user note to transfer request	Note addition works identically to other request types	Test Note: "Transfer status - documents submitted correctly?"	Transfer note addition
9	Verify back-office notes display across all request types	Back-office notes show consistently with read-only access and timestamps	Back-office Notes: Read-only, timestamped, author identified	Back-office consistency
10	Test note character limits across request types	Character limits enforced consistently for all request types	Character Test: Add 500+ character note to each type	Limit consistency
11	Verify chronological ordering across request types	All request types show notes in same chronological order pattern	Ordering Test: Latest notes first (or consistent pattern)	Ordering consistency
12	Test author identification clarity across requests	Clear distinction between user and back-office notes on all types	Author Test: Visual/textual differences maintained	Author consistency
13	Verify note persistence across sessions for all types	Notes persist when returning to different request types	Persistence Test: Logout/login, verify all notes retained	Data persistence
14	Test basic text formatting support across request types	Text formatting features work consistently (if supported)	Formatting Test: Bold, line breaks, special characters	Formatting consistency

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Notes functionality works identically across all request types (Service, Complaint, Transfer, Disconnection, Reconnection)
Secondary_Verifications: Consistent formatting, chronological ordering, author identification, character limits
Negative_Verification: No functional differences between request types, no note corruption or loss

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record notes functionality consistency across all request types]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: High
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_014, CSS01US10_TC_018, CSS01US10_TC_022, CSS01US10_TC_026, CSS01US10_TC_029
Blocked_Tests: Advanced notes features
Parallel_Tests: None (requires sequential testing across request types)
Sequential_Tests: All detail views before cross-request validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for consistent user experience across all request management
Edge_Cases: Simultaneous note additions, very long notes, special characters
Risk_Areas: Cross-system note synchronization, data consistency
Security_Considerations: Note access control, cross-request data isolation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Concurrent note addition across different request types
Type: Integration
Rationale: Ensure notes service handles simultaneous operations correctly
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 34: Transfer Documents Tab

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_034
Title: Verify Transfer Request Documents Tab Shows Uploaded Documents with Upload Date, Document Type, Verification Status, and View Option
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Document-Management], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Integration-Testing/Security-Validation/Product], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-[Document-Storage-Service], Transfer-Documents, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
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: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Transfer documents functionality)
Integration_Points: Document Storage Service, File Preview Service, Verification Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Integration-Testing, Security-Validation
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC34 - System must provide Documents tab showing uploaded documents with metadata
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_029, CSS01US10_TC_044

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Document Storage Service, File Preview Service, Verification Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Document load < 3 seconds, preview generation < 5 seconds
Data_Requirements: Transfer TC2374 with uploaded documents and verification statuses

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Transfer request with uploaded documents across different verification states
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with document access
Test_Data: Transfer TC2374 with documents: proof_of_address.pdf, identity_verification.jpg, utility_bill.pdf
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_029

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Transfer TC2374 detail view and click Documents tab	Documents tab opens showing document management interface	Transfer: TC2374	Document access
2	Verify document list displays with all uploaded documents	All documents visible in organized list format	Documents: proof_of_address.pdf, identity_verification.jpg, utility_bill.pdf	Document visibility
3	Verify upload date display for each document	Upload date shows in proper MM/DD/YYYY format	Upload Dates: 7/31/2025, 8/1/2025, 8/2/2025	Date formatting
4	Verify document type classification for each file	Document type shows appropriate classification	Document Types: Address Proof, Identity Verification, Utility Bill	Type classification
5	Verify verification status display for each document	Status shows as Verified, Pending, or Rejected with appropriate styling	Verification Status: proof_of_address.pdf (Pending), identity_verification.jpg (Verified), utility_bill.pdf (Rejected)	Status indicators
6	Verify view option availability for each document	View button or link available for each document	View Options: Clickable view icons or buttons	Document access
7	Test document view functionality for PDF	PDF document opens in viewer or downloads	Test Document: proof_of_address.pdf	PDF viewing
8	Test document view functionality for image	Image opens in preview mode	Test Document: identity_verification.jpg	Image preview
9	Verify document organization and layout	Documents organized clearly with all metadata visible	Layout: Name, Upload Date, Type, Status, View action in columns	Document organization
10	Test document status color coding	Different statuses show with appropriate color indicators	Color Coding: Green (Verified), Orange (Pending), Red (Rejected)	Visual status indicators

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Transfer Documents tab displays all uploaded documents with complete metadata (upload date, document type, verification status, view option)
Secondary_Verifications: Document organization clear, view functionality works, status color coding appropriate
Negative_Verification: No missing metadata, no broken document access

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record document display, metadata accuracy, and view functionality]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: High
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_029
Blocked_Tests: Advanced document features
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_044 (General document management)
Sequential_Tests: Transfer detail before document testing

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for transfer compliance and document verification
Edge_Cases: Large files, unsupported formats, missing verification status
Risk_Areas: Document storage integration, verification workflow
Security_Considerations: Document access control, file type validation

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Transfer documents with bulk verification status updates
Type: Integration
Rationale: Multiple documents may be verified simultaneously
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 35: Transfer Notes and Timeline Tabs

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_035
Title: Verify Transfer Request Provides Notes and Timeline Tabs with Appropriate Functionality
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Service-Management
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Transfer notes and timeline functionality)
Integration_Points: Notes Service, Activity Logging Service, Transfer Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC35 - System must provide Notes and Timeline tabs with appropriate functionality
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_029, CSS01US10_TC_033, CSS01US10_TC_040

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Notes Service, Activity Logging Service, Transfer Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Notes/Timeline load < 1 second, note save < 2 seconds
Data_Requirements: Transfer request with notes and activity history

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Transfer request with existing notes and activity history
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with note-adding permissions
Test_Data: Transfer TC2374 with back-office notes and activity timeline
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_029

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Transfer TC2374 detail view	Detail view displays with Documents, Notes, and Timeline tabs visible	Transfer: TC2374	Tab access
2	Click Notes tab to open notes section	Notes tab opens with existing transfer-related notes	Notes Tab: Transfer notes interface	Notes functionality
3	Verify user can add notes to transfer request	Note input field allows user note addition	Test Note: "Confirming new address details for transfer"	User note capability
4	Verify back-office notes display for transfer	Back-office notes visible with timestamps and attribution	Back-office Note: Transfer-specific system notes	Back-office integration
5	Click Timeline tab to open activity log	Timeline displays transfer-specific activities	Timeline Activities: Request Created, Documents Submitted, Under Review	Timeline functionality
6	Verify timeline shows transfer workflow activities	Activities include document submission, verification, approval process	Transfer Activities: Workflow-specific events	Activity tracking
7	Verify Notes and Timeline tabs work identically to other request types	Same functionality, formatting, and behavior as other request tabs	Consistency: Identical to other request types	Cross-request consistency
8	Verify timeline is read-only for transfer requests	No edit options available in timeline	Read-only: Consumer cannot modify timeline	Access control

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Transfer request provides fully functional Notes and Timeline tabs with appropriate transfer-specific content
Secondary_Verifications: User note addition works, back-office notes display, timeline shows transfer activities
Negative_Verification: Timeline remains read-only, no functional differences from other request types

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record transfer notes and timeline functionality]
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: CSS01US10_TC_029
Blocked_Tests: Advanced transfer features
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_028, CSS01US10_TC_031
Sequential_Tests: Transfer detail before tab functionality

Additional Information

Notes: Important for transfer process communication and documentation
Edge_Cases: Complex transfers, concurrent notes, approval workflows
Risk_Areas: Note synchronization, activity logging accuracy
Security_Considerations: Transfer note privacy, activity log integrity

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Transfer notes during expedited processing
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Expedited transfers may require special note handling
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 36 : Consumer Note Addition

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_036
Title: Verify System Allows Consumers to Add New Notes to Their Requests with Proper Attribution and Timestamp
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Notes], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Integration-Testing], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Notes-Service], Consumer-Note-Addition, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Consumer note addition functionality)
Integration_Points: Notes Service, Consumer Authentication, Request Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC36 - System must allow consumers to add new notes to their requests
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_033, CSS01US10_TC_037

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Notes Service API, Consumer Authentication Service, Request Management System
Performance_Baseline: Note save < 2 seconds, note display < 1 second
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with various request types for note addition testing

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with active requests across different types
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with note-adding permissions
Test_Data: Service: RE2384, Complaint: RE2383, Transfer: TC2374 for note addition testing
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_014, CSS01US10_TC_018, CSS01US10_TC_029

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Service request RE2384 Notes tab	Notes tab opens with note input capability	Service Request: RE2384	Service note access
2	Locate note input field or "Add Note" button	Input mechanism available and accessible	Input Element: Text area, Add Note button, or similar	Note input interface
3	Enter new note text in input field	Text input accepts user typing without character restrictions (within limits)	Test Note: "Could you please provide an update on the service completion timeline?"	Note content input
4	Submit/save the new note	Note saves successfully and appears in notes list	Save Action: Click Save, Submit, or Enter key	Note submission
5	Verify new note displays with proper consumer attribution	Note shows with clear consumer identification	Attribution: "Consumer", "Customer", or actual consumer name	Consumer identification
6	Verify note timestamp accuracy	Note displays current date and time	Timestamp: Current date/time in MM/DD/YYYY HH:MM AM/PM format	Timestamp validation
7	Verify note content preservation	Exact text entered is displayed without modification	Content Check: Original text matches displayed text	Content accuracy
8	Test note addition on different request types	Note addition works consistently across Service, Complaint, Transfer requests	Request Types: RE2384 (Service), RE2383 (Complaint), TC2374 (Transfer)	Cross-request consistency
9	Verify note persistence across page refresh	Added notes remain visible after page refresh	Persistence Test: Refresh browser, verify note still present	Data persistence
10	Test multiple note addition on same request	Multiple notes can be added sequentially	Multiple Notes: Add 2-3 notes to same request	Multiple note support

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Consumers can successfully add new notes to their requests with proper attribution and accurate timestamps
Secondary_Verifications: Content preservation, cross-request consistency, data persistence
Negative_Verification: No note corruption, no attribution errors, no timestamp inaccuracies

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record note addition success, attribution accuracy, and timestamp validation]
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: CSS01US10_TC_014, CSS01US10_TC_018, CSS01US10_TC_029
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_037, CSS01US10_TC_038
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_033
Sequential_Tests: Detail views before note addition

Additional Information

Notes: Essential for customer communication and request clarification
Edge_Cases: Very long notes, special characters, rapid successive additions
Risk_Areas: Data validation, character encoding, storage capacity
Security_Considerations: Input sanitization, note content filtering

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Note addition with maximum character limit testing
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Ensure system handles character limits gracefully
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 37: Back-office Notes Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_037
Title: Verify System Displays Back-office Notes as Read-only with Timestamp and Author Information
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Notes], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Integration-Testing/Module-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Back-office-System], Back-office-Notes, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Back-office notes display functionality)
Integration_Points: Back-office System, Notes Service, Consumer Authentication
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC37 - System must display back-office notes as read-only with timestamp and author information
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_036, CSS01US10_TC_038

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Back-office System, Notes Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Notes load < 1 second, back-office sync < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Requests with existing back-office notes from system administrators

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Requests with back-office notes added by system administrators
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with read access to back-office notes
Test_Data: Service RE2384 with back-office note: "Service team assigned - 8/2/2025 2:30 PM by Support Manager"
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_036

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Service request RE2384 Notes tab containing back-office notes	Notes tab displays with back-office notes visible	Service Request: RE2384	Back-office note access
2	Identify back-office notes in the notes list	Back-office notes clearly distinguishable from consumer notes	Back-office Note: "Service team assigned - 8/2/2025 2:30 PM by Support Manager"	Note identification
3	Verify back-office notes are read-only	No edit options available for back-office notes	Read-only Status: No edit buttons, text fields, or modification options	Access control validation
4	Verify timestamp display for back-office notes	Complete timestamp visible in proper format	Timestamp: "8/2/2025 2:30 PM" in MM/DD/YYYY HH:MM AM/PM format	Timestamp formatting
5	Verify author information display	Back-office author clearly identified	Author: "Support Manager", "BackOffice User", or specific staff name	Author identification
6	Verify visual distinction from consumer notes	Back-office notes have different styling or indicators	Visual Distinction: Different background color, font, or icon	Visual differentiation
7	Test interaction attempts with back-office notes	Clicking or hovering does not enable editing	Interaction Test: No edit mode activation	Edit prevention
8	Verify back-office notes across different request types	Same read-only behavior on Complaint, Transfer, Disconnection requests	Request Types: RE2383 (Complaint), TC2374 (Transfer)	Cross-request consistency
9	Verify chronological integration with consumer notes	Back-office and consumer notes properly ordered together	Chronological Order: All notes sorted by timestamp regardless of author	Mixed note ordering

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Back-office notes display as read-only with complete timestamp and author information
Secondary_Verifications: Visual distinction from consumer notes, edit prevention, cross-request consistency
Negative_Verification: No edit capabilities on back-office notes, no author information missing

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record back-office note display, read-only enforcement, and author/timestamp accuracy]
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: CSS01US10_TC_036
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_038
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_039
Sequential_Tests: Consumer notes before back-office notes

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for transparency and communication from support teams
Edge_Cases: Very long back-office notes, special characters, multiple authors
Risk_Areas: Access control, visual distinction accuracy
Security_Considerations: Read-only enforcement, author authentication

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Back-office notes with sensitive information handling
Type: Security
Rationale: Ensure appropriate information is displayed to consumers
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 38: Notes Chronological Order

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_038
Title: Verify System Shows All Notes in Chronological Order with Clear Author Identification
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Notes], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Regression-Coverage], Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Notes-Service], Notes-Ordering, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Low
Complexity_Level: Low
Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Low

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Notes chronological ordering)
Integration_Points: Notes Service, Time Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC38 - System must show all notes in chronological order with clear author identification
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_036, CSS01US10_TC_037

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Notes Service, Time Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Notes sorting < 200ms, display < 1 second
Data_Requirements: Request with multiple notes from different authors and timestamps

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Request with mixed consumer and back-office notes at different times
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Service RE2384 with notes: Consumer note (8/1/2025 10:00 AM), Back-office note (8/2/2025 2:30 PM), Consumer note (8/3/2025 9:15 AM)
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_036, CSS01US10_TC_037

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Service request RE2384 Notes tab with multiple notes	Notes tab displays all notes from different authors and times	Service Request: RE2384 with mixed notes	Notes list access
2	Verify notes are arranged in chronological order	Notes appear in time sequence (latest first or oldest first consistently)	Expected Order: 8/3/2025 9:15 AM, 8/2/2025 2:30 PM, 8/1/2025 10:00 AM (if latest first)	Chronological sorting
3	Verify each note shows clear author identification	Each note clearly indicates if it's from Consumer or Back-office staff	Author Labels: "Consumer", "Support Manager", "BackOffice User"	Author clarity
4	Verify timestamp accuracy for each note	All timestamps display correctly in consistent format	Timestamps: MM/DD/YYYY HH:MM AM/PM format for all notes	Timestamp consistency
5	Add new consumer note and verify placement	New note appears in correct chronological position	New Note: "Latest update request"	Dynamic ordering
6	Verify ordering consistency after page refresh	Note order remains the same after browser refresh	Order Persistence: Same sequence after refresh	Order stability
7	Test with notes added in rapid succession	Multiple quick notes maintain proper chronological order	Rapid Notes: Add 3 notes within 1 minute	Rapid addition ordering
8	Verify author identification remains clear in mixed sequence	Consumer and back-office notes clearly distinguished regardless of order	Mixed Sequence: Alternating consumer and back-office notes	Author distinction

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All notes display in consistent chronological order with clear author identification for each note
Secondary_Verifications: Timestamp accuracy, author clarity, dynamic reordering
Negative_Verification: No ordering inconsistencies, no author confusion

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record chronological ordering accuracy and author identification clarity]
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: CSS01US10_TC_036, CSS01US10_TC_037
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_039
Parallel_Tests: None (requires sequential note ordering)
Sequential_Tests: Individual notes before ordering validation

Additional Information

Notes: Important for understanding conversation flow and communication history
Edge_Cases: Notes with identical timestamps, timezone differences, clock synchronization issues
Risk_Areas: Sorting algorithm accuracy, timestamp precision
Security_Considerations: Time tampering prevention, accurate audit trail

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Notes chronological order with timezone differences
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Multi-timezone operations may affect note ordering
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 39: Basic Text Formatting in User Notes

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_039
Title: Verify System Supports Basic Text Formatting in User-added Notes
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Notes], MOD-RequestTracker, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Regression-Coverage], Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Low, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Notes-Service], Text-Formatting, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Low
Complexity_Level: Low
Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Low

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Basic text formatting in notes)
Integration_Points: Notes Service, Text Processing Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC39 - System must support basic text formatting in user-added notes
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_036, CSS01US10_TC_038

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Notes Service, Text Processing Engine, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Text formatting processing < 500ms, note save < 2 seconds
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with note-adding capability

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with active request for note addition
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with note-adding permissions
Test_Data: Service RE2384 for text formatting testing
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_036

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Service request RE2384 Notes tab	Notes tab opens with note input field available	Service Request: RE2384	Note input access
2	Test line break formatting in note input	Enter text with line breaks and verify preservation	Test Text: "Line 1\nLine 2\nLine 3"	Line break support
3	Test special characters in note text	Special characters display correctly without encoding issues	Special Characters: !@#$%^&*()_+-=[]{}	;:,.<>?
4	Test numbered list formatting (if supported)	Numbered lists maintain proper formatting	Test List: "1. First item\n2. Second item\n3. Third item"	List formatting
5	Test bullet point formatting (if supported)	Bullet points display correctly	Test Bullets: "• Point one\n• Point two\n• Point three"	Bullet support
6	Test text length handling with formatting	Long formatted text displays properly without breaking layout	Long Text: Paragraph with 200+ characters including formatting	Length handling
7	Verify formatting preservation after save	Saved note maintains original formatting when redisplayed	Format Preservation: Original formatting intact after save	Persistence validation
8	Test formatting display consistency across browsers	Formatting appears consistently in different browsers (if applicable)	Browser Test: Same formatting in Chrome, Firefox	Cross-browser consistency

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: System supports basic text formatting in user-added notes including line breaks and special characters
Secondary_Verifications: Format preservation after save, display consistency, length handling
Negative_Verification: No formatting corruption, no character encoding issues

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record text formatting support and preservation accuracy]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Monthly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_036
Blocked_Tests: Advanced formatting features
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_038
Sequential_Tests: Basic note addition before formatting testing

Additional Information

Notes: Enhances user communication capability and note clarity
Edge_Cases: Very long formatted text, mixed formatting types, copy-paste formatting
Risk_Areas: Text processing performance, character encoding
Security_Considerations: Input sanitization, XSS prevention in formatted text

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Copy-paste text formatting from external sources
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Users may paste formatted text from other applications
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 40: Timeline Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_040
Title: Verify Timeline Displays Complete Activity Log for All Request Types in Reverse Chronological Order with Read-only Access
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Timeline], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Integration-Testing/Module-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Activity-Logging-Service], Timeline-Functionality, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Timeline functionality across all request types)
Integration_Points: Activity Logging Service, All Request Management Systems
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC40, AC41, AC42, AC43 - Timeline functionality criteria
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_033, all detail view test cases

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Activity Logging Service, All Request Management Systems, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Timeline load < 1 second, activity retrieval < 500ms
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with requests having comprehensive activity histories

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Requests with rich activity histories across all request types
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with timeline access
Test_Data: Service: RE2384, Complaint: RE2383, Transfer: TC2374 with varied activity logs
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_033

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Service request RE2384 Timeline tab	Timeline displays complete activity log for service request	Service Activities: Request Created, Payment Pending, Assigned to Team, Status Updated	Service timeline
2	Verify service timeline entry formatting	Each entry shows timestamp, action type, and responsible party	Entry Format: "8/1/2025 9:00 AM - Request Created by John Smith"	Service formatting
3	Verify service timeline reverse chronological order	Latest activities appear at top of timeline	Order: Most recent activity first, oldest last	Service ordering
4	Verify service timeline is read-only	No edit options or modification capabilities available	Read-only: No edit buttons, text fields, or modification options	Service access control
5	Open Complaint request RE2383 Timeline tab	Timeline shows complaint-specific activities	Complaint Activities: Complaint Filed, Evidence Uploaded, Under Investigation, Response Due	Complaint timeline
6	Verify complaint timeline formatting consistency	Same formatting pattern as service timeline	Formatting Consistency: Identical timestamp and action format	Complaint formatting
7	Verify complaint timeline includes evidence activities	Timeline shows evidence upload and review activities	Evidence Activities: "Evidence Uploaded", "Evidence Reviewed"	Evidence tracking
8	Open Transfer request TC2374 Timeline tab	Timeline displays transfer-specific activities	Transfer Activities: Transfer Requested, Documents Submitted, Under Review	Transfer timeline
9	Verify transfer timeline shows document-related activities	Timeline includes document submission and verification activities	Document Activities: "Documents Submitted", "Document Verification Started"	Document tracking
10	Compare timeline formatting across all request types	Consistent formatting, ordering, and structure across all types	Format Consistency: Identical patterns for timestamp, action, responsible party	Cross-type consistency
11	Verify timestamp accuracy across timelines	All timestamps show accurate date and time information	Timestamp Accuracy: Proper date/time format (MM/DD/YYYY HH:MM AM/PM)	Timestamp validation
12	Verify responsible party identification across timelines	Clear identification of who performed each activity	Party Identification: "John Smith", "System Admin", "BackOffice User"	Actor identification
13	Test timeline scrolling for long activity lists	Timeline handles long activity lists with proper scrolling	Scrolling Test: Navigate through extensive activity history	Scrolling behavior
14	Verify timeline updates when new activities occur	Timeline reflects new activities (if available during test)	Update Test: Check for new activities from concurrent processes	Real-time updates

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Timeline displays complete activity log in reverse chronological order with consistent formatting across all request types
Secondary_Verifications: Read-only access enforced, responsible party identification accurate, timestamp formatting consistent
Negative_Verification: No edit capabilities, no missing activities, no formatting inconsistencies

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record timeline functionality across all request types]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: All detail view test cases
Blocked_Tests: Advanced timeline features
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_033 (Notes functionality)
Sequential_Tests: Detail views before timeline validation

Additional Information

Notes: Important for request transparency and audit trail
Edge_Cases: Very long activity lists, concurrent activities, timezone differences
Risk_Areas: Activity logging accuracy, performance with large histories
Security_Considerations: Activity log integrity, read-only enforcement

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Timeline performance with 50+ activities
Type: Performance
Rationale: Ensure timeline remains responsive with extensive history
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 41: Timeline Timestamp and Action Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_041
Title: Verify Timeline Shows Timestamp, Action Type, and Responsible Party for Each Activity
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Timeline], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Regression-Coverage], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Activity-Logging-Service], Timeline-Details, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Timeline entry detail display)
Integration_Points: Activity Logging Service, User Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC41 - System must show timestamp, action type, and responsible party for each activity
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_040, CSS01US10_TC_042

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Activity Logging Service, User Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Timeline load < 1 second, activity detail retrieval < 300ms
Data_Requirements: Request with detailed activity history including various action types and responsible parties

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Request with comprehensive activity log from different system users
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with timeline access
Test_Data: Service RE2384 with activities from different actors: Consumer, Support Staff, System Admin
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_040

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Service request RE2384 Timeline tab	Timeline displays with detailed activity entries	Service Request: RE2384	Timeline access
2	Verify timestamp format for each activity entry	All timestamps show in consistent MM/DD/YYYY HH:MM AM/PM format	Timestamp Format: "8/1/2025 9:00 AM", "8/2/2025 2:30 PM"	Timestamp consistency
3	Verify action type description for each entry	Action types are clearly described and understandable	Action Types: "Request Created", "Status Updated", "Assigned to Team", "Note Added"	Action clarity
4	Verify responsible party identification for each entry	Each activity shows who performed the action	Responsible Parties: "John Smith", "Support Manager", "System Admin", "Consumer"	Actor identification
5	Verify complete information display for consumer actions	Consumer-initiated actions show proper attribution	Consumer Actions: "Note Added by Consumer", "Request Created by John Smith"	Consumer attribution
6	Verify complete information display for system actions	System-generated actions show appropriate attribution	System Actions: "Status Updated by System", "Email Sent by System"	System attribution
7	Verify complete information display for staff actions	Back-office staff actions show proper identification	Staff Actions: "Assigned to Team by Support Manager", "Reviewed by Technical Lead"	Staff attribution
8	Test timeline entry information consistency across request types	Same information completeness on Complaint and Transfer timelines	Cross-Request: RE2383 (Complaint), TC2374 (Transfer)	Cross-type validation
9	Verify missing information handling	Activities with incomplete information still display available details	Incomplete Data: Entries with missing responsible party or partial timestamps	Error handling

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Each timeline activity displays complete timestamp, action type, and responsible party information
Secondary_Verifications: Format consistency, attribution accuracy, cross-request type consistency
Negative_Verification: No missing critical information, no attribution errors

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record timeline entry completeness and information accuracy]
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: CSS01US10_TC_040
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_042, CSS01US10_TC_043
Parallel_Tests: None (requires timeline functionality)
Sequential_Tests: Timeline display before detail validation

Additional Information

Notes: Essential for audit trail and activity transparency
Edge_Cases: System-generated actions, bulk operations, automated processes
Risk_Areas: User identification accuracy, timestamp precision
Security_Considerations: User privacy, activity attribution accuracy

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Timeline entries with system maintenance activities
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: System maintenance may generate automated timeline entries
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 42: Timeline Reverse Chronological Order

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_042
Title: Verify Timeline Activities Display in Reverse Chronological Order with Latest Activities First
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Timeline], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Regression-Coverage], Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Activity-Logging-Service], Timeline-Ordering, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Low
Complexity_Level: Low
Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Low

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Timeline chronological ordering)
Integration_Points: Activity Logging Service, Time Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC42 - System must display timeline activities in reverse chronological order
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_040, CSS01US10_TC_041

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Activity Logging Service, Time Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Timeline sorting < 200ms, display < 1 second
Data_Requirements: Request with multiple activities across different dates and times

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Request with activities spanning multiple days
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Service RE2384 with activities: 8/1/2025 9:00 AM, 8/2/2025 2:30 PM, 8/3/2025 10:15 AM
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_041

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Service request RE2384 Timeline tab	Timeline displays with all activities visible	Service Request: RE2384	Timeline access
2	Verify latest activity appears at top of timeline	Most recent activity (8/3/2025 10:15 AM) appears first	Latest Activity: 8/3/2025 10:15 AM at top	Latest first validation
3	Verify oldest activity appears at bottom of timeline	Earliest activity (8/1/2025 9:00 AM) appears last	Oldest Activity: 8/1/2025 9:00 AM at bottom	Oldest last validation
4	Verify middle activities maintain chronological sequence	Activities between latest and oldest follow proper time sequence	Middle Activity: 8/2/2025 2:30 PM in middle position	Sequence validation
5	Add new activity (note) and verify it appears at top	New activity appears as first item in timeline	New Activity: Added note appears at top with current timestamp	Dynamic ordering
6	Verify consistent ordering across different request types	Complaint and Transfer timelines follow same reverse chronological order	Cross-Request: RE2383 (Complaint), TC2374 (Transfer)	Cross-type consistency
7	Test ordering with activities on same day	Activities on same date ordered correctly by time	Same Day: Multiple activities on 8/2/2025 ordered by time	Same-day ordering

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Timeline activities display in reverse chronological order with latest activities at top
Secondary_Verifications: Consistent ordering across request types, dynamic reordering with new activities
Negative_Verification: No chronological inconsistencies, no ordering errors

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record chronological ordering accuracy]
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: CSS01US10_TC_041
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_043
Parallel_Tests: None (requires sequential validation)
Sequential_Tests: Timeline details before ordering validation

Additional Information

Notes: Important for user understanding of activity progression
Edge_Cases: Activities with identical timestamps, timezone differences
Risk_Areas: Sorting algorithm accuracy, timestamp precision
Security_Considerations: Time tampering prevention

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Timeline ordering with timezone differences
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Multi-timezone operations may affect activity ordering
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 43: Timeline Read-only Access

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_043
Title: Verify Timeline is Read-only for Consumers with No Modification Capabilities
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Security
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Security], [Consumer Services], [Timeline], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Security, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/Security-Validation/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-[Activity-Logging-Service], Timeline-Security, Security

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Timeline access control)
Integration_Points: Activity Logging Service, Security Framework
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Security
Report_Categories: Security-Validation, Quality-Dashboard, User-Acceptance
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC43 - System must make timeline read-only for consumers
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_040, CSS01US10_TC_042

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Activity Logging Service, Security Framework, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Access control validation < 100ms
Data_Requirements: Request with timeline activities for read-only testing

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Request with timeline activities
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role (non-administrative)
Test_Data: Service RE2384 with various timeline activities
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_042

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Service request RE2384 Timeline tab	Timeline displays with activity entries	Service Request: RE2384	Timeline access
2	Attempt to click on timeline activity entries	No edit mode or modification interface appears	Click Test: Click on various activity entries	Edit prevention
3	Right-click on timeline activities to check context menu	No edit, delete, or modification options available	Context Menu: No modification options	Context menu validation
4	Look for edit buttons or modification controls	No edit buttons, delete options, or modification controls visible	UI Elements: No edit controls present	Interface validation
5	Attempt to select and delete timeline text	Timeline text cannot be selected or deleted	Selection Test: Attempt text selection and deletion	Content protection
6	Test keyboard shortcuts for editing (Ctrl+E, Del, etc.)	Keyboard shortcuts do not enable editing functionality	Keyboard Test: Common edit shortcuts	Keyboard access prevention
7	Inspect browser developer tools for hidden edit options	No hidden edit forms or modification endpoints accessible	Developer Tools: No hidden edit interfaces	Technical validation
8	Verify read-only status across different request types	Timeline remains read-only on Complaint, Transfer, Disconnection requests	Cross-Request: RE2383, TC2374, DR-2024-001	Cross-type security
9	Test timeline read-only behavior during page refresh	Read-only status maintained after browser refresh	Refresh Test: No edit options after refresh	Session persistence

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Timeline is completely read-only for consumers with no modification capabilities available
Secondary_Verifications: No hidden edit options, cross-request type consistency, session persistence
Negative_Verification: No edit buttons, no context menu options, no keyboard shortcuts work

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record read-only enforcement and security validation]
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: CSS01US10_TC_040, CSS01US10_TC_042
Blocked_Tests: None (security validation endpoint)
Parallel_Tests: Other security tests
Sequential_Tests: Timeline functionality before security validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for maintaining activity log integrity and audit trail security
Edge_Cases: Browser developer tool manipulation, JavaScript injection attempts
Risk_Areas: Client-side security bypass, unauthorized access attempts
Security_Considerations: Activity log tampering prevention, audit trail protection

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Timeline read-only enforcement with browser developer tools manipulation
Type: Security
Rationale: Advanced users might attempt to bypass client-side restrictions
Priority: P1-Critical

Test Case 44: Document Management

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_044
Title: Verify Document Management Features Including Image Preview, Verification Status Display, and Upload Date Information
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Document management functionality)
Integration_Points: Document Storage Service, File Preview Service, Verification Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Integration-Testing, Security-Validation
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC44, AC45, AC46 - Document management criteria
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_018, CSS01US10_TC_029

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Document Storage Service, File Preview Service, Verification Service, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Document load < 3 seconds, preview generation < 5 seconds
Data_Requirements: Requests with various document types and verification statuses

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Requests with uploaded documents across different types and verification states
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with document access
Test_Data: Complaint RE2383 with images, Transfer TC2374 with PDFs, various verification statuses
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_018, CSS01US10_TC_029

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Complaint RE2383 Evidence & Attachments tab	Evidence tab opens showing document management interface	Complaint: RE2383 with uploaded images	Evidence access
2	Verify image preview functionality	Images display with clickable preview thumbnails	Test Image: water_sample.jpg with thumbnail preview	Image preview
3	Click on image thumbnail to open full preview	Full-size image preview opens in modal or dedicated view	Preview Action: Full image display with controls	Full preview
4	Verify image preview controls and navigation	Preview includes zoom, close, and navigation controls (if multiple images)	Preview Controls: Zoom in/out, close button, navigation arrows	Preview controls
5	Test file download functionality for images	Image files can be downloaded to local system	Download Test: water_sample.jpg downloads successfully	Image download
6	Verify document verification status display for images	Each image shows verification status: verified, pending, or rejected	Status Display: "Verified", "Pending", or "Rejected" badges/text	Image verification status
7	Verify upload date display for images	Upload date shows in proper format for each image	Upload Date: 7/31/2025 format	Image upload date
8	Verify document type identification for images	Document type shows as "Image" or specific type (JPEG, PNG)	Document Type: "Image" or "JPEG"	Image type identification
9	Open Transfer TC2374 Documents tab	Documents tab displays PDF and document files	Transfer: TC2374 with PDF documents	PDF document access
10	Verify PDF file preview functionality	PDF files show preview or thumbnail representation	PDF Preview: proof_of_address.pdf with preview	PDF preview
11	Test PDF file download functionality	PDF files can be downloaded successfully	PDF Download: proof_of_address.pdf downloads	PDF download
12	Verify verification status for PDF documents	PDF documents show verification status badges	PDF Status: "Pending", "Verified", or "Rejected"	PDF verification status
13	Verify upload date and document type for PDFs	Upload date and document type displayed for PDFs	PDF Metadata: Upload Date: 7/31/2025, Type: Address Proof	PDF metadata
14	Test document view option functionality	Documents can be opened in browser viewer or external application	View Test: Open document in browser tab or download	Document viewing
15	Verify document list formatting and organization	Documents organized clearly with all metadata visible	List Format: Name, Upload Date, Type, Verification Status, Actions	Document organization

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Document management provides image preview, verification status display, and complete metadata for all document types
Secondary_Verifications: Download functionality works, document organization clear, preview controls functional
Negative_Verification: No broken previews, no missing metadata, no download failures

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record document management functionality across all document types]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: High
Automation_Candidate: Planned

Test Relationships

Blocking_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_018, CSS01US10_TC_029
Blocked_Tests: Advanced document features
Parallel_Tests: None (requires sequential document testing)
Sequential_Tests: Detail views before document management

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for evidence handling and compliance documentation
Edge_Cases: Large files, unsupported formats, corrupted documents
Risk_Areas: File security, preview generation performance, storage capacity
Security_Considerations: Document access control, file type validation, virus scanning

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Document management with unsupported file types
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Graceful handling of invalid or unsupported document formats
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Document preview performance with large files (>10MB)
Type: Performance
Rationale: Ensure preview generation remains responsive with large documents
Priority: P2-High

Test Case 45: Document Verification Status Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_045
Title: Verify System Displays Document Verification Status (Verified, Pending, Rejected) with Appropriate Visual Indicators
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Document-Verification], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Integration-Testing/Module-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-[Verification-Service], Document-Verification-Status, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Document verification status display)
Integration_Points: Verification Service, Document Storage Service, Status Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC45 - System must display document verification status (verified, pending, rejected)
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_044, CSS01US10_TC_034

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Verification Service, Document Storage Service, Status Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Status retrieval < 500ms, status display < 1 second
Data_Requirements: Documents with different verification statuses across multiple requests

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Documents with verified, pending, and rejected statuses from verification team
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with document access
Test_Data: Transfer TC2374 with documents: proof_of_address.pdf (Verified), identity_doc.jpg (Pending), utility_bill.pdf (Rejected)
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_044

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Transfer TC2374 Documents tab	Documents tab displays with verification status for each document	Transfer: TC2374 with mixed verification statuses	Document status access
2	Verify "Verified" status display and visual indicator	Verified documents show green checkmark or "Verified" badge	Verified Document: proof_of_address.pdf with green indicator	Verified status validation
3	Verify "Pending" status display and visual indicator	Pending documents show orange clock or "Pending" badge	Pending Document: identity_doc.jpg with orange indicator	Pending status validation
4	Verify "Rejected" status display and visual indicator	Rejected documents show red X or "Rejected" badge	Rejected Document: utility_bill.pdf with red indicator	Rejected status validation
5	Verify status text clarity and readability	Status text is clearly readable and unambiguous	Status Text: "Verified", "Pending", "Rejected" (not abbreviations)	Text clarity validation
6	Verify color coding consistency across document types	Same status colors used for images, PDFs, and other document types	Color Consistency: Green=Verified, Orange=Pending, Red=Rejected	Color standardization
7	Test status display in different document contexts	Verification status shows in Evidence & Attachments and Documents tabs	Context Test: RE2383 (Evidence), TC2374 (Documents)	Cross-context consistency
8	Verify status display with document metadata	Verification status appears alongside upload date and document type	Metadata Display: Status integrated with other document information	Information integration
9	Test status visibility in document list view	Status clearly visible in document list without requiring additional clicks	List Visibility: Status visible in main document list	Immediate visibility
10	Verify status accuracy with back-office verification records	Displayed status matches actual verification decisions from back-office	Accuracy Check: Status reflects actual verification outcomes	Data integrity validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Document verification status displays accurately with appropriate visual indicators (green=verified, orange=pending, red=rejected)
Secondary_Verifications: Color coding consistency, text clarity, cross-context display
Negative_Verification: No status ambiguity, no missing verification information

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record verification status display accuracy and visual indicator consistency]
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: CSS01US10_TC_044
Blocked_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_046
Parallel_Tests: CSS01US10_TC_034
Sequential_Tests: Document management before status validation

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for customer understanding of document approval progress
Edge_Cases: Status changes during viewing, bulk status updates, partial verifications
Risk_Areas: Status synchronization, visual indicator accuracy
Security_Considerations: Status tampering prevention, verification integrity

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Document verification status changes in real-time during viewing
Type: Integration
Rationale: Status may change while customer is viewing documents
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Verification status for documents with multiple review stages
Type: Business Rule
Rationale: Complex documents may require multi-stage verification
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 46: Document Upload Date and Type Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_046
Title: Verify System Shows Upload Date and Document Type for Each File with Proper Formatting
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Document-Metadata], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Module-Coverage/Product/Integration-Testing], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-[Document-Storage-Service], Document-Metadata, Happy-Path

Business Context

Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (Document metadata display)
Integration_Points: Document Storage Service, Metadata Management System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AC46 - System must show upload date and document type for each file
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_044, CSS01US10_TC_045

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Document Storage Service, Metadata Management System, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Metadata retrieval < 500ms, display < 1 second
Data_Requirements: Documents with accurate upload dates and type classifications

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Documents uploaded with proper metadata tracking
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role with document access
Test_Data: Various documents: PDF (Address Proof), JPEG (Identity), PNG (Utility Bill) uploaded on different dates
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_045

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Open Transfer TC2374 Documents tab	Documents tab displays with metadata for each uploaded document	Transfer: TC2374 with various document types	Document metadata access
2	Verify upload date display for PDF documents	PDF documents show upload date in MM/DD/YYYY format	PDF Upload Date: 7/31/2025 for proof_of_address.pdf	PDF date formatting
3	Verify upload date display for image documents	Image documents show upload date in consistent format	Image Upload Date: 8/1/2025 for identity_doc.jpg	Image date formatting
4	Verify document type classification for PDFs	PDF files show "PDF" or specific classification like "Address Proof"	PDF Type: "Address Proof" or "PDF Document"	PDF type classification
5	Verify document type classification for images	Image files show appropriate type like "JPEG", "PNG", or "Identity Verification"	Image Type: "Identity Verification" or "JPEG"	Image type classification
6	Verify date formatting consistency across all documents	All upload dates use same MM/DD/YYYY format	Date Consistency: 7/31/2025, 8/1/2025, 8/2/2025 format	Date format uniformity
7	Verify document type accuracy based on file extensions	Document types correctly reflect actual file formats	Type Accuracy: .pdf = PDF, .jpg = JPEG, .png = PNG	File type mapping
8	Test metadata display in Evidence & Attachments tab	Upload date and type show in complaint evidence section	Evidence Context: RE2383 Evidence & Attachments	Cross-context metadata
9	Verify metadata visibility in document list view	Upload date and document type clearly visible without additional clicks	List Display: Date and type visible in main document list	Immediate metadata visibility
10	Verify metadata accuracy with actual upload records	Displayed dates match actual document upload timestamps	Accuracy Verification: Dates reflect actual upload times	Data integrity validation
11	Test metadata display for different file sizes	Upload date and type display regardless of file size	File Size Test: Small and large files show metadata	Size-independent display

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Upload date and document type display accurately for each file with proper MM/DD/YYYY formatting and correct type classification
Secondary_Verifications: Format consistency, type accuracy, cross-context display
Negative_Verification: No missing metadata, no date formatting errors, no type misclassification

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record upload date accuracy and document type classification]
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: CSS01US10_TC_045
Blocked_Tests: None (final document management test)
Parallel_Tests: None
Sequential_Tests: Document verification before metadata validation

Additional Information

Notes: Important for document organization and audit trail
Edge_Cases: Documents uploaded at midnight, bulk uploads, file type detection failures
Risk_Areas: Date accuracy, type classification logic, metadata synchronization
Security_Considerations: Upload timestamp integrity, type validation security

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: Document metadata display with timezone differences
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Multi-timezone operations may affect upload date display
Priority: P3-Medium
Scenario_2: Document type classification for unusual file formats
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: System should handle uncommon but valid file types appropriately
Priority: P3-Medium

Test Case 47 : New Request Button Navigation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: CSS01US10_TC_047
Title: Verify New Request Button Redirects to Service & Support Page as Specified in User Story Flow
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 14, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Request Tracker
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: [Happy-Path], [Consumer Services], [Navigation], MOD-RequestTracker, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-[Quality-Dashboard/User-Acceptance/Integration-Testing/Module-Coverage/Product], Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-[Service-Support-Module], Navigation-Flow, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Low
Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100% (New Request navigation)
Integration_Points: Service & Support Module, Navigation Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: User-Acceptance, Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: User Story Flow Step 4 - New Request button redirected to services and requests tab "service and support" header page
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Service & Support Module, Navigation Router, Consumer Authentication Service
Performance_Baseline: Navigation < 2 seconds, page load < 3 seconds
Data_Requirements: Consumer account with Request Tracker access

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Consumer account with access to both Request Tracker and Service & Support modules
User_Roles_Permissions: Authenticated Consumer role
Test_Data: Consumer Account: test.consumer@utility.com
Prior_Test_Cases: CSS01US10_TC_001

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Request Tracker page using established flow	Request Tracker dashboard loads with "New Request" button visible	Button Location: Top-right corner of page with blue styling	Button visibility
2	Locate "New Request" button in top-right area of Request Tracker	Button displays with proper styling and text "New Request"	Button Text: "New Request", Color: Blue, Icon: Plus or document icon	Button identification
3	Verify button is clickable and accessible	Button responds to hover with visual feedback	Hover Effect: Color change or shadow effect	Button interactivity
4	Click "New Request" button	Page navigation initiated to Service & Support module	Navigation Action: Click event triggers page change	Navigation trigger
5	Verify redirection to Service & Support page	URL changes to Service & Support section	Expected URL: .../service-support or similar	URL validation
6	Verify Service & Support page header displays correctly	Page shows "Service & Support" header prominently	Page Header: "Service & Support"	Header validation
7	Verify Service & Support page subtitle/description	Subtitle shows "Submit service requests, track their status, and manage appointments"	Page Subtitle: As shown in user story wireframe	Content validation
8	Verify Service & Support page contains request creation options	Page displays request creation cards: New Request, Register Complaint, Request Transfer, Request Disconnection	Request Options: 4 main request types visible	Request creation access
9	Verify navigation maintains user session and context	User remains logged in and consumer context preserved	Session State: User authentication maintained	Session persistence
10	Test browser back button functionality	Back button returns to Request Tracker page	Back Navigation: Returns to previous Request Tracker view	Back button behavior
11	Verify integration between Request Tracker and Service & Support	Navigation flow works seamlessly between modules	Integration Test: Smooth transition without errors	Module integration

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: New Request button successfully redirects to Service & Support page with proper header
Secondary_Verifications: URL changes correctly, Service & Support content loads, session maintained
Negative_Verification: No broken links, no authentication loss, no error pages

Test Results (Template)

Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Record navigation success, URL changes, and page content]
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: CSS01US10_TC_001
Blocked_Tests: Service creation workflows
Parallel_Tests: None (navigation test)
Sequential_Tests: Request Tracker before Service & Support access

Additional Information

Notes: Critical for customer journey from tracking to creating new requests
Edge_Cases: Multiple rapid clicks, navigation during page load, concurrent user sessions
Risk_Areas: Module integration, session management, navigation routing
Security_Considerations: Authenticated navigation, module access permissions

Missing Scenarios Identified

Scenario_1: New Request button behavior with active filters applied
Type: Integration
Rationale: Ensure navigation works regardless of current Request Tracker state
Priority: P2-High
Scenario_2: Return navigation from Service & Support maintains Request Tracker state
Type: UI/UX
Rationale: User experience improvement for maintaining previous view state
Priority: P3-Medium

System Admin Dashboard Test Cases - ONB05US01

User Access and Managemet Test Cases - ONB02US03

Utility Plans & Tariffs Management Test Cases - ONB02US05

ID & Reference Format Settings Test Cases- ONB02US07

Service Areas Management Test Cases- ONB02US08

Core System Settings Test Cases - ONB02US02

Utility management Test Cases - ONB05US03

SMART360 Login Experience Test Cases - AU01US01

SMART360 v2 Automation Project - Management Plan

User stories which we're picking for Phase 1

Consumer management Test Cases - CIS01US02

New Service Connection Application Form Test Cases - CIS01US03

New Connection Application Detail View Test Cases - CIS01US04

Payments Management Test Cases - CIS01US09

Account Transfer Request Test Cases - CIS01US12

Disconnection Request Flow Test Cases - CIS01US10

Profile Details Test Cases - CSS01US11

Service Payment Management Test Cases - CSS01US03

Request Tracker Test Cases - CSS01US10

Service & Support Management Test Cases - CSS01US08

Bill Management Test Case - CSS01US02

Payment History Management Test Cases - CSS01US05

Bill Cycle Setup Test Cases - BX03US02

Printing and Distribution Test Cases - BX06US01

GL Codes Management Test Cases - BX05US01

Single Bill Generation V2 Test Cases - BX01US04

Bill Generation V2 Test Case - BX01US03

Bill Template Management Test Cases - BX03US01

Service Order Dashboard Test Cases - WX03US03

Dispatcher Management System Test Case - WX05US05

Master Test Cases - WX01US01

Field Force Management Test Case - WX02US02

System Settings Configuration Management Test Cases - WX04US04

Meter Device Management Test Cases -MX01US02

Route Management Test Cases -MX02US01

Read Cycle Management Test Cases - MX02US02

Photo Read Validation Test Cases -MX03US02

Read Cycle List and Validation Configurations Test Cases - MX03US01

Photo Meter Reads Test Cases - MX02US03

Communication Hub Dashboard Test Cases - UX01US01

Utility Contact List Management Test Cases -UX03US03

Communication Workflows Test Cases - UX03US04

Message History Management System Test Cases - UX05US05

Individual & Bulk messaging Test Cases - UX02US02

Message Template Management System Test Case - UX06US06

Request Tracker Test Cases - CSS01US10

Test Scenario Analysis Based on User Story

A. Functional Test Scenarios

B. Integration Test Scenarios

C. Business Rules Validation

Test Case 1: Total Outstanding Amount Display

Test Case 2 : Active Requests Count Display

Test Case 3 : Completed Requests Count Display

Test Case 4 : Overdue Payments Count Display

Test Case 5: Real-time KPI Updates

Test Case 6 : Search Functionality Across All Request IDs

Test Case 7 : Request Type Filtering

Test Case 8 : Status Filtering

Test Case 9 : Simultaneous Type and Status Filtering

Test Case 10 : Request List Display and Functionality

Test Case 11: View Action in Actions Column

Test Casec12: Default Sorting by Created Date Descending

Test Case 13 : Column Sorting Functionality

Test Case 14 : Service Request Detail View

Test Case 15: Service Request Rejection Reason Display

Test Case 16 : Service Request Notes and Timeline Functionality

Test Case 17: Service Request Notes and Timeline Functionality

Test Case 19: Service Request Timeline Tab

Test Case 20: Complaint Detail View Fields

Test Case 21: Complaint Rejection Reason Display

Test Case 22: Disconnection Detail View

Test Case 23: Complaint Notes Tab

Test Case 24: Complaint Timeline Tab

Test Case 25: Disconnection Request Detail Fields

Test Case 26: Reconnection Detail View

Test Case 27: Disconnection Rejection Reason Display

Test Case 28: Disconnection Notes and Timeline Tabs

Test Case 29 : Transfer Detail View

Test Case 30: Reconnection Rejection Reason Display

Test Case 31: Reconnection Notes and Timeline Tabs