Skip to main content

Utility Contact List Management Test Cases -UX03US03

Test Case 1  - Unique List Names

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_001

Title: Verify successful creation of contact list with unique name using three-step guided process

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, UI, Database, MOD-ContactLists, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Low, Business-Must-Have, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-CxServices, Integration-API, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 20%
  • Integration_Points: CxServices, API, Communication Hub
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Contact database with consumer data, Authentication service, Communication Hub platform
  • Performance_Baseline: Page load < 3 seconds, list creation < 2 seconds
  • Data_Requirements: Consumer contact data including Sarah Johnson, James Williams from sample data

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: User logged in as Utility Administrator with list creation permissions
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation, contact access permissions
  • Test_Data: Valid consumer contact data populated in system
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication successful, Communication Hub accessible

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to "Lists" section in left sidebar menu

Lists page loads with "Create and manage lists of consumers, technicians, and business users" subtitle

N/A

Verify exact page title "Contact Lists" and subtitle match user story

2

Click "New List" button in top right corner

List creation wizard opens showing Step 1 of 3 with progress indicator "1" highlighted

N/A

Verify 3-step progress bar shows: 1-List Details, 2-Filters & Preview, 3-Preview

3

Click "Contact Type" dropdown

Dropdown displays three options: Consumers, Technicians, Business Users

Contact Type options per user story

Verify exact options match user story specification

4

Select "Consumers" from dropdown

"Consumers" selected and displayed in field

Contact Type: Consumers

Verify selection highlights correctly

5

Enter descriptive list name in "List Name" field

Name field accepts input without errors

List Name: "High Usage Consumers"

Using exact sample list name from user story

6

Enter detailed description in "Description" field

Description field accepts multi-line input

Description: "Consumers with high electricity usage"

Using sample description from user story data

7

Enter comma-separated tags in "Tags" field

Tags field accepts comma-separated input

Tags: "monthly-billing, high-usage"

Using exact tag format from user story samples

8

Click "Next" button

Wizard proceeds to Step 2 "Filters & Preview" with progress indicator showing "2" highlighted

N/A

Verify step progression and data preservation

9

Select "Dynamic" radio button under "Source Type"

Dynamic option selected, filter configuration section appears

Source Type: Dynamic

Verify filter options become available

10

Click "Add Filter" button

Filter dropdown appears with options based on contact type

N/A

Verify filter options include Zone, Area, Premise per user story

11

Configure usage filter from dropdown

Filter configured successfully, contact preview updates

Filter: Usage > 1000 kWh

Using high usage threshold from sample data

12

Verify contact preview shows matching consumers

Contact preview table displays with Name, Contact Info, Account Number, Status columns showing consumers matching filter criteria

Expected: Consumers with usage >1000 kWh like from sample data

Verify preview matches filter criteria

13

Click "Next" button to proceed to Step 3

Summary page displays with "Preview" step highlighted showing all configured details

N/A

Verify all entered data displayed in summary

14

Review summary showing List Details and Filter Configuration

Summary displays: Name "High Usage Consumers", Type "CONSUMER", Tags "monthly-billing, high-usage", Source Type "DYNAMIC", estimated contact count

Expected: All details match previous inputs

Verify summary accuracy against inputs

15

Click "Create List" button

List created successfully, system returns to Lists page with success message

N/A

Verify list creation confirmation

16

Verify new list appears in "My Lists" tab

List visible with correct details: Name, Description, contact count, Created date, Tags

Expected: "High Usage Consumers" list with today's date

Verify list metadata accuracy

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: List "High Usage Consumers" created with unique name and appears in My Lists with accurate contact count
  • Secondary_Verifications: All metadata saved correctly (description, tags, contact type), creation date and creator recorded, dynamic indicator visible
  • Negative_Verification: No error messages displayed during process, no duplicate names allowed in system

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Daily
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Authentication test, Communication Hub access
  • Blocked_Tests: List edit, delete, search tests
  • Parallel_Tests: User role tests, contact type tests
  • Sequential_Tests: List modification and usage tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: This test validates core list creation using exact user story workflow and sample data
  • Edge_Cases: Maximum name length validation, special characters in names
  • Risk_Areas: Database constraint validation, UI responsiveness, data persistence
  • Security_Considerations: Input validation, XSS prevention, user permission validation

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Navigation between wizard steps using "Back" button with data preservation

  • Type: UI/UX workflow validation

  • Rationale: User story mentions 3-step process but doesn't detail backward navigation behavior

  • Priority: P3-Medium

  • Scenario_2: Wizard cancellation and data cleanup at any step

  • Type: Error handling and cleanup

  • Rationale: Critical for user experience if they need to cancel mid-process

  • Priority: P3-Medium



Test Case 2: Verify error handling when attempting to create list with duplicate name


Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_002

Title: Verify error handling when attempting to create list with duplicate name

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, UI, Database, Validation, MOD-ContactLists, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Security-Validation, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Must-Have, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Database, Duplicate-Validation

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 15%
  • Integration_Points: Database, Validation Service
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Validation
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
  • Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Regression-Coverage, Security-Validation, User-Acceptance
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Database with existing list "High Usage Consumers", Validation service
  • Performance_Baseline: Validation response < 1 second
  • Data_Requirements: Pre-existing list "High Usage Consumers" from sample data

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Existing list "High Usage Consumers" created in system
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Existing list with exact name from sample data
  • Prior_Test_Cases: UX03US03_TC_001 must pass to create prerequisite list

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to "Lists" section in Communication Hub

Lists page displays with existing "High Usage Consumers" list visible

N/A

Verify prerequisite list exists

2

Click "New List" button

List creation wizard Step 1 opens with empty form fields

N/A

Starting duplicate validation test

3

Select "Consumers" from Contact Type dropdown

Consumers contact type selected

Contact Type: Consumers

Same type as existing list

4

Enter exact same list name as existing list

Name field accepts input without immediate validation

List Name: "High Usage Consumers"

Exact duplicate of existing list name

5

Enter different description and tags

Fields accept input normally

Description: "Testing duplicate validation", Tags: "test, duplicate"

Other fields should work normally

6

Click "Next" button to proceed

Error message displays: "List name already exists. Please choose a unique name."

N/A

Per business rule from user story

7

Verify error message prevents progression

Step 2 does not load, wizard remains on Step 1 with error highlighted

Expected: Red error text near name field

Validation should block progression

8

Verify error message content and location

Error message appears near List Name field with exact text from business rules

Expected: "List name already exists. Please choose a unique name."

Using exact error text from user story

9

Modify list name to unique value

Name field updated with different name

List Name: "High Usage Consumers - Updated"

Make name unique to test recovery

10

Click "Next" button again

Error clears and wizard proceeds to Step 2 Filters & Preview

N/A

Validation should pass with unique name

11

Verify successful progression with unique name

Step 2 loads normally with filter configuration options

Expected: Normal Step 2 interface

Recovery validation

12

Complete list creation with unique name

List created successfully with modified unique name

N/A

Confirm duplicate validation doesn't break normal flow

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Duplicate list name validation triggers appropriate error message "List name already exists. Please choose a unique name."
  • Secondary_Verifications: Error prevents wizard progression, error clears when unique name provided, normal flow resumes after correction
  • Negative_Verification: List not created with duplicate name, database constraints enforced

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: UX03US03_TC_001 (prerequisite list creation)
  • Blocked_Tests: N/A
  • Parallel_Tests: Other validation error tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Unique name validation tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates critical business rule preventing duplicate list names using exact error message from user story
  • Edge_Cases: Case sensitivity testing, special characters in duplicate names, whitespace handling
  • Risk_Areas: Database constraint enforcement, UI error handling, user experience during validation
  • Security_Considerations: Input sanitization, SQL injection prevention during name validation

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Case sensitivity in duplicate name validation (e.g., "HIGH USAGE CONSUMERS" vs "High Usage Consumers")

  • Type: Edge case validation

  • Rationale: User story doesn't specify case sensitivity rules for uniqueness

  • Priority: P2-High

  • Scenario_2: Duplicate name validation across different contact types

  • Type: Business rule clarification

  • Rationale: User story doesn't specify if names must be unique globally or per contact type

  • Priority: P2-High



Test Case 3: Verify contact categorization into three types

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_003

Title: Verify contact categorization into three types: Consumers, Technicians, and Business Users with type-specific filtering

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Billing Services, Meter Services, UI, Database, MOD-ContactLists, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Customer-Segment-Analysis, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Must-Have, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-End-to-End, Contact-Types

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 25%
  • Integration_Points: Contact Database, User Interface
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Contact-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Contact database with all three contact types populated, sample contacts: Sarah Johnson (Consumer), technicians, business users
  • Performance_Baseline: Contact type filtering < 2 seconds
  • Data_Requirements: Sample contacts including Sarah Johnson (Consumer), James Williams (Consumer) from user story

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Database populated with contacts of all three types from user story sample data
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Contact list access permissions
  • Test_Data: Consumer contacts (Sarah Johnson, James Williams), Technician contacts, Business User contacts
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication successful

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Lists page in Communication Hub

Lists page loads showing contact type filter buttons: "Consumers", "Technicians", "Business Users"

N/A

Verify all three contact type buttons visible per AC2

2

Verify default view shows all contact types

Page displays existing lists from all contact types without filtering

Expected: Mixed list types visible

Default state validation

3

Click "Consumers" filter button

Button highlights, view filters to show only consumer-related lists

N/A

Consumer filtering per user story contact types

4

Verify consumer lists display

Only lists with "Consumer" contact type visible, list count updates accordingly

Expected: Consumer lists only

Validate filtering accuracy

5

Click "Technicians" filter button

Button highlights, view switches to show only technician-related lists

N/A

Technician filtering per user story

6

Verify technician lists display

Only lists with "Technician" contact type visible

Expected: Technician lists only

Validate type-specific filtering

7

Click "Business Users" filter button

Button highlights, view switches to show only business user lists

N/A

Business user filtering per user story

8

Verify business user lists display

Only lists with "Business Users" contact type visible

Expected: Business user lists only

Validate third contact type

9

Create new Consumer list to verify categorization

Follow list creation wizard selecting "Consumers" contact type

Contact Type: Consumers, Name: "Residential Customers", Tags: "residential"

Using consumer sample data

10

Verify new consumer list appears in Consumers filter

List appears when "Consumers" filter active, hidden when other filters active

Expected: List visible only in Consumers view

Categorization validation

11

Create new Technician list

Follow list creation wizard selecting "Technicians" contact type

Contact Type: Technicians, Name: "Field Engineers", Tags: "field-work"

Test technician categorization

12

Verify technician list categorization

List appears only in Technicians filter view

Expected: List visible only in Technicians view

Technician type validation

13

Create new Business Users list

Follow list creation wizard selecting "Business Users" contact type

Contact Type: Business Users, Name: "Commercial Accounts", Tags: "commercial"

Test business user categorization

14

Verify business user list categorization

List appears only in Business Users filter view

Expected: List visible only in Business Users view

Business user type validation

15

Test clear filter functionality

Click to clear filters and verify all lists display again

N/A

Verify filter reset capability

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: All three contact types (Consumers, Technicians, Business Users) supported with accurate filtering
  • Secondary_Verifications: Filter buttons work correctly, list counts update appropriately, categorization persists after creation
  • Negative_Verification: No contact lists appear in wrong category filters, no mixed types in filtered views

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Daily
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Database setup with contact types
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced filtering tests, user role tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Contact type creation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Contact type-specific workflow tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates core contact categorization matching user story specification for utility operations
  • Edge_Cases: Large numbers of lists per type, performance with 100+ lists per category
  • Risk_Areas: Database query performance, UI responsiveness with many lists
  • Security_Considerations: Contact type-based access control, data segregation

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Contact type-specific field validation during list creation

  • Type: Business rule validation

  • Rationale: User story implies different fields/options available per contact type

  • Priority: P2-High

  • Scenario_2: Contact count accuracy per contact type in filter views

  • Type: Data accuracy validation

  • Rationale: Critical for operational decision-making per user story impact analysis

  • Priority: P2-High



Test Case 4 - Three-Step Guided Process

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_004

Title: Verify complete three-step wizard navigation: Details → Filters & Preview → Summary with data preservation

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • Test Type: UI
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P2-High
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, UI, Workflow, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Smoke, Type-UI, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Report-Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-End-to-End, Wizard-Flow

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 30%
  • Integration_Points: UI Components, Data Persistence
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, UI-Framework
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: UI framework, session management, contact database
  • Performance_Baseline: Step navigation < 1 second
  • Data_Requirements: Contact data for preview functionality

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: User logged in with list creation permissions
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Contact database populated for preview testing
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication successful

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Click "New List" button on Lists page

Wizard opens to Step 1 "List Details" with progress indicator showing "1" highlighted and steps labeled

N/A

Verify progress bar shows: 1-List Details, 2-Filters & Preview, 3-Preview

2

Verify Step 1 elements and layout

Form displays Contact Type dropdown, List Name field, Description field, Tags field with labels matching user story

N/A

Per user story: Contact Type, Name, Description, Tags fields

3

Complete all Step 1 fields with valid data

All fields accept input without validation errors

Contact Type: Consumers, Name: "Downtown Residential Customers", Description: "Residential consumers in downtown area", Tags: "monthly-billing, outreach, downtown"

Using exact sample data from user story

4

Click "Next" button

Progress indicator advances to "2", Step 2 "Filters & Preview" loads with previous data preserved

N/A

Verify step progression and data retention

5

Verify Step 2 elements display

Shows Source Type radio buttons (Static/Dynamic), Filter Type dropdown, contact preview section per user story

N/A

Per user story: Source Type selection, Filter configuration, Preview

6

Select "Dynamic" source type

Dynamic option selected, filter configuration section becomes active

Source Type: Dynamic

Enable filter options per user story

7

Configure filter from dropdown options

Filter dropdown shows options based on contact type selected in Step 1

Filter Type: Location Based, Area: Downtown, Premise: Residential

Using location filters from user story sample filters

8

Verify contact preview updates with filter

Preview table displays contacts matching filter criteria with columns: Name, Contact Info, Account Number, Status

Expected: James Williams and similar downtown residential contacts

Verify preview reflects filter per user story

9

Click "Next" button to proceed to Step 3

Progress indicator advances to "3", Summary page loads with "Preview" title

N/A

Verify final step navigation

10

Verify Step 3 Summary displays all data

Summary shows List Details section and Filter Configuration section with all entered data

Expected: Name "Downtown Residential Customers", Type "CONSUMER", Tags "monthly-billing, outreach, downtown", Filter Type "Location Based", estimated results count

Complete summary per user story Step 3

11

Test "Back" button functionality from Step 3

Clicking "Back" returns to Step 2 with all data preserved

N/A

Verify backward navigation maintains data

12

Navigate back to Step 1 using "Back" button

Returns to Step 1 with all original data intact

Expected: All fields populated with original entries

Data preservation validation across all steps

13

Navigate forward through all steps again

Can progress through Steps 1→2→3 with data preserved

N/A

Verify complete bidirectional navigation

14

Click "Create List" from Step 3

List created successfully and returns to Lists page with confirmation

N/A

Verify successful completion of 3-step process

15

Verify created list matches all entered data

List appears in Lists page with correct name, contact count, tags, and type

Expected: "Downtown Residential Customers" with accurate metadata

Final validation of wizard data integrity

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Three-step wizard (Details → Filters & Preview → Summary) completes successfully with proper navigation
  • Secondary_Verifications: Data preserved during forward/backward navigation, progress indicator accurate, all step elements display correctly
  • Negative_Verification: Cannot skip steps, incomplete data prevents progression, no data loss during navigation

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Daily
  • Maintenance_Effort: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: UI framework functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: List creation dependent tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Other wizard flow tests
  • Sequential_Tests: List modification wizard tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates complete user story 3-step guided process with exact steps from Major Steps section
  • Edge_Cases: Browser back button behavior, session timeout during wizard, large data entries
  • Risk_Areas: Data persistence between steps, UI responsiveness, session management
  • Security_Considerations: Data validation at each step, session security

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Wizard abandonment and cleanup when user navigates away mid-process

  • Type: Data cleanup and user experience

  • Rationale: Important for system resources and user experience

  • Priority: P3-Medium

  • Scenario_2: Validation error handling at each step of the wizard

  • Type: Error handling workflow

  • Rationale: User story mentions validation but doesn't detail step-specific error handling

  • Priority: P2-High



Test Case 5  - Static vs Dynamic Lists

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_005

Title: Verify creation of static list with manual contact selection using checkbox interface

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, UI, Database, MOD-ContactLists, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Must-Have, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Database, Static-List

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 25%
  • Integration_Points: Contact Database, UI Components
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Contact-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Contact database populated with sample contacts including Sarah Johnson, James Williams
  • Performance_Baseline: Contact selection < 2 seconds
  • Data_Requirements: North zone contacts including Sarah Johnson from user story sample data

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Database populated with contacts in North zone for manual selection
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Sample contacts: Sarah Johnson (North zone), other north zone contacts
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication successful

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Complete Step 1 of list creation wizard

Step 1 completed successfully

Name: "North Zone Contacts", Description: "Important contacts in the North zone", Tags: "emergency, north-zone"

Using exact sample data from user story

2

Proceed to Step 2 "Filters & Preview"

Step 2 displays with Source Type options

N/A

Access static list configuration

3

Select "Static" radio button under Source Type

Static option selected, manual selection interface becomes available

Source Type: Static

Per business rule: "Static lists require manual selection"

4

Verify contact selection interface appears

Checkbox interface displays with contacts list showing Name, Contact Info, Account Number, Status columns

N/A

Manual selection enabled per user story

5

Verify checkbox column appears for manual selection

Leftmost column shows checkboxes next to each contact for individual selection

N/A

Static list selection method

6

Select specific contacts manually using checkboxes

Individual contacts selected via checkbox clicks

Selected: Sarah Johnson, 4 additional North zone contacts

Using Sarah Johnson from sample data

7

Verify selected contact count updates in real-time

Counter displays "5 contacts selected" or similar indication

Expected: "5 contacts selected"

Real-time selection feedback

8

Test deselection functionality

Unchecking contacts removes them from selection and updates count

Deselect: 1 contact, Reselect: same contact

Selection management validation

9

Proceed to Step 3 Summary

Summary displays static list configuration with selected contact count

N/A

Static type confirmation

10

Verify Summary shows "Static" list type

Summary clearly indicates "Source Type: STATIC" and shows exact contact count

Expected: "Source Type: STATIC", "5 contacts"

Static indicator validation

11

Click "Create List" to create static list

List created successfully with manually selected contacts

N/A

Static list creation

12

Verify list displays "Static" indicator in Lists page

List shows "Static" type indicator and correct contact count

Expected: "Static" badge/indicator visible

Type identification

13

Access created static list to verify contacts

List contains exactly the 5 manually selected contacts including Sarah Johnson

Expected: Sarah Johnson and 4 other selected contacts only

Manual selection accuracy

14

Simulate contact data change in system

Update contact information for one of the selected contacts

Test Contact: Update Sarah Johnson's zone to "South"

Test static behavior

15

Verify static list does not auto-update

List still contains Sarah Johnson despite zone change

Expected: Sarah Johnson remains in North Zone Contacts list

Static list business rule validation

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Static list created with manually selected contacts using checkbox interface
  • Secondary_Verifications: Contact count accurate, static indicator visible, no auto-updates occur
  • Negative_Verification: List does not automatically update when contact data changes

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Daily
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Partial

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Contact database setup
  • Blocked_Tests: Static list modification tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Dynamic list creation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: List usage in workflows

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates static list creation using exact sample data "North Zone Contacts" from user story
  • Edge_Cases: Maximum contact selection limits, performance with large contact sets
  • Risk_Areas: Contact selection UI performance, data consistency after creation
  • Security_Considerations: Contact access permissions, data isolation

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Minimum contact selection validation for static lists (per business rule: minimum 1 or 5 contacts)
  • Type: Business rule validation
  • Rationale: User story shows conflicting minimum requirements that need testing
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Scenario_2: Static list modification capabilities after creation
  • Type: Post-creation functionality
  • Rationale: User story doesn't specify if static lists can be modified after creation
  • Priority: P2-High



Test Case 6 - Verify creation of dynamic list with filter-based auto-updates

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_006

Title: Verify creation of dynamic list with filter-based auto-updates using usage and location criteria

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, UI, Database, API, MOD-ContactLists, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Module-Coverage, Report-Performance-Metrics, Report-Integration-Testing, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Must-Have, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Database, Dynamic-List, Auto-Update

Business Context

  • Customer_Segment: All utility companies
  • Revenue_Impact: High
  • 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: 7 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: Medium
  • Data_Sensitivity: Medium
  • Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 30%
  • Integration_Points: Contact Database, Filter Engine, Auto-Update Service
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Filter-Service, Update-Engine
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Contact database, filter service, auto-update engine, sample usage data
  • Performance_Baseline: Filter preview < 3 seconds
  • Data_Requirements: Contacts with usage data >1000 kWh, downtown area contacts

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Contacts with usage and location data populated
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Contacts with varying usage levels, downtown residential contacts
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication successful

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Complete Step 1 of list creation wizard

Step 1 completed successfully

Name: "High Usage Downtown Customers", Description: "Customers with high electricity usage in downtown area", Tags: "dynamic, high-usage, billing, downtown"

Using sample concepts from user story

2

Proceed to Step 2 "Filters & Preview"

Step 2 displays with Source Type options

N/A

Access dynamic list configuration

3

Select "Dynamic" radio button under Source Type

Dynamic option selected, filter configuration section becomes available

Source Type: Dynamic

Per business rule: "Dynamic lists require at least one filter criteria"

4

Verify filter type dropdown appears

Filter Type dropdown displays with options: "Category Based", "Location Based" per user story

N/A

Filter configuration interface

5

Select "Category Based" filter type first

Category filter options appear with Category and Subcategory dropdowns

Filter Type: Category Based

Test usage-based filtering

6

Configure usage-based filter

Select Commercial category and subcategory for high usage

Category: Commercial, Subcategory: Commercial#2_Retail#1, Commercial#2_Office#2

Using category structure from user story

7

Verify contact preview updates automatically

Preview table shows contacts matching category criteria with real-time count

Expected: 16 contacts based on user story sample

Real-time preview per AC10

8

Change to "Location Based" filter type

Filter options switch to location-based criteria

Filter Type: Location Based

Test location filtering

9

Configure location filter

Select Area and Subarea for downtown targeting

Area: Downtown, Subarea: Specific downtown sub-areas

Using location structure from user story

10

Verify preview updates with location filter

Contact preview refreshes showing downtown contacts with updated count

Expected: Different contact set matching location

Multiple filter type validation

11

Proceed to Step 3 Summary

Summary displays dynamic configuration with filter details

N/A

Dynamic type confirmation

12

Verify Summary shows "Dynamic" type and filter details

Summary shows "Source Type: DYNAMIC", filter configuration, and estimated contact count

Expected: "Source Type: DYNAMIC", filter details, contact count

Dynamic indicator and configuration

13

Click "Create List" to create dynamic list

List created successfully with filter-based configuration

N/A

Dynamic list creation

14

Verify list displays "Dynamic" indicator

List shows "Dynamic" type indicator in Lists page

Expected: "Dynamic" badge/indicator visible

Type identification

15

Test filter modification after creation

Edit the list to change filter criteria

Edit: Change area filter to include more zones

Dynamic list flexibility

16

Verify contact count updates with filter change

List contact count adjusts based on new filter criteria

Expected: Different contact count reflecting filter change

Filter modification validation

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Dynamic list created with filter-based criteria and shows proper type indicator
  • Secondary_Verifications: Filter preview updates automatically, contact count accurate, filter modification works
  • Negative_Verification: Cannot create dynamic list without filter criteria

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Daily
  • Maintenance_Effort: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Filter service functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Auto-update validation tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Static list creation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Dynamic list auto-update tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates dynamic list creation using filter structure from user story sample filters
  • Edge_Cases: Complex filter combinations, performance with large datasets, filter conflicts
  • Risk_Areas: Filter performance, auto-update reliability, data consistency
  • Security_Considerations: Filter injection prevention, data access controls

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Complex filter combinations (Category + Location simultaneously)
  • Type: Advanced filtering capability
  • Rationale: User story shows separate filter types but doesn't specify if they can be combined
  • Priority: P2-High
  • Scenario_2: Dynamic list performance with very broad filter criteria
  • Type: Performance edge case
  • Rationale: Important for system stability when filters match thousands of contacts
  • Priority: P2-High



 Test Case 7 - List Tagging with multiple comma-separated keywords

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_007

Title: Verify tagging lists with multiple comma-separated keywords for organization and search

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, UI, Database, Search, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Customer-Segment-Analysis, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Database, Tagging

Business Context

  • Customer_Segment: All utility companies
  • 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: 20%
  • Integration_Points: Search Service, Database
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Search-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Search service, database with indexing capabilities
  • Performance_Baseline: Tag search < 1 second
  • Data_Requirements: Lists with various tag combinations

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: User logged in with list creation permissions
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation and tagging permissions
  • Test_Data: Empty database for clean tag testing
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication successful

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to list creation Step 1 "List Details"

Details page displays with Tags field visible

N/A

Access tagging functionality

2

Verify Tags field shows format guidance

Help text or placeholder shows proper comma-separated format

Expected: "Comma-separated tags (e.g. summer, campaign, vip)" from user story

Format guidance per business rules

3

Enter multiple comma-separated tags

Tags field accepts comma-separated input without errors

Tags: "billing, monthly, high-usage, q3-2025, commercial"

Using sample tag format from user story

4

Verify tag format validation

System accepts lowercase, hyphenated format as per business rules

Expected: Tags accepted in lowercase-hyphenated format

Business rule: "lowercase, hyphenated format"

5

Complete list creation with multiple tags

List created successfully with all tags saved

Name: "Multi-Tag Test List", Description: "Testing multiple tag functionality"

Tag persistence validation

6

Verify tags display in Lists page

Tags column shows all entered tags in Tags column

Expected: "billing, monthly, high-usage, q3-2025, commercial"

Tag display verification

7

Create second list with overlapping tags

Second list created with some shared and some unique tags

Tags: "billing, quarterly, commercial, emergency"

Test tag reuse and searching

8

Test tag-based search functionality

Use search field to find lists by tag

Search: "billing"

Should find both lists with "billing" tag

9

Verify search finds both lists with shared tag

Both lists appear in search results

Expected: Both "Multi-Tag Test List" and second list

Tag search accuracy

10

Test partial tag search

Search using partial tag text

Search: "q3"

Should match "q3-2025" tag

11

Verify partial tag matching works

List with "q3-2025" tag found via "q3" search

Expected: "Multi-Tag Test List" found

Partial tag search capability

12

Test tag search with no results

Search for non-existent tag

Search: "nonexistent-tag"

Should return no results

13

Verify appropriate no-results message

Search shows "No lists found" or similar message

Expected: Clear no-results indication

User feedback for failed searches

14

Test tag format edge cases

Enter tags with various characters and formats

Tags: "high-usage, zone#1, 24/7, emergency-response"

Special character handling

15

Verify system handles special characters in tags

Tags with special characters accepted and searchable

Expected: All tags saved and searchable

Robust tag handling

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Multiple comma-separated tags can be added, saved, and searched successfully
  • Secondary_Verifications: Tag format guidance shown, partial tag search works, special characters handled
  • Negative_Verification: Invalid tag formats show appropriate guidance

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: List creation functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced search tests
  • Parallel_Tests: List management tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Tag-based filtering tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates tagging system using exact format requirements from user story business rules
  • Edge_Cases: Maximum tag length, maximum number of tags per list, Unicode characters in tags
  • Risk_Areas: Search performance with many tagged lists, tag indexing reliability
  • Security_Considerations: Tag injection prevention, search query validation

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Tag format validation error handling (uppercase, spaces, invalid characters)
  • Type: Input validation and user guidance
  • Rationale: Business rule specifies format but user story doesn't detail error handling
  • Priority: P3-Medium
  • Scenario_2: Tag autocomplete or suggestion functionality
  • Type: User experience enhancement
  • Rationale: Improves tagging consistency and user efficiency
  • Priority: P4-Low





 Test Case 8  - Dynamic List Auto-Updates

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_008

Title: Verify dynamic lists automatically update when contact attributes change to match filter criteria

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • Test Type: Integration
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Database, API, Integration, MOD-ContactLists, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Integration-Testing, Report-Performance-Metrics, Report-Regression-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Must-Have, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Database, Auto-Update, Real-Time

Business Context

  • Customer_Segment: All utility companies
  • Revenue_Impact: High
  • 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: Medium
  • Data_Sensitivity: High
  • Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 35%
  • Integration_Points: Contact Database, Auto-Update Service, Filter Engine
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Update-Engine, Filter-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
  • Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Testing, Performance-Metrics, Regression-Coverage
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: Yes
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Contact database, auto-update service, filter engine, test contact data
  • Performance_Baseline: Auto-update processing within system-defined interval
  • Data_Requirements: Test contacts with modifiable usage and location attributes

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Dynamic list exists with location-based filter (Area = Downtown), test contact outside current filter criteria
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Contact data modification permissions, list viewing permissions
  • Test_Data: Dynamic list "Downtown Residential Customers", test contact in non-downtown area
  • Prior_Test_Cases: UX03US03_TC_006 (dynamic list creation) must pass

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Verify existing dynamic list baseline

List displays current contact count and filter criteria

List: "Downtown Residential Customers", Filter: Area = Downtown, Current count: recorded baseline

Establish baseline for comparison

2

Identify test contact outside filter criteria

Locate contact not currently in the dynamic list

Test Contact: "Sarah Johnson", Current Area: "North" (outside Downtown filter)

Using sample contact from user story

3

Note current list membership status

Verify Sarah Johnson is NOT in "Downtown Residential Customers" list

Expected: Sarah Johnson not visible in current list

Confirm starting state

4

Update test contact to match filter criteria

Modify contact's area attribute to match list filter

Update: Sarah Johnson Area from "North" to "Downtown"

Trigger auto-update condition

5

Wait for system processing cycle

Allow time for auto-update mechanism to process change

Wait time: As per system auto-update cycle

Per business rule: "automatically update when contact data changes"

6

Refresh dynamic list view

Reload the list to check for auto-update

N/A

Verify auto-update reflected in UI

7

Verify contact count increased

List contact count shows increase by 1

Expected: Baseline count + 1

Auto-addition validation

8

Verify Sarah Johnson now appears in list

Sarah Johnson visible in "Downtown Residential Customers" list

Expected: Sarah Johnson in results with Downtown area

Auto-inclusion confirmation

9

Update another contact to fall outside filter

Modify different contact to not match filter criteria

Test Contact 2: Change area from "Downtown" to "South"

Test auto-removal

10

Wait for system processing cycle

Allow auto-update cycle to process removal

Wait time: As per system cycle

Auto-removal processing

11

Verify contact automatically removed

Contact no longer appears in list and count decreases

Expected: Contact 2 removed, count decreased by 1

Auto-removal validation

12

Test multiple simultaneous changes

Update multiple contacts with various area changes

3 contacts: 2 into Downtown, 1 out of Downtown

Batch update testing

13

Verify all changes processed correctly

List reflects net change in contact count and membership

Expected: Net increase of 1 contact (2 added, 1 removed)

Batch processing validation

14

Compare with static list behavior

Verify static list with same contacts does NOT auto-update

Static list: No changes despite contact data modifications

Confirm static vs dynamic behavior difference

15

Verify auto-update consistency

Repeat contact modification to ensure consistent auto-update behavior

Additional test: Move contact back to original area

Reliability validation

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Dynamic lists automatically update when contact data changes to match/unmatch filter criteria
  • Secondary_Verifications: Contact count accuracy maintained, both additions and removals processed, batch changes handled correctly
  • Negative_Verification: Static lists do not auto-update with same data changes

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Daily
  • Maintenance_Effort: High
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Dynamic list creation, contact data modification capabilities
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced auto-update scenarios, performance tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Static list behavior tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Auto-update reliability and performance tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Critical test validating core dynamic list functionality using sample contact Sarah Johnson from user story
  • Edge_Cases: Network delays during updates, concurrent modifications, very large lists
  • Risk_Areas: Update timing reliability, data consistency, system performance impact
  • Security_Considerations: Data modification permissions, update audit trails

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Auto-update timing and frequency specifications
  • Type: Performance and timing requirements
  • Rationale: User story mentions auto-update but doesn't specify timing or frequency
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Scenario_2: Auto-update conflict resolution when multiple users modify same contact
  • Type: Concurrency and data integrity
  • Rationale: Important for multi-user environments typical in utility operations
  • Priority: P2-High



Test Case 9 - Verify list creation date, creator information, and modification tracking 

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_009

Title: Verify list creation date, creator information, and modification tracking with "Modified by" and "Updated by" fields

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Database, Audit, Compliance, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Customer-Segment-Analysis, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Database, Audit-Trail

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 25%
  • Integration_Points: User Management, Audit System, Database
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Audit-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: User management system, audit logging service, database with timestamp capabilities
  • Performance_Baseline: Audit information display < 1 second
  • Data_Requirements: Multiple user accounts for cross-user modification testing

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Multiple user accounts available for testing (Jane Smith, John Doe from sample data)
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation and modification permissions for test users
  • Test_Data: User accounts: "Jane Smith" (CSO Manager), "John Doe" (Billing Manager)
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication successful for multiple users

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Log in as first test user

User authenticated successfully

User: "Jane Smith" (CSO Manager)

Using sample user from user story

2

Create new contact list

List creation completed

Name: "Audit Trail Test List", Description: "Testing creation and modification tracking", Tags: "audit, test"

Track creation metadata

3

Verify "Created" date appears in Lists view

Creation date displays as today's date in Created column

Expected: 2025-08-18 (current date)

Creation date validation

4

Verify "Created by" information displays

Creator name shows in list metadata or details

Expected: "Jane Smith" visible

Creator attribution per user story sample data

5

Check if "Modified by" and "Updated by" fields exist

Initial state shows creator in modification fields

Expected: "Jane Smith" in both Modified by and Updated by initially

Initial state of tracking fields

6

Edit the existing list while logged in as same user

Modification dialog opens and changes saved

Update: Description changed to "Modified description for audit testing"

Trigger modification tracking

7

Verify "Modified by" field updates

Modifier field shows current user after modification

Expected: "Modified by: Jane Smith"

Same-user modification tracking

8

Verify "Updated by" field updates

Updated by field shows current user and timestamp

Expected: "Updated by: Jane Smith" with current timestamp

Update tracking per user story

9

Log out and log in as different user

Second user authenticated

User: "John Doe" (Billing Manager)

Different user for cross-user testing

10

Navigate to the same list and edit it

List accessible and modification permitted

Update: Add tag "billing-manager-edit"

Cross-user modification

11

Save modifications from second user

Changes saved successfully

N/A

Second user modification processing

12

Verify "Modified by" shows new user

Modifier field updates to reflect current user

Expected: "Modified by: John Doe"

User change tracking

13

Verify "Updated by" shows new user and timestamp

Updated by field reflects second user with current timestamp

Expected: "Updated by: John Doe" with latest timestamp

Update attribution change

14

Check creation information remains unchanged

Original creator and creation date preserved

Expected: "Created by: Jane Smith" and original date unchanged

Creation metadata preservation

15

View modification history if available

Complete audit trail shows all changes and users

Expected: History showing Jane Smith creation, Jane Smith first edit, John Doe second edit

Full audit trail validation

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Creation date, creator, "Modified by", and "Updated by" information accurately recorded and displayed
  • Secondary_Verifications: Cross-user modifications tracked correctly, original creation information preserved
  • Negative_Verification: Modification timestamps cannot be manually altered, unauthorized users cannot modify tracking info

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Partial

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: User authentication, list creation/modification functionality
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced audit reporting tests
  • Parallel_Tests: User permission tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Compliance audit tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates audit trail functionality using sample users Jane Smith and John Doe from user story
  • Edge_Cases: Rapid successive modifications, system clock changes, user account deletions
  • Risk_Areas: Audit data integrity, timestamp accuracy, cross-user permission validation
  • Security_Considerations: Audit trail immutability, user attribution security

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Bulk modification tracking when multiple lists modified simultaneously
  • Type: Audit trail completeness
  • Rationale: Important for compliance and accountability in utility operations
  • Priority: P3-Medium
  • Scenario_2: Audit trail retention and archival policies
  • Type: Compliance and data management
  • Rationale: Regulatory requirements may specify audit data retention periods
  • Priority: P3-Medium



 Test Case  10 - Search Functionality

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_010

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, UI, Database, Search, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Performance-Metrics, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Database, Search

Business Context

  • Customer_Segment: All utility companies
  • 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: 6 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: Low
  • Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 30%
  • Integration_Points: Search Service, Database Indexing
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Search-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Search service, database with search indexing, sample lists from user story
  • Performance_Baseline: Search response < 1 second
  • Data_Requirements: Sample lists: "High Usage Consumers", "North Zone Contacts", "Downtown Residential Customers" with associated tags

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Sample lists created with names and tags from user story data
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List viewing and search permissions
  • Test_Data: "High Usage Consumers" (tags: monthly-billing, high-usage), "North Zone Contacts" (tags: emergency, north-zone), "Downtown Residential Customers" (tags: monthly-billing, outreach, downtown)
  • Prior_Test_Cases: List creation tests with sample data

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Lists page

Lists page displays with search field visible in top section

N/A

Verify search interface availability

2

Verify search field placeholder and functionality

Search field shows placeholder text and accepts input

Expected: Search field with appropriate placeholder

Search UI validation

3

Search by exact list name

Exact match returns single result

Search: "High Usage Consumers"

Using exact sample list name from user story

4

Verify exact match result accuracy

Only "High Usage Consumers" list displayed in results

Expected: Single result matching exact name

Exact match validation

5

Search by partial list name

Partial matches returned

Search: "High"

Should find "High Usage Consumers"

6

Verify partial name matching works

All lists containing "High" in name displayed

Expected: Lists with "High" in name

Partial matching capability

7

Test case-insensitive search

Search works regardless of case

Search: "high usage"

Should match "High Usage Consumers"

8

Verify case-insensitive functionality

Search finds lists despite case differences

Expected: "High Usage Consumers" found with lowercase search

Case handling validation

9

Search by tag keyword

Lists with matching tags found

Search: "emergency"

Should find "North Zone Contacts" with emergency tag

10

Verify tag-based search accuracy

Lists tagged with "emergency" displayed

Expected: "North Zone Contacts" found via tag search

Tag search functionality

11

Search by partial tag

Partial tag matches work

Search: "month"

Should match "monthly-billing" tag

12

Verify partial tag matching

Lists with tags containing "month" found

Expected: Lists with "monthly-billing" tag found

Partial tag search

13

Search with no results

No matches found for non-existent term

Search: "nonexistent-list-name"

Test no-results scenario

14

Verify no-results message

Appropriate message displayed for empty results

Expected: "No lists found" or similar message

User feedback for failed searches

15

Clear search field and verify reset

All lists displayed when search cleared

Search: "" (empty)

Search reset functionality

16

Test search performance with multiple terms

Search handles multiple word queries

Search: "downtown residential"

Multi-word search capability

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Search finds lists by both name and tags with exact and partial matching
  • Secondary_Verifications: Case-insensitive search works, no-results handled gracefully, search reset functions properly
  • Negative_Verification: Invalid searches show appropriate messages, no false positive results

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: List creation with tags, search service availability
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced search filter tests
  • Parallel_Tests: List filtering tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Search performance tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates search functionality using exact sample lists and tags from user story
  • Edge_Cases: Very long search terms, special characters in search, search with many results
  • Risk_Areas: Search performance with large datasets, search index maintenance
  • Security_Considerations: Search query injection prevention, result access controls

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Search result ranking and relevance scoring
  • Type: Search quality and user experience
  • Rationale: Important for usability when multiple results returned
  • Priority: P3-Medium
  • Scenario_2: Search history and recent searches functionality
  • Type: User experience enhancement
  • Rationale: Could improve efficiency for frequent searches
  • Priority: P4-Low




  Test Case 11 - Contact Type Filtering

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_011

Title: Verify filtering of list view by contact type (Consumers, Technicians, Business Users) with accurate results

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • Test Type: UI
  • 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, Billing Services, Meter Services, UI, Filtering, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-UI, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Customer-Segment-Analysis, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-End-to-End, Filtering

Business Context

  • Customer_Segment: All utility companies
  • Revenue_Impact: Medium
  • 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: 20%
  • Integration_Points: UI Components, Database Filtering
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Filter-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Filter service, database with contact type data
  • Performance_Baseline: Filter response < 2 seconds
  • Data_Requirements: Lists for all three contact types from user story

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Lists exist for all three contact types (Consumers, Technicians, Business Users)
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List viewing permissions
  • Test_Data: Consumer lists, Technician lists, Business User lists from sample data
  • Prior_Test_Cases: List creation for all contact types

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Lists page

Page displays with contact type filter buttons: "Consumers", "Technicians", "Business Users"

N/A

Verify all three filter buttons visible per AC9

2

Verify default view shows all contact types

Page displays existing lists from all contact types without filtering

Expected: Mixed list types visible (consumers, technicians, business users)

Default state validation

3

Click "Consumers" filter button

Button highlights/activates, view filters to show only consumer-related lists

N/A

Consumer filtering activation

4

Verify only consumer lists display

Only lists with "Consumer" contact type visible, other types hidden

Expected: Consumer lists only (like "High Usage Consumers", "Downtown Residential Customers")

Consumer filter accuracy

5

Verify list count updates for consumer filter

List count indicator shows reduced number reflecting filtered results

Expected: Count shows only consumer lists

Count accuracy validation

6

Click "Technicians" filter button

Button highlights, view switches to show only technician-related lists

N/A

Technician filtering activation

7

Verify only technician lists display

Only lists with "Technician" contact type visible

Expected: Technician lists only (field engineers, maintenance crews)

Technician filter accuracy

8

Verify list count updates for technician filter

Count reflects only technician lists

Expected: Different count than consumer filter

Technician count validation

9

Click "Business Users" filter button

Button highlights, view switches to show only business user lists

N/A

Business user filtering activation

10

Verify only business user lists display

Only lists with "Business Users" contact type visible

Expected: Business user lists only (commercial accounts, vendors)

Business user filter accuracy

11

Test filter combination with search

Apply contact type filter then use search within filtered results

Filter: Consumers, Search: "High"

Combined functionality

12

Verify search works within filtered view

Search results limited to filtered contact type

Expected: Only consumer lists matching "High"

Filter-search integration

13

Clear filter to show all lists again

All list types displayed when filter removed

Click: Show all or clear filter

Filter removal

14

Verify filter state persistence during session

Filter selection remembered during page navigation

Navigate away and return with filter active

State persistence

15

Test rapid filter switching

Quickly switch between different contact type filters

Rapid clicks: Consumers → Technicians → Business Users

UI responsiveness

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Contact type filtering works accurately for all three types (Consumers, Technicians, Business Users)
  • Secondary_Verifications: Filter combines with search functionality, list counts update correctly, filter state persists
  • Negative_Verification: No incorrect list types shown in filtered views, no performance issues with filtering

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Contact type list creation
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced filtering scenarios
  • Parallel_Tests: Search functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Multi-filter combination tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates contact type filtering supporting different utility user roles per user story
  • Edge_Cases: Large numbers of lists per type, mixed contact type scenarios
  • Risk_Areas: Filter performance with many lists, UI responsiveness
  • Security_Considerations: Access control per contact type, data segregation

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Filter performance with 100+ lists per contact type
  • Type: Performance validation
  • Rationale: Important for large utility operations with many lists
  • Priority: P3-Medium
  • Scenario_2: Filter accessibility and keyboard navigation
  • Type: Accessibility compliance
  • Rationale: Important for users with disabilities
  • Priority: P3-Medium



 Test Case 12 - Contact Preview Functionality

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_012

Title: Verify contact preview functionality when creating or editing lists with real-time updates

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P2-High
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, UI, Database, Preview, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Performance-Metrics, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Database, Preview

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 25%
  • Integration_Points: Contact Database, Filter Engine, Preview Service
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Preview-Service, Filter-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Product
  • Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, User-Acceptance, Performance-Metrics
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Contact database with sample data, filter engine, preview service
  • Performance_Baseline: Preview load < 3 seconds
  • Data_Requirements: Sample contacts including Sarah Johnson (North zone), James Williams (Downtown)

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Contact database populated with sample contacts from user story
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation permissions, contact viewing permissions
  • Test_Data: Sarah Johnson (North zone, Residential, Single Family), James Williams (Downtown, Residential, Apartment)
  • Prior_Test_Cases: List creation wizard accessible

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Start creating new dynamic list and reach Step 2

Filters & Preview page displays

List name: "Preview Test List"

Access preview functionality

2

Select "Dynamic" source type

Dynamic options become available with preview section

Source Type: Dynamic

Enable filter-based preview

3

Verify initial preview state

Preview section shows placeholder or instruction to configure filters

Expected: "Please select a source type and filters to view the consumer list" message

Initial state per user story

4

Configure first filter criterion

Filter added and preview automatically updates

Filter Type: Location Based, Area: North

Using sample data geography

5

Verify contact preview table displays

Preview table shows contacts matching filter with columns: Name, Contact Info, Account Number, Status

Expected: Sarah Johnson appears in preview (North zone)

Preview accuracy with sample data

6

Verify preview table column headers

Table headers match expected contact information fields

Expected: Name, Contact Info, Account Number, Status columns visible

Column structure validation

7

Check contact count display

Preview shows accurate count of matching contacts

Expected: Contact count reflects number of visible contacts

Count accuracy

8

Add second filter criterion to narrow results

Additional filter applied and preview updates automatically

Additional Filter: Premise = Single Family

Real-time preview update

9

Verify preview automatically refines

Contact list becomes more specific, potentially showing fewer contacts

Expected: Only North zone Single Family contacts (like Sarah Johnson)

Auto-update validation

10

Modify existing filter values

Change filter criteria and observe preview changes

Change: Area from North to Downtown

Filter modification effect

11

Verify preview updates with filter changes

Preview refreshes to show Downtown contacts including James Williams

Expected: James Williams appears (Downtown, Apartment)

Dynamic preview response

12

Test preview with no matching contacts

Configure filter combination that returns no results

Filter: Impossible combination (e.g., North + Downtown simultaneously)

Empty preview handling

13

Verify empty preview message

Preview shows appropriate message for no matches

Expected: "No contacts match your criteria" message

Empty state per user story

14

Test preview performance with broad filter

Configure filter that matches many contacts

Filter: Area = Residential (broad filter)

Performance validation

15

Verify preview handles large result sets

Preview loads efficiently and shows pagination or limited results

Expected: Preview completes within 3 seconds, handles large datasets

Performance and usability

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Contact preview updates automatically when filters are added, modified, or removed
  • Secondary_Verifications: Preview table shows accurate contact data, empty states handled gracefully, performance acceptable
  • Negative_Verification: Preview does not show incorrect contacts, no performance issues with large datasets

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Daily
  • Maintenance_Effort: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Partial

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Filter functionality, contact database
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced preview features
  • Parallel_Tests: Filter validation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: List creation completion tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates preview functionality using exact sample contacts Sarah Johnson and James Williams from user story
  • Edge_Cases: Very large contact sets, network delays, rapid filter changes
  • Risk_Areas: Preview performance, real-time update reliability, data accuracy
  • Security_Considerations: Contact data access controls, preview data security

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Preview pagination or limiting for very large result sets
  • Type: Performance and user experience
  • Rationale: Important for utility databases with thousands of contacts
  • Priority: P2-High
  • Scenario_2: Preview export or quick list creation from preview
  • Type: User workflow enhancement
  • Rationale: Could improve efficiency in list creation process
  • Priority: P3-Medium



Test Cases 13 - Contact Count Estimation

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_013

Title: Verify calculation and display of estimated contact count for dynamic lists with filter changes

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P2-High
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Database, API, Calculation, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Performance-Metrics, Report-Integration-Testing, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Database, Count-Calculation

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 25%
  • Integration_Points: Count Service, Filter Engine, Database
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Count-Service, Filter-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Count calculation service, filter engine, contact database with known quantities
  • Performance_Baseline: Count calculation < 2 seconds
  • Data_Requirements: Contact database with predictable quantities for count validation

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Contact database with known quantities per filter criteria
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Known contact counts for specific filter combinations
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Filter functionality working

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Create new dynamic list and reach Step 2 Filters

Access count calculation functionality

List setup for count testing

Count calculation testing setup

2

Add single filter criterion

Count displays automatically and accurately

Filter: Area = Downtown

Single filter count validation

3

Verify count accuracy matches preview

Estimated count matches actual number of contacts in preview

Expected: Count = preview count (should match exactly)

Count-preview consistency

4

Record baseline count for comparison

Note initial count with single filter

Baseline: Record actual count shown

Baseline establishment

5

Add second filter to narrow criteria

Count updates and decreases appropriately

Additional Filter: Premise = Apartment

Multiple filter count

6

Verify count decreases logically

New count ≤ previous count (more restrictive filter)

Expected: Count ≤ baseline count

Logical count change validation

7

Modify filter to broader criteria

Adjust filter to be less restrictive

Change: Area = Residential (broader than Downtown)

Broader filter testing

8

Verify count increases appropriately

Count increases due to broader criteria

Expected: Count > previous count

Broader filter count increase

9

Test real-time count updates

Modify filters rapidly and observe count changes

Multiple rapid filter changes

Real-time calculation performance

10

Verify count updates without page refresh

Count recalculates automatically with each filter change

Expected: Immediate count updates

Real-time calculation validation

11

Remove all filters (if applicable)

Count shows total available contacts or clear state

No filters applied

Maximum count scenario

12

Add extremely restrictive filter

Count approaches zero with very specific criteria

Filter: Very specific combination yielding few results

Minimum count testing

13

Verify count performance with complex filters

Complex filter combinations calculate quickly

Multiple filter types combined

Performance validation

14

Test count display format

Count formatted clearly and appropriately

Expected: "16 contacts" or "1,234 contacts" format

Count formatting validation

15

Proceed to Step 3 Summary and verify count consistency

Summary shows same estimated count as Step 2

Expected: Consistent count across wizard steps

Cross-step count consistency

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Contact count calculated accurately and updates in real-time with filter changes
  • Secondary_Verifications: Count logic follows filter restrictions appropriately, formatting clear and consistent
  • Negative_Verification: Count never exceeds total available contacts, no calculation errors with complex filters

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Filter functionality, count service
  • Blocked_Tests: Performance optimization tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Preview functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: List creation completion tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates count calculation accuracy using filter combinations from user story
  • Edge_Cases: Very large contact databases, complex filter combinations, performance edge cases
  • Risk_Areas: Count calculation accuracy, real-time performance, database query efficiency
  • Security_Considerations: Count calculation security, data access validation

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Count calculation caching and optimization for repeated queries
  • Type: Performance optimization
  • Rationale: Important for system efficiency with frequent filter changes
  • Priority: P3-Medium
  • Scenario_2: Count accuracy validation with concurrent data changes
  • Type: Data consistency
  • Rationale: Important when contact data changes while creating lists
  • Priority: P2-High



Test Case 14 - Zone, Area, and Premise Filtering

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_014

Title: Verify filtering contacts by Zone, Area, and Premise attributes with hierarchical relationships

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • Test Type: Functional
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, Meter Services, Database, Geographic-Filtering, MOD-ContactLists, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Must-Have, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Database, Geo-Filtering

Business Context

  • Customer_Segment: All utility companies
  • Revenue_Impact: High
  • 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: Medium
  • Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 30%
  • Integration_Points: Geographic Database, Filter Engine, Location Service
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Geographic-Service, Filter-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Geographic database with Zone/Area/Premise data, sample contacts with location attributes
  • Performance_Baseline: Geographic filtering < 3 seconds
  • Data_Requirements: Sample contacts: Sarah Johnson (North zone, Residential, Single Family), James Williams (Downtown, Residential, Apartment)

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Contact database populated with Zone, Area, and Premise attributes per user story sample data
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Contacts across multiple zones, areas, and premise types from user story sample filters
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Dynamic list creation accessible

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Start creating new dynamic list and reach filter configuration

Access location-based filtering

Setup for geographic filtering test

Geographic filter testing preparation

2

Select "Location Based" filter type

Location filter options appear with Zone, Area, Premise dropdowns

Filter Type: Location Based

Access geographic filtering per sample filters

3

Verify Zone dropdown options

Zone dropdown populated with options from sample filters

Expected: North, South, East, West, Downtown, Central options

Zone options per user story

4

Select ZoneVerification Points




  • Primary_Verification: Dependency validation prevents accidental deletion of workflow-dependent lists
  • Secondary_Verifications: Warning message matches exact text from business rules, workflow impact properly communicated
  • Negative_Verification: Cannot delete workflow-dependent lists without explicit acknowledgment of consequences

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Workflow creation, list-workflow integration
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced workflow dependency tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Other dependency validation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Workflow recovery tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Critical safety feature preventing disruption of active utility communication workflows
  • Edge_Cases: Multiple workflows using same list, circular dependencies, inactive workflows
  • Risk_Areas: Dependency tracking accuracy, workflow impact assessment, user decision support
  • Security_Considerations: Dependency validation bypass prevention, audit trail for forced deletions

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Dependency resolution suggestions when force deleting lists
  • Type: User guidance and workflow continuity
  • Rationale: System could suggest alternative lists or workflow modifications
  • Priority: P3-Medium
  • Scenario_2: Batch deletion of multiple lists with mixed dependency status
  • Type: Bulk operations with dependencies
  • Rationale: Efficiency for large-scale list management
  • Priority: P3-Medium




 Test Case 15  - Empty List Prevention with Business Rule Validation

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_015

Title: Verify prevention of creating empty lists and validation of minimum contact requirements per business rules

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, UI, Database, Validation, MOD-ContactLists, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Security-Validation, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Must-Have, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Database, Validation-Error

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 25%
  • Integration_Points: Validation Service, Database Constraints
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Validation-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
  • Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Regression-Coverage, Security-Validation, User-Acceptance
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Validation service, contact database, filter engine
  • Performance_Baseline: Validation response < 1 second
  • Data_Requirements: Contact database with varying data for filter testing

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Contact database populated with test data for filter validation
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Contacts with various attributes for testing filter edge cases
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Filter functionality working

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Create new dynamic list with impossible filter criteria

Proceed through Steps 1-2 of wizard

Name: "Empty Filter Test", Filter: Usage > 50000 kWh (impossible value)

Create filter that matches no contacts

2

Verify zero contact count in preview

Contact preview shows "0 contacts" or empty results

Expected: "0 contacts match your criteria" message

Zero count indication per user story

3

Attempt to proceed to Step 3 Summary

System prevents progression with validation error

N/A

Validation should block progression

4

Verify error message for empty dynamic list

Error displays explaining minimum requirement

Expected: "No contacts match your criteria. Please adjust filters." or "Lists must contain at least 1 contact"

Error message per business rules

5

Modify filter to include some contacts

Adjust filter to match existing contacts

Filter: Usage > 500 kWh (reasonable value)

Create valid filter criteria

6

Verify progression allowed with valid filter

Can proceed to Step 3 when contacts match

Expected: Summary step accessible with contact count > 0

Validation passes with contacts

7

Test static list with no contact selections

Create static list without selecting any contacts

No contacts selected via checkboxes

Static empty list validation

8

Verify static list validation error

Error prevents creation with no selections

Expected: "Please select at least 1 contact" or similar message

Static validation per business rules

9

Select exactly 1 contact for static list

Select single contact to test minimum requirement

Selected: 1 contact (Sarah Johnson from sample data)

Test minimum = 1 contact rule

10

Verify 1 contact meets minimum requirement

List creation proceeds with single contact

Expected: List creation allowed

Validate minimum 1 contact rule

11

Test if 5 contact minimum also enforced

Create list with 3 contacts to test higher minimum

Selected: 3 contacts

Test conflicting business rule (minimum = 5)

12

Check system behavior with 3 contacts

Determine if system enforces 1 or 5 contact minimum

Expected: Behavior depends on actual business rule implementation

Resolve business rule conflict

13

Test with exactly 5 contacts

Create list with 5 contacts

Selected: 5 contacts including Sarah Johnson

Test higher minimum requirement

14

Verify 5 contact threshold behavior

System accepts or requires more based on actual rule

Expected: List creation successful with 5 contacts

Validate business rule enforcement

15

Test dynamic list with very restrictive filter

Create filter that results in minimal contacts

Filter: Specific combination resulting in 2-3 contacts

Edge case for minimum validation

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Empty lists (0 contacts) cannot be created for both static and dynamic types
  • Secondary_Verifications: Appropriate error messages shown, minimum contact requirement enforced consistently
  • Negative_Verification: Invalid empty lists rejected with clear user guidance

Test Results (Template)

  • Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
  • Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior - particularly which minimum rule (1 or 5) is actually enforced]
  • Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
  • Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
  • Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
  • Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
  • Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: List creation workflow, validation service
  • Blocked_Tests: List usage in workflows
  • Parallel_Tests: Other validation error tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Business rule compliance tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Critical test to resolve conflicting business rules (minimum 1 vs 5 contacts) stated in user story
  • Edge_Cases: Dynamic lists with filters that occasionally return 0 results, performance with large contact sets
  • Risk_Areas: Business rule consistency, validation performance, user experience during errors
  • Security_Considerations: Validation bypass prevention, data integrity enforcement

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Business rule clarification - actual minimum contact requirement (1 or 5)
  • Type: Business rule validation and consistency
  • Rationale: User story contains conflicting statements about minimum list size
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Scenario_2: Dynamic list behavior when filter results change to 0 after creation
  • Type: Runtime validation and list maintenance
  • Rationale: Important for ongoing list validity
  • Priority: P2-High



Test Case 16 - Export Functionality


Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_016

Title: Verify users can export list data for use in external systems with multiple format support

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • 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, Integration, Export, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Integration-Testing, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-External-Dependency, Export

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 20%
  • Integration_Points: Export Service, File Generation, External Systems
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Export-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Export service, file generation service, browser download capabilities
  • Performance_Baseline: Export generation < 30 seconds for 100 contacts
  • Data_Requirements: Sample lists with varying sizes and contact types

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Contact lists exist with sample data for export testing
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List export permissions
  • Test_Data: "High Usage Consumers" (58 contacts), "North Zone Contacts" (28 contacts) from sample data
  • Prior_Test_Cases: List creation successful

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Lists page

Lists displayed with action buttons including download icons

N/A

Verify export functionality available per sample data table

2

Locate download icon in Actions column

Download icon visible for each list in Actions column

Target List: "High Usage Consumers"

Export access per user story table structure

3

Click download icon for first list

Export dialog or direct download initiates

List: "High Usage Consumers" (58 contacts)

Export initiation using sample data

4

Verify export format options if available

CSV format available as primary export option

Format: CSV

File format selection

5

Execute export process

File download begins or completes

N/A

Download process execution

6

Verify file downloads successfully

CSV file saved to browser downloads folder

Expected: "High_Usage_Consumers.csv" or similar filename

File download validation

7

Open downloaded CSV file

File opens in spreadsheet application (Excel, Google Sheets)

N/A

File integrity verification

8

Verify CSV contains correct contact data

All contact information present and accurately formatted

Expected: Contact names, emails, phone numbers, zones, areas

Data completeness per sample contacts

9

Check CSV headers match system fields

Column headers correspond to contact database fields

Expected: Name, Contact Info, Zone, Area, Premise headers

Header validation

10

Verify contact count in CSV matches system

Row count in CSV equals contacts count shown in Lists page (58)

Expected: 58 data rows + 1 header row

Count accuracy validation

11

Test export of different sized list

Export smaller list to verify scalability

List: "North Zone Contacts" (28 contacts)

Different size export testing

12

Verify export performance with different sizes

Both small and large lists export within reasonable time

Expected: <10 seconds for small lists, <30 seconds for larger

Performance validation

13

Test export of different contact types

Export lists with different contact types (Consumers, Technicians, Business Users)

Various contact type lists

Type-specific export validation

14

Verify contact type-specific data included

Exported data includes fields relevant to each contact type

Expected: Type-appropriate fields in export

Type-specific data validation

15

Test export permissions and access control

Verify only authorized users can export lists

User: Test with different permission levels

Permission validation

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Lists can be exported successfully with complete and accurate data
  • Secondary_Verifications: Export performance acceptable, file formats correct, permissions enforced
  • Negative_Verification: Unauthorized users cannot export, corrupted exports prevented

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Partial

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: List data integrity, export service availability
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced export scenarios
  • Parallel_Tests: Import functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Export performance optimization tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates export functionality using exact contact counts from user story sample data
  • Edge_Cases: Very large lists, special characters in data, network interruptions during export
  • Risk_Areas: Export performance, data security during export, file corruption
  • Security_Considerations: Data encryption during export, access logging, sensitive data handling

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Export scheduling and automated exports
  • Type: Advanced export functionality
  • Rationale: Useful for regular utility reporting and data synchronization
  • Priority: P3-Medium
  • Scenario_2: Export format customization and field selection
  • Type: User customization
  • Rationale: Different external systems may require different data formats
  • Priority: P3-Medium



Test Case 17 - List Editing

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_017

Title: Verify users can edit existing lists including filter criteria for dynamic lists with complete modification tracking

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • 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, UI, Database, Modification, MOD-ContactLists, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Module-Coverage, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Must-Have, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Database, List-Modification

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 35%
  • Integration_Points: Edit Service, Filter Engine, Audit System
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Edit-Service, Filter-Service, Audit-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Edit service, filter engine, audit system, existing test lists
  • Performance_Baseline: Edit save < 3 seconds
  • Data_Requirements: Existing dynamic list with filters, static list for comparison

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Existing lists available for editing (both static and dynamic types)
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List editing permissions
  • Test_Data: "High Usage Consumers" dynamic list with usage filter, "North Zone Contacts" static list
  • Prior_Test_Cases: List creation tests successful

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Lists page

Lists displayed with edit icons in Actions column

N/A

Access list editing functionality

2

Click edit icon for dynamic list

Edit dialog or wizard opens for selected list

List: "High Usage Consumers" (dynamic)

Edit mode activation for dynamic list

3

Verify current list details are populated

Edit form shows existing name, description, tags, and filter criteria

Expected: Current values: "High Usage Consumers", description, "monthly-billing, high-usage" tags

Data preservation in edit mode

4

Modify list name

Name field accepts changes

New name: "Very High Usage Customers"

Name modification testing

5

Update description field

Description accepts modifications

New description: "Customers with extremely high electricity usage for priority billing"

Description editing

6

Add additional tags

Tags field accepts new tags while preserving existing

Additional tags: "priority, billing-alert"

Tag modification and addition

7

Access filter editing capability

Filter configuration becomes available for modification

N/A

Filter editing access for dynamic lists

8

Verify current filter criteria displayed

Existing filter settings shown accurately

Current: Usage > 1000 kWh filter

Filter preservation verification

9

Modify existing filter values

Filter criteria can be changed

Modified: Usage > 1500 kWh (higher threshold)

Filter value modification

10

Add additional filter criterion

Second filter added to existing criteria

New filter: Zone = North

Multiple filter editing capability

11

Verify preview updates with filter changes

Contact preview reflects new combined filter criteria

Expected: Fewer contacts due to stricter filtering (usage >1500 kWh AND North zone)

Real-time preview update with edits

12

Save list modifications

Changes committed successfully

N/A

Modification persistence

13

Verify list updates in main Lists view

Modified list reflects all changes in Lists page

Expected: New name "Very High Usage Customers", updated contact count, current date in modified fields

Change reflection validation

14

Check modification audit trail

"Modified by" and "Updated by" fields show current user and timestamp

Expected: Current user name and today's date

Audit trail per AC15 and business rules

15

Test editing static list

Edit static list to verify different editing capabilities

List: "North Zone Contacts" (static)

Static list editing comparison

16

Verify static list editing options

Static list allows name, description, tags, and manual contact selection changes

Add: New contacts to static selection, Remove: Some existing contacts

Static list modification capabilities

17

Test edit cancellation

Cancel edit operation and verify no changes saved

Cancel edit of a test list

Edit cancellation validation

18

Verify data integrity after cancelled edit

Original list data unchanged after cancellation

Expected: No modifications saved

Cancellation effectiveness

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Existing lists can be edited successfully with all changes saved and reflected
  • Secondary_Verifications: Filter modifications update contact counts, audit trail tracked, both static and dynamic lists editable
  • Negative_Verification: Cancelled edits don't save changes, invalid modifications prevented

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Daily
  • Maintenance_Effort: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: List creation, edit service availability
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced editing scenarios
  • Parallel_Tests: Audit trail tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Edit conflict resolution tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates comprehensive list editing using sample lists from user story with audit trail tracking
  • Edge_Cases: Concurrent editing by multiple users, large filter modifications, edit session timeouts
  • Risk_Areas: Data consistency during edits, edit conflict resolution, audit trail accuracy
  • Security_Considerations: Edit permission validation, modification logging, data integrity

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Edit conflict resolution when multiple users edit same list simultaneously
  • Type: Concurrency and data integrity
  • Rationale: Important for multi-user utility environments
  • Priority: P2-High
  • Scenario_2: Edit history and version comparison functionality
  • Type: Advanced editing features
  • Rationale: Useful for tracking significant list changes over time
  • Priority: P3-Medium



Test Case 18 - List Deletion

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_018

Title: Verify users can delete lists that are no longer needed with appropriate safety confirmations

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, UI, Database, Deletion, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Security-Validation, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Database, List-Deletion

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 25%
  • Integration_Points: Delete Service, Audit System, Workflow Dependencies
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Delete-Service, Audit-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
  • Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Regression-Coverage, User-Acceptance, Security-Validation
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Delete service, audit system, confirmation dialog system
  • Performance_Baseline: Delete operation < 2 seconds
  • Data_Requirements: Test lists that can be safely deleted without impacting other tests

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Test lists available for deletion testing
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List deletion permissions
  • Test_Data: "Test List for Deletion" (unused list), additional test lists for various scenarios
  • Prior_Test_Cases: List creation for test data

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Lists page

Lists displayed with delete icons (trash icons) in Actions column

N/A

Verify delete functionality available per sample data table

2

Locate delete icon for target list

Trash icon visible and clickable in Actions column

Target List: "Test List for Deletion"

Delete access verification

3

Click delete icon for unused list

Confirmation dialog appears with deletion warning

N/A

Delete action initiation

4

Verify confirmation dialog content

Warning message asks for confirmation about permanent deletion

Expected: "Are you sure you want to delete this list?" or similar

Confirmation safety measure

5

Verify confirmation dialog options

Dialog provides "Cancel" and "Delete" or "Confirm" options

Expected: Cancel and Delete buttons available

User choice validation

6

Click "Cancel" button first

Dialog closes and list remains unchanged

N/A

Cancellation functionality testing

7

Verify list still exists after cancellation

List visible and unchanged in Lists page

Expected: "Test List for Deletion" still present

Cancel effectiveness validation

8

Click delete icon again

Confirmation dialog reopens

N/A

Retry deletion process

9

Click "Delete" or "Confirm" button

Deletion process executes

N/A

Deletion confirmation and execution

10

Verify list removed from Lists view

List no longer visible in Lists page

Expected: "Test List for Deletion" disappeared from view

Deletion success verification

11

Refresh page to confirm permanent deletion

List remains deleted after page refresh

N/A

Persistent deletion validation

12

Verify deletion audit trail

Deletion event logged in system audit with user attribution

Expected: Deletion logged with current user and timestamp

Audit trail per AC16

13

Test deletion permissions

Verify only authorized users can delete lists

User: Test with different permission levels

Permission validation

14

Create and delete multiple test lists

Test bulk deletion scenarios

Create: 3 test lists, Delete: All 3 individually

Multiple deletion testing

15

Verify system stability after multiple deletions

System performance and data integrity maintained

Expected: No system issues, remaining lists unaffected

System stability validation

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Lists can be deleted successfully with proper confirmation process
  • Secondary_Verifications: Cancellation works correctly, audit trail maintained, permissions enforced
  • Negative_Verification: Unauthorized deletions prevented, accidental deletions avoided through confirmation

Test Results (Template)

  • Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
  • Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior]
  • Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
  • Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
  • Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
  • Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if issues discovered]
  • Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references]
  • ent and recovery
  • Rationale: Important for data recovery and compliance requirements
  • Priority: P3-Medium
  • Scenario_2: Bulk deletion capabilities for multiple lists
  • Type: Operational efficiency
  • Rationale: Useful for large-scale list management operations
  • Priority: P3-Medium



Test Case 19 - My Lists vs All Lists Views

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_019

Title: Verify tab functionality between "My Lists" and "All Lists" views with proper user context filtering

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • Test Type: UI
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P2-High
  • Execution Phase: Smoke
  • Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Happy-Path, Consumer Services, UI, User-Context, Navigation, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Smoke, Type-UI, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Smoke-Test-Results, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Customer-Segment-Analysis, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-End-to-End, Tab-Navigation

Business Context

  • Customer_Segment: All utility companies
  • 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: 20%
  • Integration_Points: User Context Service, UI Navigation
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, User-Context-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Product
  • Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Smoke-Test-Results, User-Acceptance, Customer-Segment-Analysis
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Low

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: User context service, multi-user test data
  • Performance_Baseline: Tab switching < 1 second
  • Data_Requirements: Lists created by multiple users including current user and others

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Multiple user accounts have created various lists
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List viewing permissions for current user
  • Test_Data: Current user created some lists, other users (Jane Smith, John Doe) created different lists
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Lists created by multiple users

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Lists page

Page loads with "My Lists" and "All Lists" tab options visible

N/A

Verify tab interface per AC17

2

Verify default tab selection

"My Lists" tab is active/highlighted by default

Expected: "My Lists" tab selected initially

Default view validation

3

Verify "My Lists" content

Only current user's created lists displayed

Expected: Lists showing current user in "Created by" field

User-specific filtering per sample data

4

Check list creator attribution in My Lists

All displayed lists show current user as creator

Expected: Current user name in "Created by" column for all visible lists

User attribution consistency

5

Note count of lists in "My Lists" view

Record number of lists visible in current user view

Count: Record actual number of user's lists

Baseline for comparison

6

Click "All Lists" tab

Tab switches to show comprehensive view

N/A

Tab switching functionality

7

Verify "All Lists" tab becomes active

"All Lists" tab highlighted, "My Lists" tab deactivated

Expected: Visual indication of active tab change

Tab state management

8

Verify "All Lists" content includes multiple users

Lists from various users displayed including Jane Smith, John Doe from sample data

Expected: Mixed "Created by" values showing different users

Multi-user visibility

9

Check for increased list count

More lists visible in "All Lists" than "My Lists" view

Expected: Count ≥ "My Lists" count

Logical count relationship

10

Verify diverse creator attribution

Various user names appear in "Created by" column

Expected: Jane Smith, John Doe, current user, others

Multi-user content validation

11

Switch back to "My Lists" tab

View returns to user-specific filtering

N/A

Reverse tab navigation

12

Verify filtering restored

User-specific lists displayed again, same count as before

Expected: Same lists and count as step 5

Filter persistence validation

13

Test search functionality within "My Lists"

Search works within user-specific context

Search: User's list name

Search within tab context

14

Switch to "All Lists" and test search

Search works across all users' lists

Search: Other user's list name (e.g., list by Jane Smith)

Global search capability

15

Verify tab state persistence during session

Active tab remembered during page navigation or refresh

Refresh page with "All Lists" active

State persistence validation

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Tab switching between "My Lists" and "All Lists" works correctly with proper filtering
  • Secondary_Verifications: User attribution displayed correctly, search functions within tab context, tab state persists
  • Negative_Verification: No unauthorized list access, proper user context maintained

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Daily
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Multi-user data setup, user context service
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced user filtering scenarios
  • Parallel_Tests: User permission tests
  • Sequential_Tests: User role-based access tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates tab navigation using exact user attribution from user story sample data
  • Edge_Cases: Large numbers of lists per user, performance with many users, tab switching speed
  • Risk_Areas: User context accuracy, tab performance, session state management
  • Security_Considerations: User context isolation, unauthorized access prevention

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Performance optimization for "All Lists" view with hundreds of lists
  • Type: Performance and scalability
  • Rationale: Important for large utility organizations with many users creating lists
  • Priority: P3-Medium
  • Scenario_2: Advanced filtering within "All Lists" by user, date, or other criteria
  • Type: User experience enhancement
  • Rationale: Could improve list discovery in large multi-user environments
  • Priority: P4-Low




Test Case 20 -Verify Import functionality workflow

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_020

Title: Verify Import functionality workflow for adding contacts through "Import" button

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • 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, Integration, Import, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Integration-Testing, Report-User-Acceptance, Report-Performance-Metrics, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-External-Dependency, Import

Business Context

  • Customer_Segment: All utility companies
  • 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: 8 minutes
  • Reproducibility_Score: High
  • Data_Sensitivity: High
  • Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 20%
  • Integration_Points: File Processing Service, Contact Database
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Import-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: File upload service, contact processing engine, database
  • Performance_Baseline: File processing < 30 seconds for 100 contacts
  • Data_Requirements: Sample CSV file with contact data in expected format

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Sample import file prepared with valid contact data
  • User_Roles_Permissions: Contact import permissions
  • Test_Data: CSV file with sample contacts including Name, Email, Phone, Zone, Area, Premise columns
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Lists page accessible

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to Lists page

Lists page displays with "Import" button visible

N/A

Verify import functionality availability per user story

2

Click "Import" button

Import dialog or workflow opens

N/A

Access import functionality

3

Verify import interface elements

File selection, format guidance, preview options available

Expected: File upload interface with format specifications

Import UI validation

4

Select valid CSV file for import

File selected and basic validation passes

Test File: sample_contacts.csv with 10 contacts

File selection functionality

5

Verify file format validation

System validates file structure and shows preview

Expected: Column headers recognized, data preview displayed

Format validation

6

Review import preview and mapping

Contact data preview shows with field mapping options

Expected: Name, Email, Phone, Zone, Area columns mapped correctly

Data mapping validation

7

Configure import settings

Select contact type and list assignment options

Contact Type: Consumers, Action: Add to new list "Imported Contacts"

Import configuration

8

Execute import process

Import processing completes successfully

N/A

File processing execution

9

Verify import success confirmation

Success message shows number of contacts imported

Expected: "10 contacts imported successfully"

Import completion feedback

10

Verify imported contacts appear in system

New contacts visible in contact database

Expected: 10 new contacts with correct data

Data persistence validation

11

Check contact data accuracy

Imported contact fields match source file data

Verify: Names, emails, zones match CSV data

Data integrity validation

12

Test import error handling with invalid file

Upload file with incorrect format or data

Test File: invalid_format.txt

Error handling validation

13

Verify error message for invalid import

Clear error message explains validation failure

Expected: "Invalid file format. Please use CSV format."

Error feedback

14

Test duplicate contact handling during import

Import file containing existing contact data

Test: Include existing contact in import file

Duplicate handling

15

Verify duplicate resolution options

System provides options for handling duplicates

Expected: Skip, Update, or Create duplicate options

Duplicate management

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Import functionality successfully adds contacts from external files
  • Secondary_Verifications: File validation works, data mapping accurate, error handling appropriate
  • Negative_Verification: Invalid files rejected with clear error messages

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Medium
  • Automation_Candidate: Partial

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: File upload service, contact database
  • Blocked_Tests: Bulk contact operations
  • Parallel_Tests: Export functionality tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Import performance tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates import functionality mentioned in user story Major Steps section
  • Edge_Cases: Very large import files, malformed data, encoding issues
  • Risk_Areas: File processing performance, data validation accuracy, memory usage
  • Security_Considerations: File type validation, data sanitization, upload security

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Import file size limitations and performance thresholds
  • Type: Performance and scalability
  • Rationale: Important for system stability with large utility customer databases
  • Priority: P2-High
  • Scenario_2: Import data validation rules specific to utility contact requirements
  • Type: Business rule validation
  • Rationale: Utility contacts may have specific validation requirements
  • Priority: P2-High



Test Case 21 - Verify workflow dependency validation 

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_021

Title: Verify workflow dependency validation when deleting lists used in active workflows

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

  • Module/Feature: Utility Contact List Management
  • Test Type: Integration
  • Test Level: System
  • Priority: P1-Critical
  • Execution Phase: Regression
  • Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, Integration, Workflow, Validation, MOD-ContactLists, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Integration-Testing, Report-Security-Validation, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Must-Have, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Workflow-Engine, Dependency-Validation

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 30%
  • Integration_Points: Workflow Engine, Messaging System, Dependency Tracker
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Workflow-Service, Dependency-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

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

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Workflow engine, messaging system, dependency tracking service
  • Performance_Baseline: Dependency check < 2 seconds
  • Data_Requirements: Active workflow using specific contact list

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Active workflow configured using specific contact list for messaging or communication
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List deletion permissions, workflow access
  • Test_Data: Contact list "High Usage Consumers" actively used in messaging workflow
  • Prior_Test_Cases: Workflow creation with list dependency

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Create or verify active workflow using contact list

Workflow exists and is actively using a contact list

Workflow: "Monthly Billing Notifications" using "High Usage Consumers" list

Establish workflow dependency

2

Navigate to Lists page

Lists page displays with target list visible

N/A

Access list management

3

Locate list used in active workflow

Identify the list currently used in workflow

Target List: "High Usage Consumers" (in active use)

Identify dependency target

4

Click delete icon for workflow-dependent list

Delete action initiated

N/A

Trigger dependency validation

5

Verify dependency warning appears

Warning message displays about workflow usage

Expected: "This list is used in active workflows. Deleting it may affect those workflows."

Exact message per business rule

6

Check warning message details

Warning specifies which workflows are affected

Expected: Warning mentions "Monthly Billing Notifications" workflow

Specific dependency information

7

Verify deletion options in warning

Warning provides options to proceed or cancel

Expected: "Cancel" and "Delete Anyway" or "Force Delete" options

User choice validation

8

Select "Cancel" option

Deletion cancelled, list remains unchanged

N/A

Safe cancellation option

9

Verify list still exists after cancellation

List visible and unchanged in Lists page

Expected: "High Usage Consumers" still present

Cancellation effectiveness

10

Attempt deletion again and select proceed option

Choose to proceed with deletion despite warning

N/A

Force deletion testing

11

Verify additional confirmation required

System requires additional confirmation for forced deletion

Expected: Second confirmation dialog for dangerous action

Additional safety measure

12

Complete forced deletion process

List deleted despite workflow dependency

N/A

Force deletion capability

13

Check workflow behavior after list deletion

Verify workflow handles missing list appropriately

Expected: Workflow shows error or disabled state

Dependency impact validation

14

Test with unused list deletion

Delete list not used in any workflow

Test List: "Unused Test List"

Normal deletion comparison

15

Verify no warning for unused list

Deletion proceeds normally without dependency warning

Expected: Standard deletion confirmation only

Normal flow validation

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Dependency validation prevents accidental deletion of workflow-dependent lists
  • Secondary_Verifications---




Test Case 22 -  Verify tag format validation and guidance

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_022

Title: Verify tag format validation and guidance for invalid tag formats

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, UI, Validation, Input-Validation, MOD-ContactLists, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Security-Validation, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Should-Have, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Validation-Service, Tag-Validation

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 15%
  • Integration_Points: Validation Service, Input Processing
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Validation-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
  • Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Regression-Coverage, Security-Validation, User-Acceptance
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Low

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Input validation service, form validation framework
  • Performance_Baseline: Validation feedback < 500ms
  • Data_Requirements: N/A

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: User logged in with list creation permissions
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Various invalid tag format examples
  • Prior_Test_Cases: List creation wizard accessible

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Navigate to list creation Step 1 with Tags field

Tags field visible with format guidance

N/A

Access tag input validation

2

Verify default tag format guidance displayed

Placeholder or help text shows expected format

Expected: "Comma-separated tags (e.g. summer, campaign, vip)"

Default guidance per business rule

3

Enter tags with uppercase letters

Input accepted but validation triggered

Tags: "BILLING, HIGH-USAGE"

Test uppercase handling

4

Verify uppercase validation message

Guidance message appears for case format

Expected: "Tags should be comma-separated words (e.g., billing, north-zone)"

Exact message per business rule

5

Enter tags with spaces instead of hyphens

Invalid format triggers validation

Tags: "high usage, north zone"

Test space handling

6

Verify space format validation message

Guidance appears for hyphenation requirement

Expected: Format guidance suggesting hyphen usage

Hyphenation guidance

7

Enter tags without commas (space-separated)

Invalid separator format triggers validation

Tags: "billing monthly usage"

Test separator validation

8

Verify comma separator guidance

Message explains comma requirement

Expected: Guidance about comma separation

Separator format instruction

9

Enter tags with special characters

Special character validation triggered

Tags: "billing@, high_usage!, zone#1"

Test special character handling

10

Verify special character guidance

System guides toward accepted format

Expected: Guidance about acceptable characters

Character set validation

11

Enter extremely long tag

Length validation triggered if applicable

Tags: "verylongtagnamethatshouldexceedreasonablelimits"

Test length limits

12

Verify tag length guidance if applicable

Length limit message if enforced

Expected: Length guidance if limits exist

Length validation

13

Enter valid format tags after seeing guidance

Valid tags accepted without further warnings

Tags: "billing, high-usage, monthly"

Recovery validation

14

Verify validation clears with correct format

No validation messages with proper format

Expected: Clean form state with valid tags

Validation clearing

15

Complete list creation with valid tags

List created successfully with properly formatted tags

N/A

End-to-end validation

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Invalid tag formats trigger appropriate guidance messages per business rules
  • Secondary_Verifications: Validation messages are helpful and specific, validation clears with correct format
  • Negative_Verification: Valid tag formats do not trigger unnecessary validation messages

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Form validation framework
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced tag functionality tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Other input validation tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Tag search and filtering tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates user guidance system for tag formatting per exact business rule text
  • Edge_Cases: Mixed valid/invalid tags, very long tag strings, unicode characters
  • Risk_Areas: User experience during validation, validation performance
  • Security_Considerations: Input sanitization, injection prevention

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Tag auto-correction or suggestion functionality
  • Type: User experience enhancement
  • Rationale: Could automatically format tags to meet requirements
  • Priority: P4-Low
  • Scenario_2: Bulk tag validation for imported lists
  • Type: Data import validation
  • Rationale: Important when importing lists with existing tags
  • Priority: P3-Medium




Test Case 23 -  Verify filter criteria validation and error handling 

Test Case ID: UX03US03_TC_023

Title: Verify filter criteria validation and error handling for incomplete filter configurations

Test Case Metadata

  • Created By: Hetal
  • Created Date: 2025-08-18
  • Version: 1.0

Classification

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

Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support Tags: Negative, Consumer Services, UI, Database, Filter-Validation, MOD-ContactLists, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Report-Quality-Dashboard, Report-Regression-Coverage, Report-Security-Validation, Report-User-Acceptance, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Must-Have, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Filter-Engine, Validation-Error

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

  • Feature_Coverage: 25%
  • Integration_Points: Filter Engine, Validation Service
  • Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web, Filter-Service, Validation-Service
  • Requirement_Coverage: Complete
  • Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

  • Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
  • Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Regression-Coverage, Security-Validation, User-Acceptance
  • Trend_Tracking: Yes
  • Executive_Visibility: No
  • Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Test Environment

  • Environment: Dev
  • Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
  • Device/OS: Windows 10/11
  • Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
  • Dependencies: Filter engine, validation service, form validation framework
  • Performance_Baseline: Filter validation < 1 second
  • Data_Requirements: Contact database for filter testing

Prerequisites

  • Setup_Requirements: Dynamic list creation wizard accessible
  • User_Roles_Permissions: List creation permissions
  • Test_Data: Contact database with filterable attributes
  • Prior_Test_Cases: List creation wizard functional

Test Procedure

Step #

Action

Expected Result

Test Data

Comments

1

Create new list and proceed to Step 2 Filters

Reach filter configuration step

Name: "Filter Validation Test"

Access filter validation testing

2

Select "Dynamic" source type

Dynamic options become available

Source Type: Dynamic

Enable filter requirement

3

Attempt to proceed without configuring any filters

Validation error prevents progression

N/A

Test missing filter validation

4

Verify error message for missing filters

Error displays per business rule

Expected: "Please complete filter criteria before proceeding."

Exact message per business rule

5

Start configuring Category Based filter

Select filter type but leave incomplete

Filter Type: Category Based, Category: (not selected)

Partial filter configuration

6

Attempt to proceed with incomplete category filter

Validation prevents progression

N/A

Incomplete filter validation

7

Verify incomplete filter error message

Specific error about incomplete configuration

Expected: Error indicating category selection required

Specific validation feedback

8

Complete category selection but leave subcategory empty

Partial completion of filter criteria

Category: Commercial, Subcategory: (not selected)

Test partial completion

9

Verify subcategory validation error

Error indicates required subcategory selection

Expected: Error about required subcategory

Detailed validation requirement

10

Switch to Location Based filter

Change filter type with incomplete state

Filter Type: Location Based

Test filter type switching

11

Leave location filter partially configured

Select Area but not Subarea

Area: Downtown, Subarea: (not selected)

Location filter validation

12

Verify location filter validation error

Error about incomplete location criteria

Expected: Error indicating subarea selection required

Location-specific validation

13

Complete all required filter fields

Fully configure filter criteria

Area: Downtown, Subarea: Specific subarea

Complete valid configuration

14

Verify progression allowed with complete filter

Can proceed to Step 3 with valid configuration

Expected: Next button enabled, progression allowed

Valid filter acceptance

15

Test removing filter after configuration

Remove configured filter and attempt progression

Remove all filter criteria

Test filter removal validation

Verification Points

  • Primary_Verification: Incomplete filter criteria trigger appropriate validation errors per business rules
  • Secondary_Verifications: Specific error messages guide user to complete required fields
  • Negative_Verification: Cannot create dynamic lists without complete filter criteria

Test Results (Template)

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

Execution Analytics

  • Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
  • Maintenance_Effort: Low
  • Automation_Candidate: Yes

Test Relationships

  • Blocking_Tests: Filter engine functionality, validation service
  • Blocked_Tests: Advanced filter combination tests
  • Parallel_Tests: Other validation error tests
  • Sequential_Tests: Filter performance tests

Additional Information

  • Notes: Validates filter validation system using exact business rule error messages from user story
  • Edge_Cases: Complex filter combinations, filter conflicts, performance with many filter options
  • Risk_Areas: Filter validation accuracy, user guidance quality, system performance
  • Security_Considerations: Filter injection prevention, validation bypass protection

Missing Scenarios Identified

  • Scenario_1: Filter criteria conflict detection (e.g., mutually exclusive selections)
  • Type: Advanced filter validation
  • Rationale: Important for complex utility data filtering scenarios
  • Priority: P2-High
  • Scenario_2: Filter performance validation with large datasets
  • Type: Performance and scalability
  • Rationale: Critical for utility databases with thousands of contacts
  • Priority: P2-High


No Comments
Back to top