Utility Plans & Tariffs Management Test Cases - ONB02US05
Test Scenario Summary
This comprehensive test suite covers all 20 acceptance criteria for the Utility Plans & Tariffs Management user story, with complete navigation flows from login to feature testing, ensuring full automation compatibility and comprehensive validation of dashboard overview, tariff management, plan creation, and system validations.
Test Case 1: Dashboard Overview Display Validation
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_001
Title: Verify overview dashboard displays total plans, tariffs, and active subscribers with growth indicators
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: Enterprise/SMB/All
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: 5 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of overview dashboard functionality
Integration_Points: Dashboard API, SMART360 Database, Authentication Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Dashboard
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Customer-Segment-Analysis, Engineering, QA]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: SMART360 database with sample data, authentication service, utility setup completion
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds page load time
Data_Requirements: Existing plans and tariffs in database matching sample data (28 plans, 51 tariffs, 34 subscribers)
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Valid SMART360 environment with utility configuration completed
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with full access
Test_Data: Active utility: "Metropolitan Water Authority", existing plans and tariffs data
Prior_Test_Cases: User authentication system functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: All dashboard metrics display correct counts (28 plans, 51 tariffs, 34 subscribers) with accurate growth indicators
Secondary_Verifications: Timestamps are accurate and in correct chronological order, categories are properly labeled, navigation links function correctly
Negative_Verification: No broken layouts, missing data sections, or calculation errors in metrics
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording actual behavior and metrics]
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 for dashboard screenshots]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: User authentication and utility setup
Blocked_Tests: All other Plans & Tariffs feature tests
Parallel_Tests: User profile management tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_002, TC_003
Additional Information
Notes: This test validates the main entry point and overview functionality for Plans & Tariffs management module
Edge_Cases: Zero data scenarios, database connectivity issues, large data sets performance
Risk_Areas: Database query performance, data synchronization between services, metric calculation accuracy
Security_Considerations: User permission verification for viewing sensitive utility data and subscriber information
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Dashboard refresh functionality and real-time data updates
Type: Integration
Rationale: Critical for ensuring data accuracy in operational environment
Priority: P2
Scenario_2: Dashboard performance with large data volumes (1000+ plans/tariffs)
Type: Performance
Rationale: Scalability validation for enterprise deployments
Priority: P3
Test Case 2: Active vs Inactive Status Visual Differentiation
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_002
Title: Verify clear visual distinction between active and inactive plans/tariffs with consistent color schemes
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: UI
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Low
Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of status visualization components
Integration_Points: UI Rendering Engine, Status Management Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-UI-Components
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, QA, Module-Coverage, Customer-Segment-Analysis, Engineering]
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Test data with both active and inactive plans/tariffs, CSS styling framework
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for UI rendering
Data_Requirements: Mixed status data including active and inactive entities
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Database with mixed active/inactive plans and tariffs for visual comparison
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: Active utility setup: "Metropolitan Water Authority", mixed status entities
Prior_Test_Cases: TC_001 passed successfully
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Active status items consistently display with green visual indicators (badges for tariffs, toggles for plans)
Secondary_Verifications: Text readability meets accessibility standards, color consistency across components, responsive behavior
Negative_Verification: No ambiguous status indicators, missing color coding, or inconsistent visual styling
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording visual verification results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if visual issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for visual comparison]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Partial (visual validation may require manual verification)
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: TC_001 (Dashboard access)
Blocked_Tests: Status change functionality tests
Parallel_Tests: Responsive design tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_011 (Status management)
Additional Information
Notes: This test ensures consistent visual communication of status across the application
Edge_Cases: High contrast mode, color blindness accessibility, very long entity names affecting layout
Risk_Areas: CSS framework changes, browser rendering differences, accessibility compliance
Security_Considerations: No security implications for visual status indicators
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Inactive status visual indicators testing (if inactive items exist in system)
Type: UI
Rationale: Complete visual differentiation validation requires both active and inactive states
Priority: P2
Scenario_2: Status transition animations and visual feedback
Type: UI
Rationale: Enhanced user experience during status changes
Priority: P3
Test Case 3: Recently Updated Items Chronological Display
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_003
Title: Verify recently updated plans and tariffs display with accurate timestamps and chronological ordering
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: Low
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of recent updates display functionality
Integration_Points: Database Query Service, Timestamp Management, UI Rendering
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Timeline-Components
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Engineering, QA, Customer-Segment-Analysis]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Database with timestamp tracking, recent modification data
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for recent items query
Data_Requirements: Recent plan and tariff modifications with accurate timestamps
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Database with recently modified plans and tariffs containing timestamp data
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: Recent modifications: JOHN PLAN TEST1, Omi plan 123, new plan 2, Wakad Billing, Harsh Jha, Harsh
Prior_Test_Cases: TC_001 passed successfully
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Recently updated items display in correct chronological order with accurate timestamps
Secondary_Verifications: Navigation links function correctly, timestamp format consistency, proper categorization display
Negative_Verification: No duplicate entries, missing timestamps, or incorrect chronological ordering
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording timeline verification results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if timeline issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for chronological display]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Daily
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: TC_001 (Dashboard access)
Blocked_Tests: None
Parallel_Tests: Other dashboard component tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_010 (Version history)
Additional Information
Notes: This test ensures accurate tracking and display of recent system activity for administrative oversight
Edge_Cases: Same timestamp entries, timezone differences, large volumes of recent updates
Risk_Areas: Database query performance, timestamp accuracy, timezone handling
Security_Considerations: Ensure only authorized users can view modification history
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Real-time updates to recent items list without page refresh
Type: Integration
Rationale: Enhanced user experience for active administrative sessions
Priority: P3
Scenario_2: Recent items filtering by date range or user
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Advanced administrative filtering capabilities
Priority: P4
Test Case 4: Multiple Rate Type Support Validation
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_004
Title: Verify system supports Fixed and Variable rate types in tariff creation with proper validation
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of rate type selection and validation
Integration_Points: Rate Type Service, Validation Engine, Database
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Rate-Management
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Customer-Segment-Analysis]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Rate configuration service, database with rate type definitions
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for form loading and validation
Data_Requirements: Clean test environment for tariff creation
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Database with rate type configurations, validation rules active
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with tariff creation permissions
Test_Data: Utility setup completed for "Metropolitan Water Authority"
Prior_Test_Cases: User authentication and utility setup functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Both Fixed and Variable rate types are available, selectable, and can be used to create tariffs successfully
Secondary_Verifications: Dropdown functionality works correctly, form validation accepts both rate types, contextual help available
Negative_Verification: No disabled rate type options, no validation errors for supported rate types, no missing rate type categories
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording rate type validation results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if rate type issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for rate type selection]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Dashboard access, authentication
Blocked_Tests: Advanced rate configuration tests
Parallel_Tests: Utility type validation tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_007 (Guided tariff creation)
Additional Information
Notes: This test validates core rate type functionality essential for billing system operation
Edge_Cases: Missing rate type configurations, database corruption of rate type data
Risk_Areas: Rate type service availability, database connectivity, form validation logic
Security_Considerations: Ensure only authorized users can create tariffs with different rate types
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Rate type-specific form behavior and field availability
Type: Functional
Rationale: Different rate types may require different configuration fields
Priority: P2
Scenario_2: Rate type change validation for existing tariffs
Type: Business Rules
Rationale: Prevent invalid rate type changes that could affect billing
Priority: P1
Test Case 5: Comprehensive Utility Type Support Validation
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_005
Title: Verify system supports all utility types including Water, Gas, Electricity, and additional utility services
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 7 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of utility type selection and support
Integration_Points: Utility Service Configuration, Database, Validation Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Utility-Management
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Customer-Segment-Analysis]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Utility configuration service, database with utility type definitions
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for dropdown loading and selection
Data_Requirements: Complete utility type configuration data
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Database with all utility type configurations loaded
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with full access
Test_Data: Utility setup: "Metropolitan Water Authority"
Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication and utility setup functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: All core utility types (Water, Gas, Electricity) and additional utility types are available and selectable
Secondary_Verifications: Dropdown functionality works smoothly, selections persist correctly, comprehensive utility coverage
Negative_Verification: No missing core utility types, no broken selection functionality, no disabled essential options
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording utility type validation results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if utility type issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for utility type selection]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Authentication, utility setup
Blocked_Tests: Utility-specific rate configuration tests
Parallel_Tests: Rate type validation tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_024 (Utility services in plans)
Additional Information
Notes: This test validates comprehensive utility type support essential for multi-utility management
Edge_Cases: New utility type additions, utility type configuration changes, regional utility variations
Risk_Areas: Utility service configuration, database integrity, dropdown population logic
Security_Considerations: Ensure utility type access aligns with user permissions and utility authorization
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Utility type-specific configuration requirements and validations
Type: Business Rules
Rationale: Different utility types may have specific regulatory or operational requirements
Priority: P2
Scenario_2: Utility type filtering and search functionality in large utility lists
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Improved usability for organizations managing many utility types
Priority: P3
Test Case 6: Overlapping Validity Period Prevention
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_006
Title: Verify system prevents creation of tariffs with overlapping validity periods for same utility and rate type
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of overlap validation business rules
Integration_Points: Validation Engine, Database Query Service, Business Rules Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Validation-Services
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Revenue-Impact-Tracking]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Validation service, database with existing tariff data, business rules engine
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for validation processing
Data_Requirements: Existing tariffs for overlap testing scenarios
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Database with existing tariffs for overlap validation testing
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with tariff creation permissions
Test_Data: Existing tariff data for overlap scenarios
Prior_Test_Cases: TC_004 and TC_005 passed successfully
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: System prevents overlapping tariffs for same utility and rate type with clear error messaging
Secondary_Verifications: Different utility types allowed, different rate types allowed, adjacent dates permitted
Negative_Verification: No false positive validations, no overlap prevention for valid scenarios
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording overlap validation results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if validation issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for validation behavior]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: TC_004 (Rate types), TC_005 (Utility types)
Blocked_Tests: Advanced tariff management tests
Parallel_Tests: Other validation rule tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_007 (Guided tariff creation)
Additional Information
Notes: Critical validation prevents billing conflicts and ensures data integrity in tariff management
Edge_Cases: Timezone considerations, leap year dates, indefinite validity periods
Risk_Areas: Validation logic accuracy, database query performance, complex date calculations
Security_Considerations: Ensure validation cannot be bypassed through direct API calls or data manipulation
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Ongoing tariff (no end date) overlap validation
Type: Business Rules
Rationale: Ongoing tariffs need special overlap handling as mentioned in business rules
Priority: P1
Scenario_2: Bulk tariff import overlap validation
Type: Integration
Rationale: Overlap validation must work during bulk operations
Priority: P2
Test Case 7: Guided Tariff Creation Workflow Validation
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_007
Title: Verify guided step-by-step tariff creation form with contextual help and validation
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Acceptance
Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 7 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of guided creation workflow and user assistance
Integration_Points: Form Validation Service, Help Content System, UI Components
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Form-Components
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, QA, Module-Coverage, Customer-Segment-Analysis, Engineering]
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Help content system, form validation service, UI framework
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for form interactions
Data_Requirements: Clean environment for form testing
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Help content system active, validation rules configured
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: Clean test environment for form workflow testing
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic navigation tests passed
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Guided form provides clear help text, validates required fields, and guides users through successful completion
Secondary_Verifications: Help text is contextually appropriate, validation messages are clear, form flow is intuitive
Negative_Verification: No confusing error messages, no missing help content, no broken form validation
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording form workflow results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if workflow issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for form validation]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Partial (manual verification needed for help content)
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Basic form access and navigation
Blocked_Tests: Advanced tariff configuration tests
Parallel_Tests: Other form validation tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_008 (Advanced tariff features)
Additional Information
Notes: This test ensures user experience quality and reduces user errors through proper guidance
Edge_Cases: Very long tariff names, special characters in names, browser auto-fill conflicts
Risk_Areas: Help content accuracy, form validation logic, user experience degradation
Security_Considerations: Form validation must prevent injection attacks and data manipulation
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Progressive disclosure based on selections (different fields for different rate types)
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Enhanced user experience with conditional form fields
Priority: P3
Scenario_2: Form auto-save functionality for incomplete tariff creation
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Prevents data loss during long form completion sessions
Priority: P4
Test Case 8: Service Charges Configuration with Predefined Options
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_008
Title: Verify service charges configuration using predefined charge options in plan creation
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Acceptance
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of service charges configuration and predefined options
Integration_Points: Billing System, Service Charge Database, Plan Configuration Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Service-Charges
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, Revenue-Impact-Tracking, QA]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Service charges database, billing system integration, plan creation service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for service charges loading
Data_Requirements: Complete predefined service charges data (21 charges)
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Database populated with all 21 predefined service charges
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with plan creation permissions
Test_Data: Plan creation in progress, service charges configuration step
Prior_Test_Cases: Plan creation Steps 1-3 completed successfully
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: All 21+ predefined service charges are available and selectable with correct configuration options
Secondary_Verifications: Multiple charges can be configured, charge types and frequencies work correctly, common/service-specific options available
Negative_Verification: No missing predefined charges, no broken charge configuration, no validation errors for valid inputs
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording service charges configuration results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if service charges issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for service charges configuration]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Plan creation Steps 1-3
Blocked_Tests: Plan completion and activation tests
Parallel_Tests: Other plan configuration tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_026 (Plan creation completion)
Additional Information
Notes: Critical test for billing system integration and revenue management accuracy
Edge_Cases: Very high charge amounts, special characters in charge descriptions, currency formatting
Risk_Areas: Billing system integration, charge calculation accuracy, database integrity
Security_Considerations: Ensure charge configuration requires appropriate permissions and cannot be manipulated maliciously
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Service-specific charges configuration (charges that apply only to specific utilities)
Type: Functional
Rationale: Business Rule #52 mentions unmetered utility charges should be visible in service charges
Priority: P2
Scenario_2: Charge calculation preview and validation
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Users need to verify charge calculations before plan activation
Priority: P3
Test Case 9: Complete Navigation Flow with Resume Functionality
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_009
Title: Verify resume functionality allows users to continue plan creation from where they left off
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Acceptance
Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of resume functionality and session management
Integration_Points: Session Storage, Form State Management, Database
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Session-Management
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, QA, Module-Coverage, Customer-Segment-Analysis, Engineering]
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Session management service, form state persistence, database
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for resume functionality
Data_Requirements: Partially completed plan data for resume testing
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Session management system active, form state persistence enabled
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: Partially completed plan for resume testing
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic plan creation functionality working
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Resume functionality accurately restores plan creation progress and preserves entered data
Secondary_Verifications: Resume notification displays correct step information, Start Fresh option works correctly
Negative_Verification: No data loss during interruptions, no incorrect step restoration, no session conflicts
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording resume functionality results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if resume issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for resume functionality]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Partial (session testing may require manual verification)
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Basic plan creation functionality
Blocked_Tests: None
Parallel_Tests: Other session management tests
Sequential_Tests: None
Additional Information
Notes: Important for user experience when plan creation process is lengthy or complex
Edge_Cases: Multiple browser tabs, incognito mode, session sharing between users
Risk_Areas: Session storage capacity, data security, cross-browser compatibility
Security_Considerations: Ensure session data is secured and cannot be accessed by unauthorized users
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Resume functionality timeout limits and data expiration
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Define how long resume data should be preserved
Priority: P3
Scenario_2: Multiple concurrent plan creation sessions
Type: Edge Case
Rationale: Handle multiple incomplete plans for same user
Priority: P4
Test Case 10: Version History Maintenance and Change Tracking
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_010
Title: Verify complete version history maintenance with change attribution and detailed tracking
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Acceptance
Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 9 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of version control and change tracking functionality
Integration_Points: Version Control Service, Database, Audit Trail System
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Version-Management
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Revenue-Impact-Tracking]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Version control service, database audit tables, change tracking system
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for version history loading
Data_Requirements: Existing tariffs with multiple versions for testing
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Database with versioned tariff data, audit trail system active
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with full access
Test_Data: Existing versioned tariff: "Wakad Billing - Version-3"
Prior_Test_Cases: Tariff creation and modification functionality working
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Complete version history maintained with accurate change attribution and detailed modification tracking
Secondary_Verifications: Change descriptions are meaningful, timestamps accurate, user attribution correct
Negative_Verification: No missing versions, no incorrect attribution, no lost change history
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording version history results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if version issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for version tracking]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Partial
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Tariff creation and modification
Blocked_Tests: Advanced audit reporting tests
Parallel_Tests: Other audit trail tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_017 (Version comparison)
Additional Information
Notes: Critical for regulatory compliance and change tracking in utility billing systems
Edge_Cases: Rapid successive changes, bulk modifications, system clock changes
Risk_Areas: Database integrity, audit trail completeness, performance with large version histories
Security_Considerations: Ensure version history cannot be tampered with or deleted by unauthorized users
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Version rollback functionality (if supported)
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: May need ability to revert to previous versions
Priority: P3
Scenario_2: Version history export for compliance reporting
Type: Compliance
Rationale: Regulatory requirements may need exportable audit trails
Priority: P2
Test Case 11: Status Management with Visual Indicators
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_011
Title: Verify tariff and plan status management with appropriate visual indicators and state transitions
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of status management and visual indication systems
Integration_Points: Status Management Service, UI Components, Database
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Status-Management
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, QA, Module-Coverage, Customer-Segment-Analysis, Engineering]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Status management service, UI framework, database
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for status changes
Data_Requirements: Active and inactive tariffs/plans for status testing
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Mixed status entities for testing status transitions
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with status management permissions
Test_Data: Active tariffs and plans for status change testing
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic tariff and plan management functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Status changes work correctly with appropriate visual indicators and business rule enforcement
Secondary_Verifications: Visual consistency, status persistence, audit logging functional
Negative_Verification: No unauthorized status changes, no visual inconsistencies, no status conflicts
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording status management results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if status issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for status changes]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Basic tariff/plan management
Blocked_Tests: Status-dependent business rule tests
Parallel_Tests: Other UI interaction tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_015 (Automatic status updates)
Additional Information
Notes: Important for operational control and lifecycle management of utility offerings
Edge_Cases: Rapid status changes, concurrent user modifications, network interruptions during status change
Risk_Areas: Status synchronization, business rule enforcement, UI responsiveness
Security_Considerations: Ensure status changes are properly authorized and logged
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Scheduled status changes (future activation/deactivation)
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Operational efficiency for planned status transitions
Priority: P3
Scenario_2: Status change notifications to stakeholders
Type: Integration
Rationale: Alert relevant parties when important items are deactivated
Priority: P3
Test Case 12: File Upload and Download Functionality
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_012
Title: Verify authorized users can upload and download tariff/plan data in standard formats
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Acceptance
Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of file upload/download and bulk operations
Integration_Points: File Service, Data Validation, Database, Export Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-File-Operations
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Customer-Segment-Analysis]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: File service, data validation service, database, export service
Performance_Baseline: < 10 seconds for export generation, < 5 seconds for import validation
Data_Requirements: Sample CSV files for import testing, existing data for export testing
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: File service active, sample import files prepared, existing tariff/plan data
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with import/export permissions
Test_Data: Sample CSV with columns: Tariff Name, Utility Type, Rate Type, Valid From, Valid To, Status, Version
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic tariff/plan management functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Export generates accurate CSV files, import processes valid files correctly with proper validation
Secondary_Verifications: File formats are standard, error handling is comprehensive, performance is acceptable
Negative_Verification: Invalid files are rejected, malformed data doesn't corrupt system, unauthorized access prevented
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording file operations results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if file operation issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for file operations]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Partial (file content validation may require manual verification)
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: User authentication and permissions
Blocked_Tests: Bulk data management tests
Parallel_Tests: Other data management tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_018 (Permission-based access)
Additional Information
Notes: Critical for bulk data management and system migration scenarios
Edge_Cases: Very large files, special characters in data, network interruptions during upload/download
Risk_Areas: Data integrity during import, file size limitations, concurrent file operations
Security_Considerations: File upload security, data validation to prevent injection, access control enforcement
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Bulk update via import (modify existing records)
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Efficient way to update multiple records simultaneously
Priority: P3
Scenario_2: Import preview and confirmation before final processing
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: User verification before committing bulk changes
Priority: P2
Test Case 13: Advanced Filtering and Search Capabilities
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_013
Title: Verify comprehensive filtering and search capabilities in tariff and plan management interfaces
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of search and filtering functionality
Integration_Points: Search Engine, Database Query Service, UI Components
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Search-Filter
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, QA, Module-Coverage, Customer-Segment-Analysis, Engineering]
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Search service, database indexing, UI framework
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for search results, < 1 second for filter application
Data_Requirements: Diverse tariff and plan data for comprehensive search testing
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Search indexing active, diverse test data available
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: Mixed tariffs: "Wakad Billing", "Harsh Jha", "Harsh", various utility types and statuses
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic tariff/plan listing functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Search and filtering functionality works accurately with proper result filtering and performance
Secondary_Verifications: Collapsible filters work correctly, combined search/filter operations function properly, reset capability works
Negative_Verification: No irrelevant results in search, no broken filter combinations, no performance degradation
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording search/filter results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if search/filter issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for search functionality]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Basic listing functionality
Blocked_Tests: Advanced reporting tests
Parallel_Tests: Other UI interaction tests
Sequential_Tests: None
Additional Information
Notes: Important for user productivity when managing large numbers of tariffs and plans
Edge_Cases: Special characters in search, very long search terms, concurrent filter operations
Risk_Areas: Search performance, database query optimization, UI responsiveness
Security_Considerations: Ensure search doesn't expose unauthorized data
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Saved search/filter configurations
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: User productivity for frequently used search criteria
Priority: P4
Scenario_2: Advanced search with date ranges and complex criteria
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Power user functionality for complex data analysis
Priority: P3
Test Case 14: Deletion Prevention for In-Use Tariffs
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_014
Title: Verify system prevents deletion of tariffs currently in use by customer accounts with appropriate error messaging
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 7 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of deletion prevention business rules and validation
Integration_Points: Database Validation, Customer Account Service, Business Rules Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Data-Integrity
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, Revenue-Impact-Tracking, QA]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Customer account service, database referential integrity, business rules validation
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for deletion validation check
Data_Requirements: Tariffs linked to customer accounts, unused tariffs for testing
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Database with tariffs linked to customer accounts and unused tariffs
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with deletion permissions
Test_Data: In-use tariff: "Wakad Billing", unused test tariff for deletion testing
Prior_Test_Cases: Tariff creation and customer account management functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: System prevents deletion of in-use tariffs with clear error messaging, allows deletion of unused items
Secondary_Verifications: Error messages are informative, deletion confirmation works for valid cases, business rules consistent
Negative_Verification: No data corruption from failed deletion attempts, no unauthorized deletions, no system errors
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording deletion prevention results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if deletion issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for deletion prevention]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Tariff creation, customer account management
Blocked_Tests: Advanced data integrity tests
Parallel_Tests: Other business rule validation tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_019 (Audit logging)
Additional Information
Notes: Critical for data integrity and preventing billing system corruption
Edge_Cases: Recently unassigned tariffs, orphaned references, concurrent deletion attempts
Risk_Areas: Database referential integrity, business rule accuracy, performance of usage checking
Security_Considerations: Ensure deletion prevention cannot be bypassed through direct database access or API manipulation
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Soft delete vs hard delete for in-use items
Type: Business Rules
Rationale: May need to preserve historical data while preventing active use
Priority: P2
Scenario_2: Deletion impact analysis before prevention
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Show administrators what would be affected by deletion
Priority: P3
Test Case 15: Automatic Status Updates on Expiration
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_015
Title: Verify automatic tariff status update to "Expired" when validity dates are exceeded
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes (includes time simulation)
Reproducibility_Score: Medium
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of automatic status update functionality
Integration_Points: Scheduler Service, Status Management, Database, Notification Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Auto-Status-Management
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Revenue-Impact-Tracking]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Scheduler service, automatic status update service, database
Performance_Baseline: Status updates processed within 1 hour of expiration
Data_Requirements: Tariffs with near-future expiration dates for testing
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Scheduler service active, automatic status update functionality enabled
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: Tariff with short validity period for testing expiration
Prior_Test_Cases: Tariff creation and status management functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Tariffs automatically change to "EXPIRED" status when validity dates are exceeded
Secondary_Verifications: Visual indicators update correctly, business rules prevent use of expired tariffs, audit trail records changes
Negative_Verification: No premature status changes, no failures in batch expiration processing, no system errors
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording auto-expiration results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if expiration issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for status changes]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Monthly
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes (with time simulation capabilities)
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Tariff creation, status management
Blocked_Tests: Advanced lifecycle management tests
Parallel_Tests: Other automated process tests
Sequential_Tests: None
Additional Information
Notes: Important for automated lifecycle management and preventing use of outdated tariffs
Edge_Cases: Timezone changes, daylight saving time transitions, leap year dates
Risk_Areas: Scheduler reliability, database transaction consistency, notification delivery
Security_Considerations: Ensure automatic processes cannot be manipulated or bypassed
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Grace period before expiration status change
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Allow brief grace period for operational flexibility
Priority: P3
Scenario_2: Automatic renewal options for recurring tariffs
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Streamline management of ongoing utility offerings
Priority: P4
Test Case 16: Contextual Tips and Benefits Display
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_016
Title: Verify contextual tips and benefits display for tariff configurations with appropriate user guidance
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: UI
Test Level: System
Priority: P3-Medium
Execution Phase: Acceptance
Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Could-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: Low
Complexity_Level: Low
Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Low
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of contextual help and guidance systems
Integration_Points: Help Content System, UI Components, Content Management
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Help-System
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, QA, Module-Coverage, Customer-Segment-Analysis, Engineering]
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Low
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Help content system, UI framework, content management system
Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for help content loading
Data_Requirements: Complete help content database
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Help content system active, all contextual help content loaded
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: Access to tariff and plan creation forms
Prior_Test_Cases: Form access functionality working
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Contextual help is available, accurate, and provides valuable guidance for form completion
Secondary_Verifications: Help content is accessible, well-formatted, and appears consistently across forms
Negative_Verification: No missing help content, no broken help links, no inaccurate guidance
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording contextual help results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if help content issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for help content]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Partial (content verification may require manual review)
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Form access functionality
Blocked_Tests: None
Parallel_Tests: Other UI/UX tests
Sequential_Tests: None
Additional Information
Notes: Important for user experience and reducing user errors through proper guidance
Edge_Cases: Very long help content, special characters in help text, multilingual content
Risk_Areas: Content management system availability, help content accuracy maintenance
Security_Considerations: Ensure help content cannot be manipulated or used for injection attacks
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Interactive help tours or guided tutorials
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Enhanced onboarding experience for new users
Priority: P4
Scenario_2: Context-sensitive help based on user role or experience level
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Personalized guidance based on user expertise
Priority: P4
Test Case 17: Version Comparison Functionality
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_017
Title: Verify version comparison view displays differences between tariff versions with highlighting and change summary
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Acceptance
Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of version comparison and difference visualization
Integration_Points: Version Control Service, Comparison Engine, UI Components
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Version-Comparison
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Customer-Segment-Analysis]
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Version control service, comparison engine, modal framework
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for version comparison loading
Data_Requirements: Multi-version tariffs with documented changes
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Multi-version tariffs available, version comparison functionality enabled
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: "Wakad Billing" tariff with multiple versions (v1, v2, v3)
Prior_Test_Cases: TC_010 (Version history) functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Version comparison accurately displays differences with proper highlighting and meaningful change summaries
Secondary_Verifications: Comparison interface is user-friendly, export functionality works, performance is acceptable
Negative_Verification: No missing changes, no false positive differences, no performance issues with large changes
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording version comparison results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if comparison issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for version comparisons]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Partial (visual comparison may require manual verification)
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: TC_010 (Version history)
Blocked_Tests: Advanced audit reporting tests
Parallel_Tests: Other version control tests
Sequential_Tests: None
Additional Information
Notes: Important for understanding change impact and regulatory compliance documentation
Edge_Cases: Very large numbers of changes, complex nested data structures, identical versions
Risk_Areas: Comparison algorithm accuracy, UI performance with large datasets, change detection completeness
Security_Considerations: Ensure comparison doesn't expose sensitive historical data to unauthorized users
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Three-way version comparison (comparing multiple versions simultaneously)
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Advanced analysis capabilities for complex change tracking
Priority: P4
Scenario_2: Change impact analysis showing affected customers/accounts
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Business impact assessment for version changes
Priority: P3
Test Case 18: Permission-Based Access Control
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_018
Title: Verify appropriate permission levels for tariff and plan operations across different user roles
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Security
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of role-based access control and permission validation
Integration_Points: Authentication Service, Authorization Engine, Database Security
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Security-Access-Control
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Revenue-Impact-Tracking]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Authentication service, role management system, permission engine
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for permission validation
Data_Requirements: Multiple user accounts with different roles and permissions
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Multiple user accounts configured with different roles: Utility Administrator, Billing Manager, Billing Specialist
User_Roles_Permissions: Test accounts for all role types
Test_Data: User accounts: admin@utility.com (Admin), billing@utility.com (Manager), specialist@utility.com (Specialist)
Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication system functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Each user role has appropriate access levels with proper enforcement of permission restrictions
Secondary_Verifications: Unauthorized actions are prevented with clear error messages, audit logging captures violations
Negative_Verification: No privilege escalation possible, no unauthorized access through alternative paths
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording permission validation results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if permission issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for permission testing]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: High
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Authentication system, user role management
Blocked_Tests: Advanced security tests
Parallel_Tests: Other security validation tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_019 (Audit logging)
Additional Information
Notes: Critical for security compliance and preventing unauthorized access to billing system functions
Edge_Cases: Role changes during active sessions, concurrent users with different permissions, session hijacking attempts
Risk_Areas: Permission escalation vulnerabilities, session management security, API security enforcement
Security_Considerations: Regular permission validation, secure session management, comprehensive audit logging
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Dynamic permission assignment based on data context
Type: Security Enhancement
Rationale: Some permissions may depend on data ownership or organizational hierarchy
Priority: P2
Scenario_2: Multi-factor authentication for sensitive operations
Type: Security Enhancement
Rationale: Additional security for critical billing system modifications
Priority: P3
Test Case 19: Audit and Compliance Logging
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_019
Title: Verify comprehensive audit and compliance logging for all tariff-related actions with complete traceability
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Acceptance
Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of audit logging and compliance tracking functionality
Integration_Points: Audit Service, Database Logging, Compliance Engine, Export Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Audit-Compliance
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, Revenue-Impact-Tracking, QA]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Audit logging service, database audit tables, compliance reporting system
Performance_Baseline: < 1 second for audit log entry creation
Data_Requirements: Clean audit environment for testing log generation
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Audit logging system active, database audit tables configured
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with audit access permissions
Test_Data: Test tariffs and plans for generating audit events
Prior_Test_Cases: Tariff/plan creation and modification functionality working
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: All tariff and plan actions are comprehensively logged with complete user attribution and change details
Secondary_Verifications: Audit logs are searchable, exportable, and meet compliance requirements for data retention
Negative_Verification: Audit logs cannot be tampered with, no actions go unlogged, no performance degradation
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording audit logging results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if audit issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for audit functionality]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Partial (audit verification may require manual review)
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: User authentication, tariff/plan operations
Blocked_Tests: Advanced compliance reporting tests
Parallel_Tests: Other security and logging tests
Sequential_Tests: None
Additional Information
Notes: Critical for regulatory compliance and forensic analysis in utility billing systems
Edge_Cases: High-volume concurrent operations, system clock changes, database failures during logging
Risk_Areas: Audit log storage capacity, logging performance impact, log integrity maintenance
Security_Considerations: Audit log encryption, access control for audit data, tamper-evident logging
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Real-time audit alerting for critical actions
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Immediate notification for high-risk operations
Priority: P3
Scenario_2: Audit log anonymization for privacy compliance
Type: Compliance
Rationale: Data privacy requirements may need audit data anonymization
Priority: P3
Test Case 20: Responsive Design Cross-Platform Validation
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_020
Title: Verify responsive design functionality works correctly across desktop, tablet, and mobile viewports
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: UI
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Acceptance
Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Low
Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of responsive design implementation across screen sizes
Integration_Points: UI Framework, CSS Media Queries, Browser Rendering Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Responsive-UI
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, QA, Module-Coverage, Customer-Segment-Analysis, Engineering]
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 118+, Safari 16+, Edge 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS, iOS, Android
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080, Tablet-1024x768, Mobile-375x667
Dependencies: Responsive CSS framework, cross-browser compatibility
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds load time on all screen sizes
Data_Requirements: Standard test data for UI rendering
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Access to multiple screen sizes/devices or browser developer tools
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: Standard tariff and plan data for UI testing
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic UI functionality working
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Application displays and functions correctly across desktop, tablet, and mobile viewports with appropriate responsive adaptations
Secondary_Verifications: Touch interactions work on mobile, text remains readable, navigation is accessible on all screen sizes
Negative_Verification: No broken layouts, no inaccessible functionality, no performance degradation on smaller screens
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording responsive design results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if responsive issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for responsive behavior]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Partial (visual validation may require manual verification)
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Basic UI functionality
Blocked_Tests: Advanced mobile-specific feature tests
Parallel_Tests: Cross-browser compatibility tests
Sequential_Tests: None
Additional Information
Notes: Important for accessibility and user experience across different devices and usage contexts
Edge_Cases: Very large or very small screen sizes, high DPI displays, unusual aspect ratios
Risk_Areas: CSS framework updates, browser rendering differences, performance on older devices
Security_Considerations: Ensure responsive design doesn't expose sensitive information on smaller screens
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Progressive Web App (PWA) functionality for mobile usage
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Enhanced mobile experience with app-like functionality
Priority: P4
Scenario_2: Accessibility compliance across all screen sizes
Type: Compliance
Rationale: Ensure responsive design maintains accessibility standards
Priority: P2
Test Case 21: Four-Step Plan Creation Wizard Complete Workflow
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_021
Title: Verify complete 4-step plan creation wizard workflow (Basic Details → Consumer Categories → Utility Services → Service Charges)
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of plan creation wizard workflow and step progression
Integration_Points: Plan Management Service, Database, Validation Engine, UI Wizard Framework
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Plan-Creation
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Revenue-Impact-Tracking]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Plan creation service, wizard framework, validation service, database
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds per step transition
Data_Requirements: Clean environment for plan creation testing
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Plan creation service active, wizard framework functional
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with plan creation permissions
Test_Data: Available tariffs for plan association, service charge options
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic navigation and authentication functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Search and filtering functionality works accurately with proper result filtering and performance
Secondary_Verifications: Collapsible filters work correctly, combined search/filter operations function properly, reset capability works
Negative_Verification: No irrelevant results in search, no broken filter combinations, no performance degradation
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording search/filter results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if search/filter issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for search functionality]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Weekly
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: Basic listing functionality
Blocked_Tests: Advanced reporting tests
Parallel_Tests: Other UI interaction tests
Sequential_Tests: None
Additional Information
Notes: Important for user productivity when managing large numbers of tariffs and plans
Edge_Cases: Special characters in search, very long search terms, concurrent filter operations
Risk_Areas: Search performance, database query optimization, UI responsiveness
Security_Considerations: Ensure search doesn't expose unauthorized data
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Saved search/filter configurations
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: User productivity for frequently used search criteria
Priority: P4
Scenario_2: Advanced search with date ranges and complex criteria
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Power user functionality for complex data analysis
Priority: P3
Test Case 22: Plan Basic Details Validation and Requirements
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_022
Title: Verify comprehensive validation and requirements for plan basic details form in Step 1
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of basic details form validation and business rules
Integration_Points: Form Validation Service, Business Rules Engine, Database
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Plan-Validation
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Revenue-Impact-Tracking]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Form validation service, business rules engine, database uniqueness checking
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for validation processing
Data_Requirements: Existing plans for uniqueness validation testing
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Validation service active, existing plan data for uniqueness testing
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: Existing plan names for duplicate testing
Prior_Test_Cases: TC_021 wizard access functional
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: All required fields are validated with appropriate error messages and business rules enforced
Secondary_Verifications: Field length limits enforced, data type validation works, form progression controlled properly
Negative_Verification: Invalid data rejected, cannot proceed with incomplete forms, no data corruption from invalid inputs
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording validation results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if validation issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for validation testing]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: TC_021 (Wizard access)
Blocked_Tests: Step 2 validation tests
Parallel_Tests: Other form validation tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_023 (Consumer categories)
Additional Information
Notes: Foundation validation critical for data integrity in billing system
Edge_Cases: Very long text inputs, Unicode characters, concurrent plan creation with same names
Risk_Areas: Validation bypass attempts, database constraint enforcement, user experience with error messages
Security_Considerations: Prevent injection attacks through form inputs, ensure validation cannot be bypassed
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Real-time validation feedback as user types
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Improved user experience with immediate feedback
Priority: P3
Scenario_2: Auto-save draft functionality for partial form completion
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Prevent data loss during long form sessions
Priority: P3
Test Case 23: Consumer Categories Configuration and Dependencies
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_023
Title: Verify consumer categories and subcategories selection with dynamic filtering and dependency validation
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 7 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of consumer category selection and dependency logic
Integration_Points: Category Service, Dynamic Filtering Engine, Database
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Category-Management
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Revenue-Impact-Tracking]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Category service, dynamic filtering system, database with category/subcategory data
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds for subcategory loading
Data_Requirements: Complete category and subcategory data
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Category service active, complete category/subcategory database
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: Step 1 completed successfully to access Step 2
Prior_Test_Cases: TC_021, TC_022 completed successfully
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Consumer categories and subcategories work with proper dynamic filtering and dependency validation
Secondary_Verifications: Required field validation enforced, data persistence works, navigation functions properly
Negative_Verification: Cannot proceed without selections, subcategory properly filtered by category, no invalid combinations
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording category selection results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if category issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for category functionality]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Low
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: TC_021, TC_022 (Previous steps)
Blocked_Tests: TC_024 (Utility services)
Parallel_Tests: Other dependency validation tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_024 (Utility services)
Additional Information
Notes: Critical for proper customer segmentation and billing rule application
Edge_Cases: Very large numbers of categories/subcategories, concurrent updates to category data
Risk_Areas: Dynamic filtering performance, data synchronization, category data integrity
Security_Considerations: Ensure category selections cannot be manipulated to access unauthorized plans
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Custom category creation for specific utility requirements
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Flexibility for unique utility business models
Priority: P4
Scenario_2: Category-based pricing preview
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Show impact of category selection on pricing structure
Priority: P3
Test Case 24: Utility Services Selection and Rate Assignment
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_024
Title: Verify utility services selection with rate type assignment and tariff configuration
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 9 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of utility service selection and rate assignment functionality
Integration_Points: Service Management, Rate Assignment Service, Tariff Database
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Service-Rate-Assignment
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Revenue-Impact-Tracking]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Service configuration system, rate assignment service, tariff database
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for rate loading after service selection
Data_Requirements: Available utility services and configured tariffs
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Service and rate configuration data available, tariffs configured for assignment
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role
Test_Data: Steps 1 and 2 completed, available services: Water, Gas, Electricity
Prior_Test_Cases: TC_021, TC_022, TC_023 completed successfully
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Utility services can be selected and configured with appropriate rate types and rate names
Secondary_Verifications: Dynamic configuration sections work, multiple services supported, validation enforced
Negative_Verification: Cannot proceed without complete service configuration, business rules enforced
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording service selection results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if service issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for service configuration]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: TC_021, TC_022, TC_023 (Previous steps)
Blocked_Tests: TC_025 (Service charges)
Parallel_Tests: Tariff configuration tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_025 (Service charges)
Additional Information
Notes: Critical for linking plans to specific utility services and billing structures
Edge_Cases: Large numbers of available services, complex rate hierarchies, service availability changes
Risk_Areas: Rate assignment accuracy, service configuration persistence, business rule validation
Security_Considerations: Ensure service assignments cannot be manipulated to access unauthorized rates
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Service bundle configuration with discounted rates
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Common utility business practice for multi-service customers
Priority: P3
Scenario_2: Service availability based on geographic region
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Some services may not be available in all areas
Priority: P4
Test Case 25: Service Charges Configuration with Predefined Options (Complete)
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_025
Title: Verify comprehensive service charges configuration using all 21 predefined charge options with multiple charge types
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Acceptance
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of service charges configuration including all 21 predefined charges
Integration_Points: Billing System, Service Charge Database, Plan Configuration Service, Financial Calculation Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Service-Charges-Complete
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, Revenue-Impact-Tracking, QA]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Complete service charges database, billing system integration, financial calculation engine
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds for service charges loading and configuration
Data_Requirements: All 21 predefined service charges loaded in database
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Complete service charges database, all predefined charges configured
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with service charges configuration permissions
Test_Data: Steps 1-3 completed, multiple utility services selected for comprehensive testing
Prior_Test_Cases: TC_021, TC_022, TC_023, TC_024 completed successfully
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: All 21 predefined service charges are available and can be configured with appropriate charge types, rates, and frequencies
Secondary_Verifications: Multiple charges can be configured simultaneously, charges can be deleted/modified, business rules enforced
Negative_Verification: Invalid charge configurations rejected, required fields validated, no duplicate charge assignments
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording comprehensive service charges results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if service charges issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for service charges configuration]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: TC_021, TC_022, TC_023, TC_024 (All previous steps)
Blocked_Tests: TC_026 (Plan completion)
Parallel_Tests: Billing calculation tests
Sequential_Tests: TC_026 (Plan creation completion)
Additional Information
Notes: Critical for comprehensive billing system functionality and revenue management accuracy
Edge_Cases: Very high charge amounts, complex charge combinations, currency precision handling
Risk_Areas: Billing calculation accuracy, charge persistence, financial system integration
Security_Considerations: Ensure charge configuration requires appropriate permissions and cannot be manipulated to create unauthorized billing
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Bulk service charges import/export functionality
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Efficient management of complex charge structures
Priority: P3
Scenario_2: Service charge templates for common utility configurations
Type: Enhancement
Rationale: Streamline setup for standard utility offerings
Priority: P4
Test Case 26: Plan Creation Completion and Success Validation
Test Case Metadata
Test Case ID: ONB02US05_TC_026
Title: Verify successful plan creation completion with comprehensive validation and confirmation
Created By: Hetal
Created Date: August 12, 2025
Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Utility Plans & Tariffs Management
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
Customer_Segment: All
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: High
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of plan creation completion workflow and success validation
Integration_Points: Plan Management Service, Database, Validation Engine, Billing System, Notification Service
Code_Module_Mapped: CX-Web-Plan-Creation-Complete
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: [Quality-Dashboard, Engineering, Module-Coverage, QA, Revenue-Impact-Tracking]
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Complete plan management system, database, validation services, billing integration
Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds for plan creation and activation
Data_Requirements: Complete plan configuration from all previous steps
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: All plan creation services active, database ready for new plan storage
User_Roles_Permissions: Utility Administrator role with plan creation and activation permissions
Test_Data: Complete plan configuration from Steps 1-4
Prior_Test_Cases: TC_021, TC_022, TC_023, TC_024, TC_025 all completed successfully
Test Procedure
Verification Points
Primary_Verification: Plan creation completes successfully with all data preserved and plan activated for use
Secondary_Verifications: Success feedback provided, plan appears in listings with accurate data, audit trail created
Negative_Verification: No data loss during creation, no system errors, no incomplete plan activation
Test Results (Template)
Status: [Pass/Fail/Blocked/Not-Tested]
Actual_Results: [Template for recording plan completion results]
Execution_Date: [When test was executed]
Executed_By: [Who performed the test]
Execution_Time: [Actual time taken]
Defects_Found: [Bug IDs if completion issues discovered]
Screenshots_Logs: [Evidence references for plan creation success]
Execution Analytics
Execution_Frequency: Per-Release
Maintenance_Effort: Medium
Automation_Candidate: Yes
Test Relationships
Blocking_Tests: TC_021, TC_022, TC_023, TC_024, TC_025 (All prerequisite steps)
Blocked_Tests: Advanced plan management tests
Parallel_Tests: Plan activation and billing tests
Sequential_Tests: None (End-to-end completion)
Additional Information
Notes: Critical end-to-end test validating complete plan creation workflow from start to finish
Edge_Cases: Network interruptions during creation, concurrent plan creation, very complex plan configurations
Risk_Areas: Data consistency during creation, billing system synchronization, plan activation reliability
Security_Considerations: Ensure plan creation is properly authorized and all data is validated before activation
Missing Scenarios Identified
Scenario_1: Plan creation rollback on failure scenarios
Type: Error Handling
Rationale: Ensure data integrity if plan creation fails partway through
Priority: P2
Scenario_2: Plan creation notification to stakeholders
Type: Integration
Rationale: Alert relevant teams when new plans are activated
Priority: P3
No Comments