Asset Registry--Facility Management (AX02US01)

Test Cases

TC_001: Facilities Registry - View Complete List

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: ~~V1-126_TC_001~~ AX02US01_TC_001
Title: Verify facilities registry displays complete facility list
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: 2025-01-08
Version: 1.0

Classification:

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US01)
Test Type: Functional/UI
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags: Tags: Happy-Path, Facility-Registry, UI, Database, MOD-AX, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Happy-Path

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: Low
Expected_Execution_Time: 2 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: High

Coverage Tracking:

Feature_Coverage: 10%
Integration_Points: Asset-Registry-Service, User-Management-Service, GIS-System
Code_Module_Mapped: AX
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

Related_Requirements: V1-126 Acceptance Criteria #1, #3, #11
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_002, TC_004

Test Environment:

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Asset Registry Service, User Management Service
Performance_Baseline: <3 seconds page load

Prerequisites:

User logged in with Facility Management permissions
At least 5 facilities exist in system (FAC-001 to FAC-005)
Test facilities have various types and operational statuses
Asset hierarchy data populated for metrics calculation

Test Procedure:

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Dashboard > Asset Registry > Facilities	Facilities page loads successfully with correct breadcrumb	N/A	Verify navigation path
2	Verify page header and subtitle	Title shows "Facilities" with subtitle "Complete list of all facilities and their operational status"	N/A	UI verification
3	Verify KPI cards display correct aggregated values	Shows Total Facilities: 5, Operational: 4, Avg Condition Score: 78, Total Capacity: 280 MLD	Sample facility data	Verify business rule calculations
4	Verify facilities registry table columns	Table displays: Facility ID, Name, Type, Zone/Division, Systems, Assets, Condition Score, Design/Current Capacity, Actions	N/A	Column structure verification
5	Verify pagination controls present	Confirm pagination visible	N/A	requirement verification
8	Verify Actions dropdown contains exactly 3 options	Actions menu shows only: View Details, Edit Facility, View Alerts	Any facility row	Limited actions verification
9	Test "View Details" action	Click View Details - should navigate to facility detail page	FAC-001	Only redirection method
10	Verify condition score color coding	Scores display with correct color tags: Good (76-100), Fair (41-75), Poor (0-40)	Various facilities	Business rule validation

Primary_Verification:
All facilities display in single table with pagination controls present and functional

"View Details" action successfully navigates to facility detail page

Condition score color coding follows business rules: Good (76-100), Fair (41-75), Poor (0-40)

Secondary_Verifications:
Page header and subtitle display correctly

All test facilities (FAC-001 to FAC-005) are visible in the registry

Business rule calculations for KPIs are mathematically accurate

Negative_Verification:
No unauthorized actions should be available in the Actions dropdown

TC_002: KPI Cards - Detailed Validation and Calculation Verification

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: ~~V1-126_TC_013~~AX02US01_TC_002
Title: Verify KPI cards display accurate calculations from correct data sources with proper business rule implementation
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: 2025-01-08
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US01)
Test Type: Functional/Data Validation
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, KPI-Validation, UI, Database, Analytics, MOD-AX, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 15%
Integration_Points: Asset-Registry-Service, Facility-Database, Analytics-Engine, Business-Rules-Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: AX
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Business-Metrics, Data-Accuracy
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

Related_Requirements: V1-126 Acceptance Criteria #1, #4, #11, #16
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_001, TC_002, TC_006, TC_008

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Dependencies: Asset Registry Service, Analytics Engine, Database
Performance_Baseline: KPI calculations <2 seconds

Prerequisites

Test Data Setup:
- Total facilities in system: 5 (FAC-001, FAC-002, FAC-003, FAC-004, FAC-005)
- Operational facilities: 4 (FAC-001, FAC-002, FAC-003, FAC-005)
- Inactive facilities: 1 (FAC-004)
- Facility condition scores: FAC-001(85), FAC-002(72), FAC-003(90), FAC-004(65), FAC-005(78)
- Facility capacities: FAC-001(50), FAC-002(25), FAC-003(75), FAC-004(100), FAC-005(30)
User logged in with Facility Management permissions
Database contains accurate facility records with complete data

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Facilities Registry page	Page loads with 4 KPI cards visible	N/A	Initial load
2	Verify Total Facilities KPI	Card shows "5" with correct calculation	Count all facilities regardless of status	Business Rule: COUNT(DISTINCT Facility_ID)
3	Verify Operational Facilities KPI	Card shows active facilities with correct status-based filtering	Count only operational facilities	Business Rule: COUNT(Facilities) WHERE Status = 'Active’/’operational’
4	Verify Avg Condition Score KPI	Card shows "78" with correct weighted average calculation	Calculate: (total of condition score/total facilities) e.x-(85+72+90+65+78)/5 = 78	Business Rule: SUM(Facility_Condition_Score)/COUNT(Facilities)
5	Verify Total Capacity KPI	Card shows "280 MLD" with correct capacity summation	Sum: sum of( Design / Current Capacity (MLD)) 50+25+75+100+30 = 280	Business Rule: SUM(Design_Capacity)
6	Test KPI tooltip functionality	Hover over each KPI to verify descriptive tooltips appear	Tooltip content for each KPI	User experience
7	Verify KPI data refresh	Add new facility and verify KPI counts update correctly	Add test facility FAC-006	Real-time calculation

Primary Verification

Total Facilities KPI: Shows accurate count of all facilities (5)
Operational Facilities KPI: Shows accurate count of operational facilities only (4)
Average Condition Score KPI: Shows mathematically correct average with proper color coding (78 - Good)
Total Capacity KPI: Shows accurate sum of all facility capacities (280 MLD)

Secondary Verifications

KPI tooltips display correct descriptive text
Color coding follows business rules consistently
Real-time updates work when data changes

Negative Verification

Calculations should not double-count any facilities
Color coding should not display incorrect status for condition scores

TC_003: Add New Facility Form - Complete Field Validation and Business Rules

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US01_TC_003
Title: Verify Add New Facility form validates all fields, implements business rules, and successfully creates facility with proper navigation and confirmation workflows
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: 2025-01-08
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US01) - Add Facility Form
Test Type: Functional/Form-Validation/Integration/Workflow
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Facility-Creation, Form-Validation, GIS-Integration, User-Integration, Document-Upload, Workflow-Management, MOD-AX, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Critical, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High

Business Context

Customer_Segment: Enterprise
Revenue_Impact: High
Business_Priority: Must-Have
Customer_Journey: Onboarding
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: Yes

Quality Metrics

Risk_Level: Critical
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 20 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 40%
Integration_Points: User-Management-Service, GIS-Service, Document-Management-System, Settings-Service, Validation-Engine, Asset-Discovery-Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: AX
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, Integration-Testing, Form-Validation, User-Journey
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: Add Form Business Rules, Field Validation Requirements, Navigation Workflows, Document Upload Specifications
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_006, TC_001, TC_020

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: User Management Service, GIS Service, Document Management System, Settings Service, Validation Engine
Performance_Baseline: Form load <3 seconds, validation <1 second, submission <5 seconds
Data_Requirements: User directory with contact details, Settings configured with facility types, zones, operational hours

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: User has facility creation permissions, GIS service active, settings populated
User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with facility creation and document upload permissions
Test_Data: Test documents (PDF, DOCX, XLSX, JPG, PNG), User contacts with phone/email
Prior_Test_Cases: User authentication successful, settings configuration complete

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1. PAGE HEADER & NAVIGATION
1	Navigate to Dashboard > Asset Registry > Facilities	Facilities registry page loads successfully	N/A	Initial navigation
2	Click "Add New Facility" button	Form opens with breadcrumb "Dashboard > add-facility"	N/A	Form access point
3	Verify page title and subtitle	Shows "Add New Facility" title with "Create a new facility in the utility system" subtitle	Page headers	Interface validation
4	Check "Back to Facilities" button presence	Button visible and clickable in header	Navigation element	Return navigation
5	Test unsaved changes warning	Click "Back to Facilities" without data - navigates directly	No data entered	No warning when form empty
6	Return to form and enter test data	Type in Facility Name field	"Test Facility"	Data entry
7	Test unsaved changes confirmation	Click "Back to Facilities" - shows modal "Unsaved changes will be lost. Are you sure you want to continue?"	Confirmation modal	Business Rule: Warning for unsaved data
8	Cancel confirmation and return to form	Stay on form, data preserved	Form data intact	User workflow
2. FACILITY IDENTIFICATION & ROLE SECTION
9	Verify section title	Shows "Facility Identification & Role" section	Section header	Form organization
10	Enter valid Facility Name	Field accepts descriptive name	"Northwood Regional Water Treatment Plant"	Placeholder validation
11	Test Facility Name validation	Try empty name - validation error, try 256+ chars - validation error	Length validation	Validation: Not empty, max 255 characters
12	Test Facility Type dropdown	Dropdown shows options from Settings > Facility Types	Water Treatment Plant, Wastewater Treatment Plant, Water Pumping Station	Business Rule: Dynamic list from settings
13	Select facility type	Choose "Water Treatment Plant"	Type selection	Required field completion
14	Test Operating Status dropdown	Shows predefined status options	Operational, Inactive, Under Construction, Decommissioned	Business Rule: Managed in Settings
15	Select operating status	Choose "Operational"	Status selection	Business Rule: Affects KPI inclusion
16	Test Operational Hours dropdown	Shows 7 predefined schedule options	24/7 - Continuous Operations, 16/5 - 16 hours/day 5 days/week, 8/5, 12/7, 18/6, On-Demand, Seasonal	Business Rule: Integration with O&M and Energy modules
17	Select operational hours	Choose "24/7 - Continuous Operations"	Schedule selection	Required field completion
3. LOCATION & RESPONSIBILITY SECTION
18	Verify section title	Shows "Location & Responsibility" section	Section header	Form organization
19	Check Address/Site Label field	Optional text field for location description	Input field	Optional but recommended
20	Test Map Pin Location interface	Interactive map embedded in form	GIS map interface	Business Rule: Leaflet/ArcGIS/Google Maps integration
21	Test map click functionality	Click on map - pin places at clicked location	Map coordinates	Business Rule: Click to place pin
22	Verify Latitude auto-population	After map click, Latitude field auto-fills	40.7128	Business Rule: Auto-populated from map click
23	Verify Longitude auto-population	After map click, Longitude field auto-fills	-74.0060	Business Rule: Auto-populated from map click
24	Test reverse geocoding	Address field auto-populates from map coordinates	"123 Industrial Blvd, Northwood"	Business Rule: Auto-populated using reverse geocoding
25	Test manual coordinate entry	Enter latitude manually - map pin moves to new location	40.7500	Business Rule: Bidirectional sync
26	Test coordinate validation	Enter invalid latitude (>90) - validation error	95.0	Validation: -90 to 90 for latitude
27	Test longitude validation	Enter invalid longitude (>180) - validation error	185.0	Validation: -180 to 180 for longitude
28	Test Facility Manager dropdown	Searchable dropdown shows user directory	Search interface	Business Rule: Searches system user directory
29	Select facility manager	Choose "John Smith (Operations)"	User selection	Contact integration
30	Verify contact auto-population	Phone and Email fields auto-fill (read-only)	Phone: "555-0123", Email: "john.smith@utility.com"	Business Rule: Auto-populated from user directory
31	Test contact field read-only	Try to edit phone/email - fields are not editable	Read-only validation	Business Rule: Not editable, auto-update only
4. HIGH-LEVEL OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS
32	Enter Overall Design Capacity	Field accepts positive numerical value	50.5	Validation: Positive numerical value
33	Test capacity validation	Enter negative value - validation error	-10	Validation: Must be positive
34	Test capacity placeholder	Verify placeholder text shown	"e.g., 30.5"	User guidance
35	Test Service Zone dropdown	Shows zones from settings	Northern Division, Central Zone, Industrial Park	Business Rule: List managed in Settings
36	Select service zone	Choose "Northern Division"	Zone assignment	Operational control
5. FINANCE & LIFECYCLE SECTION
37	Test Commissioned Date picker	Date picker opens, cannot select future dates	Date interface	Business Rule: Cannot be future date
38	Select valid commissioned date	Choose historical date	2020-01-15	Business Rule: Used to calculate asset age
39	Test future date validation	Try to select tomorrow - validation error	Future date	Date validation
40	Enter Design Useful Life	Field accepts positive integer	25	Validation: Positive integer
41	Test useful life validation	Enter decimal - validation error	25.5	Validation: Must be integer
42	Test useful life placeholder	Verify placeholder text	"e.g., 50"	User guidance
43	Enter Annual O&M Budget	Field accepts positive numerical value	2500000	Validation: Positive numerical value
44	Test budget validation	Enter negative value - validation error	-100000	Validation: Must be positive
45	Test budget placeholder	Verify placeholder text	"e.g., 2500000"	User guidance
46	Test Depreciation Schedule dropdown	Shows schedule options	Monthly, Quarterly, Annual	Business Rule: Calculate depreciation based on schedule
47	Select depreciation schedule	Choose "Annual"	Schedule selection	Financial calculation basis
6. DOCUMENTATION SECTION
48	Verify section title	Shows "Documentation" section	Section header	Document management
49	Test drag-and-drop area	Area visible for file uploads	Upload interface	Business Rule: Supports multiple file uploads
50	Test file type restrictions	Upload PDF - accepted	Site_Plan.pdf	Business Rule: PDF, DOCX, XLSX, JPG, PNG allowed
51	Test valid file upload	Upload DOCX - accepted	Environmental_Permit.docx	Allowed file type
52	Test invalid file type	Upload .txt file - rejected with error	test.txt	Business Rule: Only specific types allowed
53	Test multiple file upload	Upload multiple files simultaneously	Site_Plan.pdf, Permit.docx	Business Rule: Multiple file support
54	Verify upload progress	Progress bar shown during upload	Upload progress	Business Rule: Progress bar displayed
55	Test file size validation	Upload oversized file - validation error	Large file >50MB	File size restrictions
56	Verify uploaded file list	Files appear in list after upload	Uploaded files display	Business Rule: Files linked to facility record
7. FORM VALIDATION & SUBMISSION
57	Test Create Facility button state	Button disabled when required fields empty	Disabled state	Business Rule: Disabled until all mandatory fields completed
58	Fill all required fields	Complete all mandatory fields marked with *	All required data	Form completion
59	Verify button enablement	"Create Facility" button becomes enabled	Enabled state	Business Rule: Enabled when validation passes
60	Test final validation	Click "Create Facility" - system validates all fields	Validation process	Business Rule: Final validation on submission
61	Test validation failure	Clear required field and submit - validation error shown	Field-specific errors	Business Rule: Error messages shown next to problematic fields
62	Complete valid submission	Fill all fields correctly and submit	Successful submission	Business Rule: Facility record created in database
63	Verify success navigation	Redirected to facility detail page or asset discovery	Next step navigation	Business Rule: Navigate to next step or facility profile
64	Test Cancel button	Click "Cancel" - same unsaved changes warning as "Back to Facilities"	Confirmation modal	Business Rule: Identical to Back button behavior
65	Verify facility creation	Navigate to facilities registry - new facility appears in list	Facility in registry	Business Rule: Created facility visible in system
8. ERROR HANDLING & EDGE CASES
66	Test concurrent facility creation	Simulate duplicate ID creation attempt	Unique constraint validation	Database integrity
9. INTEGRATION VALIDATION
67	Verify settings integration	All dropdown options loaded from Settings service	Settings connectivity	Business Rule: Dynamic lists from Settings
68	Test user directory integration	Facility manager search works correctly	User service connectivity	Business Rule: Searches system user directory
69	Verify GIS integration	Map functionality works completely	GIS service connectivity	Business Rule: Interactive map interface
70	Test document service integration	File uploads processed correctly	Document service connectivity	Business Rule: Files linked to facility record
71	Verify validation engine	All field validations work properly	Validation service connectivity	Business Rule: Comprehensive field validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification:

All required fields (*) must be completed before "Create Facility" button enables
Auto-generated Facility ID follows FAC-YYYY-NNN format and is unique
GIS integration works bidirectionally (map ↔ coordinates ↔ address)
Contact details auto-populate when facility manager selected
Unsaved changes warning appears when navigating away with data

Secondary_Verifications:

Negative_Verification:

Cannot submit form with empty required fields
Cannot select future dates for Commissioned Date
Cannot enter negative values for capacity or budget
Cannot upload unsupported file types
Invalid coordinates rejected with appropriate error messages
Network/service failures handled gracefully with user feedback

TC_004: Advanced Search and Filter Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: ~~V1-126_TC_004~~AX02US01_TC_004
Title: Verify comprehensive search and filtering capabilities work correctly with business rules
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: 2025-01-08
Version: 1.0

Classification:

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US01)
Test Type: Functional/UI
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags: Tags: [Happy-Path, Search-Filter, UI, Database], MOD-AX, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Low, Business-High

Business Context:

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

Quality Metrics:

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

Coverage Tracking:

Feature_Coverage: 20%
Integration_Points: Search-Service, Database-Query-Engine, Filter-Logic-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, User-Experience, Performance-Testing
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability:

Related_Requirements: V1-126 Acceptance Criteria #7, #12, #16
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_001, TC_011, TC_013

Test Environment:

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Dependencies: User Management Service, GIS Service, Document Management System
Performance_Baseline: Search response <1 second, Filter application <2 seconds

Prerequisites:

Multiple facilities with diverse data: different types, zones, conditions, statuses
Test facilities: 2 Water Treatment Plants, 2 Pumping Stations, 1 Storage Facility
Condition mix: 2 Good, 2 Fair, 1 Poor
Status mix: 4 Operational, 1 Inactive

Test Procedure:

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Enter partial search term in "Search Facilities..."	Results filter dynamically as typing	Type "Water"	Real-time search
2	Verify multi-field search functionality	Search matches Facility ID, Name, Type, and Zone/Division fields	Results show facilities containing "Water"	Multi-field matching
3	Test exact ID search	Search for specific facility ID	Search "FAC-001"	Exact match search
4	Clear search and click Filters button	Advanced filter modal/dropdown opens with all filter options	N/A	Filter interface
5	Verify available filter categories	Shows: Facility Type (multi-select), Zone/Division (multi-select), Condition (Good/Fair/Poor), Status (Operational/Inactive/Under Construction)	N/A	Filter options
6	Apply single Facility Type filter	Select "Water Treatment Plant" only	Type: "Water Treatment Plant"	Single filter
7	Verify single filter results	Only Water Treatment Plants display in results	2 Water Treatment Plants	Filter logic
8	Add Zone/Division filter	Additionally select "North District"	Zone: "North District"	Multi-filter combination
9	Verify combined filtering logic	Shows only Water Treatment Plants in North District	Expected combined results	AND logic verification
10	Apply Condition score filter	Add "Good" condition filter	Condition: "Good" (76-100 range)	Condition filtering
11	Test Status filter	Add "Operational" status filter	Status: "Operational"	Status filtering
12	Verify all filters work together	Results show facilities matching ALL selected criteria	Multi-criteria results	Complex filter logic
13	Test "Clear All Filters" functionality	All filters reset, full facility list displays	N/A	Filter reset
14	Test Export with active filters	Apply filters and export - should export filtered results only	Filtered dataset	Export integration

Primary_Verification:
Search and filters work independently and in combination with correct business logic Secondary_Verifications:
Real-time search, multi-select filters, export filtered data
Negative_Verification:
Invalid search terms return empty results gracefully

TC_005: Facility Detail View - Page Header and Navigation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US01_TC_005
Title: Verify facility detail view page header displays correct breadcrumbs, title, and navigation functionality
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: 2025-01-08
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US01) - Detail View
Test Type: Functional/UI/Navigation
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Detail-View, Navigation, Breadcrumbs, UI-Validation, MOD-AX, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 5%
Integration_Points: Navigation-Service, User-Interface-Components
Code_Module_Mapped: AX
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, UI-Testing, Navigation-Testing
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: Page Header & Breadcrumbs Business Rules, Navigation Requirements
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_001, TC_007

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Navigation Service, UI Components
Performance_Baseline: Page load <3 seconds, navigation <1 second

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: FAC-001 exists and is accessible
User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with facility view permissions
Test_Data: FAC-001 - Water Treatment Plant A
Prior_Test_Cases: Facility must be accessible from registry

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 from facilities registry	Facility detail page loads successfully	FAC-001	Initial navigation
2	Verify Breadcrumb Structure	Shows "Dashboard > Facilities > Water Treatment Plant A"	Breadcrumb path	Navigation hierarchy display
3	Test "Dashboard" breadcrumb link	Clicking "Dashboard" navigates to main dashboard	Dashboard navigation	Clickable breadcrumb functionality
4	Test "Facilities" breadcrumb link	Clicking "Facilities" navigates to facilities registry	Facilities registry	Breadcrumb navigation validation
5	Verify current page indicator	"Water Treatment Plant A" appears non-clickable	Current page	Non-clickable current page indicator
6	Verify Page Title	Main title displays "FAC-001"	Facility ID	Unique identifier display
7	Check title prominence	FAC-001 displayed as main page header	Title display	Identity reinforcement
8	Verify Subtitle	Shows "Comprehensive facility information and operational details"	Subtitle text	Descriptive page purpose
9	Check subtitle positioning	Subtitle appears below main title	Layout validation	Interface hierarchy
10	Test Navigation Consistency	Breadcrumbs remain consistent across page interactions	Navigation state	State preservation
11	Verify browser back navigation	Browser back button returns to previous page	Browser navigation	Standard navigation support

Verification Points

Primary_Verification:

Breadcrumbs display correct hierarchy: Dashboard > Facilities > Water Treatment Plant A
Dashboard and Facilities breadcrumb links navigate to correct pages
Page title shows unique Facility ID (FAC-001)
Subtitle provides clear page description

Secondary_Verifications:

Current page (Water Treatment Plant A) not clickable in breadcrumbs
Navigation maintains state consistency
Browser navigation functions properly
Direct URL access works correctly

Negative_Verification:

Current page breadcrumb should not be clickable
Invalid facility IDs should handle gracefully
Navigation should not break page state

TC_006: Facility Information Section - Core Data Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US01_TC_006
Title: Verify facility information section displays complete core facility data with proper formatting and GIS integration
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: 2025-01-08
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US01) - Detail View Information
Test Type: Functional/Data-Display/GIS-Integration
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Facility-Information, Data-Display, GIS-Integration, Contact-Management, MOD-AX, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 15%
Integration_Points: GIS-Service, Contact-Management, Asset-Registry
Code_Module_Mapped: AX
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Data-Accuracy, GIS-Integration
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: Facility Information Section Business Rules, GIS Integration, Contact Display
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_005

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Dependencies: GIS Service, Contact Management, Asset Registry
Performance_Baseline: GIS load <3 seconds, data display <2 seconds

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: FAC-001 with complete facility information including contact details
User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with facility information access
Test_Data: FAC-001 - Water Treatment Plant A, commissioned 15/3/2018, contact John Smith
Prior_Test_Cases: Facility detail page must be accessible

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Facility Information section	Section displays with all core facility data	FAC-001	Information display
2	Verify Facility ID Display	Shows "FAC-001" as read-only unique identifier	FAC-001	Primary key display
3	Verify Facility Name Display	Shows "Water Treatment Plant A" as read-only common name	Facility name	Human-readable identifier
4	Verify Facility Type Display	Shows "Water Treatment Plant" as read-only classification	Facility type	Type classification
5	Verify Commission Date Display	Shows "15/3/2018" as read-only service start date	Commission date	Service inception date
6	Verify Contact Person Display	Shows "John Smith" as primary facility contact	Contact person	Responsible person identification
7	Verify Contact Information Display	Shows "+1 (555) 123-4567" as contact phone number	Phone number	Contact method
8	Verify Location Display	Shows "North District" with "View on map" link	Location display	Geographic reference
9	Test "View on map" Functionality	Click link opens GIS modal/view showing facility location	GIS integration	Geographic visualization
10	Verify map accuracy	Map displays correct facility coordinates and location pin	Location accuracy	Geographic precision
11	Test map interaction	Map allows zoom, pan, and layer selection	Map functionality	GIS feature validation
12	Close map view	Map modal closes properly returning to detail view	UI interaction	Modal management
13	Verify Zones/Divisions Served	Shows service zones as tags: "North District", "Northeast Sector", "Industrial Zone A"	Service zones	Service area coverage
14	Test zone overflow handling	If >3-4 zones, shows "+X more" indicator	Overflow display	UI space management
15	Verify Description Display	Shows facility description: "Primary water treatment facility serving the North District with advanced filtration systems"	Description text	Facility purpose summary
16	Check Description tooltip	Hover shows "A summary of the facility's function and key characteristics"	Tooltip text	Description guidance
17	Verify Field Formatting	All fields display in read-only format with consistent styling	Visual consistency	UI standardization
18	Test Data Accuracy	Cross-reference displayed data with facility registry	Data consistency	Cross-system validation
19	Verify contact integration	Contact information matches user directory data	Contact accuracy	User system integration
20	Check date formatting	Commission date uses consistent date format	Date standardization	Temporal data formatting
21	Test Responsive Display	Information section displays properly on different screen sizes	Responsive design	Cross-device compatibility

Verification Points

Primary_Verification:

All facility core data displays accurately in read-only format
"View on map" link opens GIS view with correct facility location
Contact information integrates properly with user directory
Service zones display as tags with overflow handling

Secondary_Verifications:

Tooltips provide helpful descriptions for all fields
Data formatting remains consistent across all fields
GIS integration functions properly with interactive map
Visual styling maintains consistency throughout section

Negative_Verification:

Read-only fields should not be editable
Invalid coordinates should not break map display
Missing data should be handled gracefully

TC_007: Key Metrics Section - Performance Indicators and Calculations

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US01_TC_007
Title: Verify key metrics section displays accurate performance indicators with correct calculations and clickable navigation
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: 2025-01-08
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US01) - Detail View Metrics
Test Type: Functional/Performance-Analytics/Calculations
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Performance-Metrics, Calculations, Analytics, Integration, MOD-AX, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 20%
Integration_Points: Performance-Analytics, Asset-Registry, System-Registry, Network-Registry
Code_Module_Mapped: AX
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Performance-Analytics, Business-Intelligence
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: Key Metrics Section Business Rules, Capacity Calculations, Count Formulas
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_024, TC_026

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Dependencies: Performance Analytics, Asset Registry, System Registry, Network Registry
Performance_Baseline: Metrics calculation <2 seconds, page load <3 seconds

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: FAC-001 with complete asset hierarchy: systems, networks, assets
User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with performance analytics access
Test_Data: Current: 45.2 MLD, Design: 50 MLD, Systems: 3, Networks: 2, Assets: 12
Prior_Test_Cases: Facility with complete asset data

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Key Metrics section	Section displays with 4 metric cards	FAC-001	Metrics dashboard
2	Current Capacity (MLD) Validation
3	Verify capacity display	Shows "45.2 / 50" format	Current: 45.2, Design: 50	Capacity ratio display
4	Check capacity percentage	Shows "90%" calculated percentage	90%	Formula: (Current Capacity / Design Capacity) × 100 = (45.2/50) × 100 = 90.4% ≈ 90%
5	Verify progress bar	Visual progress bar shows 90% fill	Progress visualization	Graphical capacity utilization
6	Check capacity calculation accuracy	Manual calculation: 45.2/50 = 0.904 = 90.4%	Mathematical verification	Formula validation
7	Verify capacity tooltip	Hover shows "The current operational capacity versus the original design capacity. A reduction can indicate performance issues or assets being out of service"	Tooltip guidance	User information
8	Systems Count Validation
9	Verify systems count	Shows "3" active systems	3 systems	Formula: COUNT(Systems) WHERE Parent_Facility_ID = 'FAC-001' AND Status = 'Active'
10	Test systems navigation	Click systems count - navigates to systems list view	Systems tab	Cross-tab navigation
11	Verify systems tooltip	Hover shows "The number of active operational systems contained within this facility. Click to view the list of systems"	Tooltip text	User guidance
	Networks Count Validation
12	Verify networks count	Shows "2" connected networks	2 networks	Formula: COUNT(Networks) WHERE Connected_Facility_ID = 'FAC-001'
13	Test networks navigation	Click networks count - navigates to networks list view	Networks tab	Cross-tab integration
14	Verify networks tooltip	Hover shows "The number of distribution or collection networks connected to this facility. Click to view the list of networks"	Tooltip text	User information
18	Assets Count Validation
19	Verify assets count	Shows "12" total assets	12 assets	Formula: COUNT(Assets) WHERE Parent_Facility_ID = 'FAC-001'
22	Verify assets tooltip	Hover shows "The total number of individual assets registered to this facility. Click to view the list of assets"	Tooltip text	User guidance
23	Capacity Calculation Deep Dive
24	Verify current capacity source	Current capacity calculated from operational asset performance	Performance-based	Based on operational status and performance of critical child assets
25	Check design capacity source	Design capacity from static Design_Capacity field	Static value	Historical design specification
26	Validate capacity reduction scenarios	Reduced capacity indicates asset performance issues	Performance correlation	Capacity impacts from asset status
27	Cross-Reference Count Accuracy
28	Verify systems count accuracy	Cross-check with Systems tab count	Data consistency	Count validation across modules
29	Check networks count accuracy	Cross-check with Networks tab count	Data consistency	Cross-module validation
30	Validate assets count accuracy	Cross-check with Assets tab count	Data consistency	Hierarchical count integrity
31	Real-time Data Updates
32	Test metrics refresh	Metrics update when underlying data changes	Real-time updates	Dynamic data integration
33	Verify calculation performance	Metrics calculate within baseline time	Performance validation	<2 seconds calculation time
34	Check data synchronization	Metrics remain synchronized across tab switches	Data consistency	State management

Verification Points

Primary_Verification:

Current Capacity displays correct ratio (45.2/50) with accurate percentage (90%)
Systems, Networks, and Assets counts match respective registry counts
All count formulas calculate correctly using proper WHERE clauses
Clickable metrics navigate to appropriate detailed views

Secondary_Verifications:

Progress bar visually represents capacity percentage accurately
Tooltips provide helpful descriptions for all metrics
Visual styling maintains consistency across all metric cards
Real-time updates reflect underlying data changes

Negative_Verification:

Capacity percentage should not exceed 100% or go negative
Count calculations should exclude inactive or deleted items
Navigation should handle missing or invalid data gracefully

TC_008: Key Stats Sidebar - Health and Performance Summary

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US01_TC_008
Title: Verify key stats sidebar displays accurate facility age, condition, risk, and efficiency calculations
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: 2025-01-08
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US01) - Detail View Key Stats
Test Type: Functional/Health-Analytics/Risk-Assessment
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Health-Analytics, Risk-Assessment, Age-Calculation, Efficiency-Metrics, MOD-AX, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 15%
Integration_Points: Condition-Assessment, Risk-Calculator, Performance-Analytics, Age-Calculator
Code_Module_Mapped: AX
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Health-Analytics, Risk-Management
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: Key Stats Business Rules, Age Calculation, Condition Aggregation, Risk Assessment
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_025, TC_027

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Dependencies: Condition Assessment System, Risk Calculator, Performance Analytics
Performance_Baseline: Calculations <2 seconds, data display <1 second

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: FAC-001 with condition scores, risk assessments, commissioned date
User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with health analytics access
Test_Data: Commissioned: 15/3/2018, Condition: 85, Risk: 82, Efficiency: 90%
Prior_Test_Cases: Facility with assessment data

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Key Stats sidebar	Sidebar displays with 4 key statistics	FAC-001	Health summary display
2	Age Calculation Validation
3	Verify age display	Shows "7 years" as calculated facility age	7 years	Formula: Current Date − Commissioned Date
4	Check age calculation accuracy	Manual calculation: 2025 - 2018 = 7 years	Mathematical verification	Age calculation validation
5	Check age tooltip	Hover shows "The operational age of the facility, calculated from its commissioned date"	Tooltip guidance	Age calculation explanation
6	Condition Score Validation
7	Verify condition score	Shows "85" as current facility condition	Score: 85	Aggregated from child systems and assets
9	Check condition color coding	Score 85 displays with "Good" green tag	Good (76-100)	Color-coded classification
10	Verify condition thresholds	Good: 76-100, Fair: 41-75, Poor: 0-40	Threshold validation	Business rule compliance
11	Check condition tooltip	Hover shows "The overall health score of this facility, aggregated from its underlying components. (Good: 76–100, Fair: 41–75, Poor: 0–40)"	Tooltip text	Comprehensive condition guidance
12	Risk Score Validation
13	Verify risk score	Shows "82" as calculated facility risk	Score: 82	Combines probability and consequence of failure
14	Check risk color coding	Score 82 displays with "High" red tag	High (71-100)	Risk level classification
15	Verify risk thresholds	Low: 0-30, Medium: 31-70, High: 71-100	Risk categories	Business rule validation
16	Check risk calculation methodology	Risk combines failure probability (condition-based) with consequence (criticality)	Risk formula	Risk = Probability × Consequence
17	Verify risk tooltip	Hover shows "A score representing the overall risk posed by this facility, combining the likelihood of failure with the consequence of that failure"	Tooltip explanation	Risk methodology description
18	Efficiency Score Validation
19	Verify efficiency score	Shows "90%" as operational efficiency	90% efficiency	Composite operational efficiency score
20	Check efficiency components	Efficiency includes capacity utilization, energy efficiency, chemical usage	Component validation	Weighted average calculation
21	Verify efficiency calculation	May include (Current Capacity ÷ Design Capacity), energy efficiency metrics	Calculation components	Multi-factor efficiency assessment
22	Check efficiency tooltip	Hover shows "A composite score measuring the overall operational efficiency of the facility, including factors like capacity utilization and energy performance"	Tooltip guidance	Efficiency explanation
23	Color Coding Validation
24	Verify condition color accuracy	Condition 85 = Good = Green tag	Color validation	Visual classification accuracy
25	Check risk color accuracy	Risk 82 = High = Red tag	Color validation	Risk level visualization
26	Validate color consistency	Colors match business rules across application	Color standardization	UI consistency
27	Aggregation Logic Validation
28	Verify condition aggregation source	Condition score aggregated from child systems and assets	Data source	Hierarchical health aggregation
29	Check risk aggregation method	Risk calculated from component risks weighted by criticality	Risk methodology	Criticality-weighted risk calculation
30	Validate efficiency aggregation	Efficiency combines multiple operational metrics	Composite calculation	Multi-dimensional efficiency

Verification Points

Primary_Verification:

Age calculated correctly: Current Date - Commissioned Date = 7 years
Condition score (85) displays with correct "Good" green color coding
Risk score (82) shows with proper "High" red classification
Efficiency score (90%) reflects composite operational metrics

Secondary_Verifications:

Color coding follows business rules (Good=Green, High Risk=Red)
Tooltips provide comprehensive explanations for all metrics
Aggregation logic properly combines component scores
Visual formatting maintains consistency throughout sidebar

Negative_Verification:

Age calculation should handle leap years and date edge cases
Color coding should not display incorrect classifications
Aggregation should not include inactive or invalid components

Test Case 9: Performance Overview KPI Validation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US03_TC_009
Title: Validate Performance Overview Section KPI Calculations and Display
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US03)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Facility-Management, Dashboard, KPI-Calculation, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-End-to-End, Happy-Path

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 85%
Integration_Points: CxServices, API, Database, Happy-Path
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage, KPI-Validation
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US03-AC1, AX02US03-AC2, AX02US03-BR1-BR7
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US03_TC_002, AX02US03_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Facility Service, Asset Management Service, Work Order Service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds page load
Data_Requirements: FAC-001 with 138 assets, historical data (3 months)

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Facility FAC-001 configured with complete asset inventory
User_Roles_Permissions: Facility Manager role with read access
Test_Data:
- Facility ID: FAC-001
- Asset Count: 138 total assets
- Out of Service Assets: 8
- Scheduled Inspections: 120
- Completed Inspections: 110
Prior_Test_Cases: Login authentication test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Performance tab	Performance Overview loads with 7 KPI cards displayed	FAC-001	Default tab, page loads < 3 seconds
2	Verify Facility Condition Index	Shows 87.3 with trend ↑2.1% from last month, green status indicator	Value: 87.3, Trend: ↑2.1%	Formula: Weighted average of Condition Score of all assets in facility
3	Validate Asset Availability calculation	Shows 94.2% with trend ↑1.3% from last month	94.2%, Trend: ↑1.3%	Formula: (Scheduled Operating Time - Unplanned Downtime) / Scheduled Operating Time × 100
4	Verify Out of Service count and percentage	Shows 8 (5.8%) with trend ↑2 from last month	Count: 8, Percentage: 5.8%	Formula: COUNT(Assets WHERE Status = 'Out of Service') / Total Assets × 100
5	Check Avg Remaining Life calculation	Shows 12.4 yrs with trend ↓0.8 yrs from last quarter	12.4 years, Trend: ↓0.8 yrs	Formula: SUM(Asset RUL) / COUNT(Assets) for all facility assets
6	Validate Inspection Compliance percentage	Shows 91.7% with status within target range	91.7%, Status: Green	Formula: (Completed Inspections / Scheduled Inspections) × 100 = (110/120) × 100
7	Verify Overall Risk Score and classification	Shows 23 with "Low risk" subtitle	Score: 23, Classification: Low risk	Range: 0–30 = Low, 31–70 = Medium, 71–100 = High
8	Check Service Level Achievement percentage	Shows 96.8% above target threshold	96.8%, Status: Above target	Formula: (Time Met Service Level / Total Time) × 100
9	Verify hover tooltips on each KPI	Tooltip displays with title and description for each metric	All 7 KPIs	Tooltip content matches specification
10	Validate trend indicators and colors	Green for positive trends, red for negative trends, appropriate arrow directions	Visual indicators	Color coding per business rules

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All 7 KPI cards display with correct calculated values and trends
Secondary_Verifications:
- Tooltips appear with correct content
- Trend indicators show proper colors and directions
- Performance baseline met (< 3 seconds load time)
Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, no missing data indicators, no broken UI elements

Test Case 10: Energy Consumption Section Validation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US03_TC_010
Title: Validate Energy Consumption Section Metrics and System Breakdown
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US03)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Energy-Management, Cost-Analysis, API, Database, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Point

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 90%
Integration_Points: Energy-Service, API, Database, Cost-Calculation
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, ENERGY
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Energy-Analytics, Cost-Management, Module-Coverage
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US03-AC3, AX02US03-AC4, AX02US03-BR8-BR10
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-025 (Fixed: Energy efficiency calculation rounding)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US03_TC_001, AX02US03_TC_015

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Energy Management Service, Billing Service, Cost Calculator API
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds section load
Data_Requirements: FAC-001 energy consumption data (3 months), cost per kWh rates

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Energy consumption data for FAC-001 (last 3 months)
User_Roles_Permissions: Facility Manager with energy data access
Test_Data:
- Total kWh Consumed: 8,550 kWh
- Total ML Produced: 30 ML
- Cost per kWh: $0.12
- Budget: $20,000
Prior_Test_Cases: Performance Overview section test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Scroll to Energy Consumption section	Section loads with 3 main components	Energy section	Below Performance Overview
2	Verify Energy Efficiency calculation	Shows 285 kWh/ML with trend ↓12 kWh/ML vs last month	285 kWh/ML, Trend: ↓12	Formula: Total kWh Consumed ÷ Total ML Produced = 8,550 ÷ 30
3	Validate Monthly Energy Cost	Shows $1,026 with trend ↓8.2% vs budget	$1,026, Variance: ↓8.2%	Formula: 8,550 × $0.12 = $1,026. Budget variance calculation
4	Check Energy Consumption by System ranking	Top 5 systems listed in descending order by kWh	System ranking list	Sorted by consumption, progress bars visible
5	Verify system progress bars	Each system shows percentage of total consumption	Progress bars	Visual representation of consumption share
6	Click on top energy consuming system	Navigates to detailed system view or shows system details	System details	Clickable functionality
7	Validate trend indicators	Downward trend (positive) for efficiency, cost under budget	Green indicators	Efficiency improvement = positive trend

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Energy efficiency and cost calculations are accurate
Secondary_Verifications: System ranking is correct, progress bars proportional, clickable navigation works
Negative_Verification: No division by zero errors, no negative efficiency values

Test Case 11: Water Quality Compliance Parameter Display

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US03_TC_011
Title: Validate Water Quality Parameters from Compliance Service Order
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US03)
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Compliance, Water-Quality, External-Dependency, API, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-External-Dependency

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: Medium
Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: High
Failure_Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100%
Integration_Points: Compliance-Service, Water-Quality-API, External-Lab-Data
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, COMPLIANCE, WQ
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web, Mobile

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: Compliance-Dashboard, Regulatory-Reporting, Integration-Health
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US03-AC5, AX02US03-AC6, AX02US03-BR11-BR15
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-018 (Fixed: pH status color coding)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US03_TC_001, AX02US03_TC_020

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Safari 16+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11, iOS 16+
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080, Mobile-375x667
Dependencies: Compliance Service Order API, Water Quality Lab Integration, Parameter Threshold Service
Performance_Baseline: < 1 second parameter load
Data_Requirements: Active compliance service order for FAC-001 with current water quality readings

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Compliance service order attached to FAC-001 with current water quality data
User_Roles_Permissions: Quality Manager role with compliance data access
Test_Data:
- Turbidity: 0.8 NTU (Target: < 1.0 NTU)
- Chlorine: 1.2 mg/L (Target: 0.5-2.0 mg/L)
- pH: 7.3 (Target: 6.5-8.5)
- Bacteria: 0 CFU/100mL (Target: 0 CFU/100mL)
Prior_Test_Cases: Compliance service order integration test

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Compliance & Water Quality section	Section displays parameter cards from attached service order	Service order data	Integration with compliance service
2	Verify Turbidity parameter card	Shows 0.8 NTU with "Within Limits" green status	0.8 NTU, Status: Green	Target: < 1.0 NTU, within range
3	Validate Chlorine level display	Shows 1.2 mg/L with "Within Limits" green status	1.2 mg/L, Status: Green	Target range: 0.5-2.0 mg/L
4	Check pH level and status	Shows 7.3 with "Within Limits" green status	7.3, Status: Green	Target range: 6.5-8.5
5	Verify Bacteria count	Shows 0 CFU/100mL with "Compliant" status	0 CFU/100mL, Status: Compliant	Pass/fail parameter
6	Test approaching limit scenario	Modify test data: Turbidity = 0.95 NTU	0.95 NTU, Status: Yellow	"Approaching Limit" status
7	Test exceeded limit scenario	Modify test data: pH = 8.7	8.7, Status: Red	"Exceeded" status for out of range
8	Validate tooltip content	Hover shows parameter description and target range	Tooltip content	Matches specification format

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All water quality parameters display with correct values and status colors
Secondary_Verifications: Status tags use correct color coding, tooltips show accurate information
Negative_Verification: No missing parameters, no incorrect status assignments, proper handling of null values

Test Case 12: Asset Health Distribution and Financial Overview

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US03_TC_012
Title: Validate Asset Health Status Distribution and Financial KPIs
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US03)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Asset-Management, Financial-Analysis, Database, MOD-Facility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Low, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Point

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 80%
Integration_Points: Asset-Service, Financial-Service, Work-Order-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, ASSET, FINANCE
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Asset-Analytics, Financial-Dashboard, Capital-Planning
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US03-AC7, AX02US03-AC8, AX02US03-BR16-BR20
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US03_TC_001, AX02US03_TC_012, AX02US03_TC_018

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Asset Management Service, Financial Service, Work Order Service, Capital Planning API
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds section load
Data_Requirements: FAC-001 complete asset inventory with condition scores, financial data, maintenance history

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Asset inventory complete for FAC-001, financial data current, maintenance history available
User_Roles_Permissions: Facility Manager with asset and financial data access
Test_Data:
- Total Assets: 138
- Good Condition: 85 assets (61.6%)
- Fair Condition: 41 assets (29.7%)
- Poor Condition: 12 assets (8.7%)
- Total Asset Value: $2,450,000
- Monthly Maintenance Spend: $18,500
- Monthly Budget: $20,000
- Assets needing replacement (RUL < 2 years): 15
- High-failure assets: 8
Prior_Test_Cases: Asset data synchronization test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Asset Health & Financials section	Section displays with 5 main components	Asset data	Bottom section of Performance tab
2	Verify Asset Health Status Distribution	Shows breakdown: Good (85, 61.6%), Fair (41, 29.7%), Poor (12, 8.7%)	Condition counts	Formula: (Status Count / Total Assets) × 100
3	Validate Asset Age Profile	Displays age bands with counts and progress bars	Age distribution	Visual breakdown by age ranges
4	Check Total Asset Value	Shows $2,450,000 in Financial Overview	$2,450,000	SUM(Current Book Value) of all assets
5	Verify Maintenance Spend	Shows $18,500 for current period	$18,500	SUM(Maintenance Costs) for period
6	Validate Budget Variance	Shows 7.5% under budget (positive variance)	↓7.5% vs budget	((20,000 - 18,500) / 20,000) × 100
7	Check Assets Approaching Replacement list	Shows top 3 assets with RUL < 2 years, priority tags	Replacement list	Watchlist with priority indicators
8	Verify Frequent Failure Assets	Shows top 3 assets with highest failure-related work orders	Failure assets	Unreliable asset identification
9	Test view button functionality	Clicking "Schedule" initiates capital planning workflow	Schedule action	Integration with planning system

Verification Points:

Primary_Verification:

Asset Health Status Distribution shows correct breakdown with accurate percentages
Financial Overview displays accurate total asset value and maintenance spend
Budget variance calculation is mathematically correct (7.5% under budget)
Assets Approaching Replacement list shows assets with RUL < 2 years
Frequent Failure Assets list identifies highest failure-related work orders

Secondary_Verifications:

Asset Age Profile displays visual breakdown by age ranges with progress bars
Priority tags are displayed correctly for replacement assets
Schedule button integrates properly with capital planning workflow
All financial calculations are accurate and up-to-date

Negative_Verification:

No incorrect percentage calculations in health status distribution
No missing or incorrect financial data
No broken integration with capital planning system
No missing priority indicators for critical assets

Test Case 13: Critical Assets Out of Service Validation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US04_TC_013
Title: Validate Critical Assets Out of Service List Display and Functionality
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Alerts Tab (AX02US04)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Critical-Assets, Out-of-Service, Work-Orders, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-End-to-End, Alert-Management

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 95%
Integration_Points: Work-Order-Service, Asset-Service, Critical-Asset-Alert-Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, ALERT, WO
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Alert-Management, Critical-Asset-Monitoring, Work-Order-Integration
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US04-AC1, AX02US04-AC2, AX02US04-BR1-BR3
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US04_TC_002, AX02US04_TC_006

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Work Order Service, Asset Management Service, Alert Engine
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds list load
Data_Requirements: FAC-001 with critical assets, some out of service with work orders

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Critical assets configured for FAC-001, work orders created for out-of-service assets
User_Roles_Permissions: Facility Manager role with alert and work order access
Test_Data:
- Critical Assets Out of Service: 3
- Asset P-003 (Secondary Pump): Status "Under Repair", WO-2024-089, ETA: 2 hours
- Asset F-012 (Primary Filter): Status "Parts Ordered", WO-2024-091, ETA: 24 hours
- Asset S-045 (Flow Sensor): Status "Awaiting Technician", WO-2024-093, ETA: 4 hours
Prior_Test_Cases: Asset status synchronization test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Alerts tab	Alerts tab loads with Active Alerts section displaying critical assets list	FAC-001	Default alerts view
2	Verify Critical Assets Out of Service section	Shows 3 critical assets with Status = 'Out of Service' AND Criticality = 'High'/'Critical'	3 critical assets	Business rule: Status = 'Out of Service' AND Criticality IN ('High', 'Critical')
6	Test hover tooltip on Asset P-003	Tooltip displays: "This critical asset is currently down. The repair work order is WO-2024-089 with a status of Under Repair."	Tooltip content	Tooltip matches specification
7	Click View button for Asset P-003	Navigates to work order WO-2024-089 in service orders section	Navigation to WO-2024-089	Service order integration
8	Verify list sorting/ordering	Assets displayed in logical order (by criticality, then by ETA)	Asset order	Priority-based sorting
9	Test real-time updates	Simulate asset status change, verify list updates automatically	Real-time update	Live data synchronization
10	Validate empty state handling	When no critical assets are out of service, shows appropriate message	Empty state	Graceful empty state display

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Critical assets list displays only assets with Status='Out of Service' AND Criticality='High'/'Critical'
Secondary_Verifications:
- All required fields (Asset Name, ID, Status, ETA) display correctly
- View buttons navigate to correct work orders
- Tooltips show accurate work order information
- Real-time updates function properly
Negative_Verification: No non-critical assets appear in list, no assets with Status≠'Out of Service', no broken navigation links

Test Case 14: Anomalies Detection and Investigation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US04_TC_014
Title: Validate Anomalies Detection List and Investigation Work Order Creation
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Alerts Tab (AX02US04)
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Anomaly-Detection, Predictive-Analytics, Work-Order-Creation, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-External-Dependency

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 90%
Integration_Points: Predictive-Analytics-Engine, Work-Order-Service, Asset-Sensor-Data
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, ANOMALY, WO, ANALYTICS
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Predictive-Analytics, Anomaly-Detection, Work-Order-Automation
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US04-AC3, AX02US04-AC4, AX02US04-BR4-BR6
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-056 (Fixed: Anomaly priority calculation)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US04_TC_001, AX02US04_TC_008

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Predictive Analytics Engine, Work Order Service, Sensor Data API
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds anomaly load
Data_Requirements: Assets with sensor data showing anomalies, baseline parameters established

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Predictive analytics engine running, sensor data available, baseline parameters configured
User_Roles_Permissions: Facility Manager with anomaly investigation and work order creation permissions
Test_Data:
- Motor M-007: Vibration levels high, Priority: High, Detected: 5 min ago
- Pump P-019: Temperature spike detected, Priority: Medium, Detected: 12 min ago
- Valve V-034: Pressure variance, Priority: Low, Detected: 25 min ago
Prior_Test_Cases: Predictive analytics integration test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Anomalies section in Alerts tab	Anomalies list loads showing assets with detected anomalies	Anomaly data	Predictive analytics integration
2	Verify Motor M-007 anomaly display	Shows "Motor M-007", "Vibration levels high", "High" priority tag, "5 min ago"	M-007 anomaly	High priority anomaly validation
3	Validate Pump P-019 anomaly display	Shows "Pump P-019", "Temperature spike detected", "Medium" priority tag, "12 min ago"	P-019 anomaly	Medium priority anomaly validation
4	Check Valve V-034 anomaly display	Shows "Valve V-034", "Pressure variance", "Low" priority tag, "25 min ago"	V-034 anomaly	Low priority anomaly validation
5	Test priority tag color coding	High=Red, Medium=Yellow, Low=Green priority tags	Priority colors	Visual priority indication
6	Hover tooltip on Motor M-007	Shows: "A potential failure has been detected on Motor M-007. The system recommends creating an investigation work order to prevent a full failure."	Tooltip content	Tooltip matches specification
7	Click view button for Motor M-007	Creates new inspection work order pre-populated with Asset ID=M-007, Description="Vibration levels high", assigned to maintenance team	Work order creation	Automated work order generation
8	Verify work order pre-population	New work order shows Type="Inspection", Asset="M-007", Priority="High", Description includes anomaly details	WO pre-population	Data transfer accuracy
9	Test anomaly list real-time updates	Simulate new anomaly detection, verify list updates with new entry	Real-time updates	Live anomaly feed
10	Validate time since detection updates	Verify time stamps update correctly (e.g., "5 min ago" becomes "6 min ago")	Time updates	Dynamic timestamp updates

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Anomalies list displays assets with sensor data deviations, priority assignment is accurate
Secondary_Verifications:
- Investigation button creates properly pre-populated work orders
- Priority tags use correct color coding
- Time since detection updates dynamically
- Tooltips provide accurate information
Negative_Verification: No false anomalies displayed, no work order creation failures, no incorrect priority assignments

Test Case 15: Alert KPI Cards Validation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US04_TC_015
Title: Validate Alert KPI Cards Calculations and Navigation
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Alerts Tab (AX02US04)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, KPI-Cards, Emergency-Work-Orders, SLA-Breaches, Overdue-Tasks, Work-Order-Backlog, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100%
Integration_Points: Work-Order-Service, SLA-Monitoring, O&M-Section
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, WO, SLA, OM
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: KPI-Dashboard, Work-Order-Analytics, SLA-Monitoring
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US04-AC5, AX02US04-AC6, AX02US04-BR7-BR10
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US04_TC_001, AX02US04_TC_004

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Work Order Service, SLA Monitoring Service, O&M Module
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds KPI calculation
Data_Requirements: Work orders with various priorities and statuses, SLA breach records, overdue tasks

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Work orders created with different priorities and statuses, SLA monitoring active
User_Roles_Permissions: Facility Manager with work order and SLA data access
Test_Data:
- Emergency Work Orders: 7 (Priority='Emergency' OR 'Critical', Status='Open')
- SLA Breaches: 3 (SLA breach events for facility)
- Overdue Tasks: 12 (Due_Date < Current_Date, not assigned)
- Work Order Backlog: 24 orders, 156 estimated hours
Prior_Test_Cases: Work order data synchronization test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Alert KPI Cards section	4 KPI cards display with calculated values	KPI cards	Alert summary metrics
2	Verify Emergency Work Orders card	Shows "7" emergency work orders	Count: 7	Formula: COUNT(WOs) WHERE Facility_ID=[FAC-001] AND Priority IN ('Emergency','Critical') AND Status='Open'
3	Validate SLA Breaches card	Shows "3" SLA breach events	Count: 3	Formula: COUNT(SLA_Breach_Service_orders) WHERE Facility_ID=[FAC-001]
4	Check Overdue Tasks card	Shows "12" overdue tasks	Count: 12	Formula: COUNT(WOs) WHERE Facility_ID=[FAC-001] AND Due_Date < Current_Date
5	Verify Work Order Backlog card	Shows "24 / Est. 156 hours"	Count: 24, Hours: 156	Formula: COUNT(WOs) WHERE Status IN ('Open','Scheduled'), SUM(Estimated_Duration)
6	Test Emergency Work Orders tooltip	Shows: "Number of open, high-priority work orders requiring immediate assignment. Click to dispatch a team."	Tooltip content	Tooltip matches specification
7	Click View button on Emergency Work Orders	Navigates to O&M section with filters pre-applied showing emergency work orders	Navigation with filters	Filter integration with O&M
8	Test SLA Breaches View button	Navigates to O&M section showing SLA breach service orders	SLA breach navigation	Filtered view of breaches
9	Click View Details on Overdue Tasks	Shows filtered list of overdue work orders	Overdue tasks list	Overdue work order display
10	Test Work Order Backlog View Details	Shows all open and scheduled work orders with estimated hours	Backlog details	Complete backlog view
11	Verify KPI calculations update	Simulate work order status change, verify KPI values update	Real-time KPI updates	Dynamic calculation updates

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All KPI card calculations are mathematically correct based on work order data
Secondary_Verifications:
- View buttons navigate to correctly filtered O&M sections
- Tooltips display accurate descriptions
- Real-time updates function properly
- Visual indicators highlight urgent items appropriately
Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, no broken navigation links, no missing filter applications

Test Case 16: Predictive Maintenance Alerts with MPS Calculation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US04_TC_016
Title: Validate Predictive Maintenance Alerts MPS Calculation and Schedule Functionality
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Alerts Tab (AX02US04)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Predictive-Maintenance, MPS-Calculation, Risk-Score, Performance-Index, Work-Order-Creation, API, Database, MOD-Facility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 85%
Integration_Points: Risk-Assessment-Engine, Performance-Analytics, Work-Order-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, PREDICT, RISK, PERF
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Predictive-Analytics, Maintenance-Planning, Risk-Assessment
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US04-AC7, AX02US04-AC8, AX02US04-BR11-BR13
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-071 (Fixed: MPS calculation rounding error)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US04_TC_002, AX02US04_TC_005

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Risk Assessment Engine, Performance Analytics, Work Order Creation Service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds MPS calculation
Data_Requirements: Assets with risk scores and performance index data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Risk assessment data available, performance metrics calculated, MPS algorithm configured
User_Roles_Permissions: Facility Manager with predictive maintenance access
Test_Data:
- Motor M-015: Risk Score=75, Performance Index=40, MPS=75×(1-40/100)=45
- Pump P-028: Risk Score=60, Performance Index=25, MPS=60×(1-25/100)=45
- Filter F-091: Risk Score=85, Performance Index=10, MPS=85×(1-10/100)=76.5
Prior_Test_Cases: Risk assessment and performance calculation tests must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Predictive Maintenance Alerts section	Section displays top 3 assets with highest MPS scores	Top 3 by MPS	MPS = Risk Score × (1 - (Performance Index / 100))
7	Test hover tooltip on Filter F-091	Shows: "Assets predicted to require maintenance soon. Click 'Schedule' to create proactive work order."	Tooltip content	Tooltip matches specification
8	Click schedule button for Filter F-091	Opens service order creation form with pre-filled Asset ID=F-091, Type=Preventive Maintenance	Work order creation	Pre-filled form validation
9	Verify pre-filled form data	Form shows Asset=F-091, Priority=High (due to MPS>60), Description includes risk and performance data	Form pre-population	Data transfer accuracy
10	Test MPS calculation edge cases	Verify handling of Risk Score=0, Performance Index=100, and boundary values	Edge case handling	Boundary value testing
11	Validate real-time MPS updates	Simulate performance index change, verify MPS recalculation and list reordering	Real-time updates	Dynamic MPS calculation
12	Check list ordering by MPS	Confirm top 3 assets are sorted by highest MPS scores	Descending MPS order	Correct prioritization

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: MPS calculations are mathematically correct using formula MPS = Risk Score × (1 - (Performance Index / 100))
Secondary_Verifications:
- Top 3 assets display correctly sorted by MPS score
- Schedule button creates properly pre-filled work orders
- MPS interpretation categories are correctly applied
- Real-time updates function when underlying data changes
Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, no incorrect sorting, no form pre-population failures

Test Case 17: High Maintenance Cost Assets Analysis

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US04_TC_017
Title: Validate High Maintenance Cost Assets List and Review Functionality
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Alerts Tab (AX02US04)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P3-Medium
Execution Phase: Acceptance
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Maintenance-Cost-Analysis, Financial-Analysis, Asset-Management, Database, MOD-Facility, P3-Medium, Phase-Acceptance, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low

Business Context

Customer_Segment: Enterprise
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Could-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 75%
Integration_Points: Financial-Service, Asset-Service, Maintenance-Cost-Analytics
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, FINANCE, ASSET
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: CSM
Report_Categories: Cost-Analysis, Asset-Performance, Financial-Dashboard
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Low

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US04-AC9, AX02US04-BR14
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US04_TC_004, AX02US04_TC_006

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Financial Service, Asset Management Service, Cost Analytics
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds cost calculation
Data_Requirements: Assets with maintenance cost history (labor + parts)

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Maintenance cost data available for assets, cost analytics configured
User_Roles_Permissions: Facility Manager with financial data access
Test_Data:
- Pump P-045: Monthly cost $2,850 (highest)
- Motor M-023: Monthly cost $2,200 (second)
- Filter F-067: Monthly cost $1,950 (third)
- Valve V-089: Monthly cost $1,800 (fourth)
Prior_Test_Cases: Financial data synchronization test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to High Maintenance Cost Assets section	List displays assets ranked by average monthly maintenance cost	Cost ranking	Descending order by cost
5	Verify cost color formatting	All monthly costs display in red to indicate negative financial impact	Red cost display	Visual negative impact indicator
7	Click view button for Pump P-045	Navigates to detailed financial and maintenance history for P-045	Asset financial history	Detailed cost analysis
8	Verify cost breakdown in detail view	Shows labor costs, parts costs, frequency of maintenance, trend analysis	Cost breakdown	Comprehensive financial analysis
9	Test list ordering accuracy	Confirm assets sorted in descending order by average monthly cost	Correct sorting	Highest to lowest cost
10	Validate cost calculation accuracy	Verify monthly costs match average of (labor + parts) costs over period	Cost calculation	Formula validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Assets are correctly ranked by average monthly maintenance cost in descending order
Secondary_Verifications:
- All costs display in red color indicating negative impact
- Review button navigates to detailed financial analysis
- Cost calculations are accurate (labor + parts average)
- Tooltips provide correct information
Negative_Verification: No incorrect sorting, no missing cost data, no calculation errors

Test Case 18: Active Violations and Overdue Inspections

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US04_TC_018
Title: Validate Active Violations and Overdue Inspections Lists with Navigation
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Alerts Tab (AX02US04)
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Smoke
Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Compliance-Violations, Overdue-Inspections, Regulatory-Compliance, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 90%
Integration_Points: Compliance-Module, Inspection-Service, O&M-Module
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, COMPLIANCE, INSPECT, OM
Requirement_Coverage: Complete

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: Compliance-Dashboard, Regulatory-Reporting, Inspection-Management
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US04-AC10, AX02US04-AC11, AX02US04-BR15-BR17
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-082 (Fixed: Overdue inspection calculation)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US04_TC_003, AX02US04_TC_007

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Compliance Module, Inspection Service, O&M Module, Regulatory Database
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds compliance data load
Data_Requirements: Active compliance violations, overdue inspection records

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Compliance violations configured, inspection schedules established, regulatory data current
User_Roles_Permissions: Facility Manager with compliance and inspection data access
Test_Data:
- Active Violations: 2 (pH Limit Violation: PENDING, Turbidity Violation: MONITOR)
- Overdue Inspections: 4 (Asset P-067: 15 days overdue, High priority; Asset F-023: 8 days overdue, Medium priority)
Prior_Test_Cases: Compliance module integration test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Active Violations section	Section displays current unresolved compliance violations for facility	Violation data	Compliance integration
2	Verify pH Limit Violation entry	Shows "pH Limit Violation", Status: "PENDING", Resolution due date displayed	pH violation: PENDING	Regulatory compliance violation
3	Validate Turbidity Violation entry	Shows "Turbidity Violation", Status: "MONITOR", Resolution due date displayed	Turbidity violation: MONITOR	Active monitoring violation
4	Test hover tooltip on pH violation	Shows: "Current unresolved compliance violations. Click 'View Details' for full response plan."	Tooltip content	Tooltip matches specification
5	Click View Details on pH violation	Navigates to detailed violation record in Compliance module with response plan	Compliance module navigation	Full violation details
6	Navigate to Overdue Inspections section	Section displays mandatory inspections past due date, sorted by priority and duration	Inspection data	Overdue inspection tracking
7	Verify Asset P-067 overdue inspection	Shows "Asset P-067", Priority: "High", "15 days overdue"	P-067: 15 days overdue, High	High priority overdue item
8	Validate Asset F-023 overdue inspection	Shows "Asset F-023", Priority: "Medium", "8 days overdue"	F-023: 8 days overdue, Medium	Medium priority overdue item
9	Check priority tag color coding	High priority shows red tag, Medium priority shows yellow tag	Priority colors	Visual priority indication
10	Click Schedule button for P-067	Opens inspection service order creation form with pre-filled Asset ID and high priority	Work order creation	Inspection scheduling
11	Test View button on overdue inspections	Navigates to O&M tab showing filtered list of inspection service orders	O&M navigation	Filtered inspection orders
12	Verify sorting by priority and overdue duration	High priority items appear first, then sorted by days overdue descending	Sorting validation	Business rule compliance

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Active violations and overdue inspections display correctly with accurate status and timing information
Secondary_Verifications:
- Priority tags use correct color coding
- Navigation buttons lead to appropriate modules with correct context
- Sorting follows business rules (priority first, then overdue duration)
- Work order creation pre-fills correct information
Negative_Verification: No resolved violations appear in active list, no future inspections in overdue list, no broken navigation links

Test Case 19: Facility Book Value Section Validation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US05_TC_019
Title: Validate Facility Book Value Calculations and Display
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Finance Tab (AX02US05)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Financial-Calculations, Book-Value, Depreciation, Capital-Cost, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-End-to-End, Financial-Analytics

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 90%
Integration_Points: Financial-Service, Asset-Registry, Depreciation-Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, FINANCE, DEPRECIATION
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Financial-Dashboard, Asset-Valuation, Depreciation-Analytics
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US05-AC1, AX02US05-AC2, AX02US05-BR1-BR4
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US05_TC_002, AX02US05_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Financial Service, Asset Registry, Depreciation Calculator
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds financial data load
Data_Requirements: FAC-001 with complete financial history and asset data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Facility FAC-001 configured with financial data, depreciation schedule active
User_Roles_Permissions: Finance Manager role with financial data access
Test_Data:
- Initial Capital Cost: $25,000,000
- Accumulated Depreciation: $12,500,000
- Current Book Value: $12,500,000
- Salvage Value: $0
- Design Useful Life: 50 years
Prior_Test_Cases: Financial data synchronization test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Finance tab	Finance tab loads with Facility Book Value section displaying 4 financial metrics	FAC-001	Default finance view
2	Verify Current Book Value calculation	Shows $12,500,000	$12,500,000	Formula: Initial Capital Cost - Accumulated Depreciation = $25,000,000 - $12,500,000
3	Validate Initial Capital Cost display	Shows $25,000,000 as static value	$25,000,000	Original acquisition/construction cost
4	Check Accumulated Depreciation display	Shows ($12,500,000) in red/negative formatting	($12,500,000)	Sum of all depreciation charged, displayed as negative
5	Verify Salvage Value display	Shows $0	$0	Estimated residual value at end of useful life
6	Test Current Book Value tooltip	Hover shows: "The accounting value of the facility, calculated as initial cost minus all depreciation to date."	Tooltip content	Tooltip matches specification
7	Test Initial Capital Cost tooltip	Hover shows: "The original total cost to acquire or build the facility, including all initial expenses."	Tooltip content	Tooltip accuracy validation
8	Validate Accumulated Depreciation tooltip	Hover shows: "Total depreciation charged against the facility since it was placed in service."	Tooltip content	Negative value explanation
9	Check Salvage Value tooltip	Hover shows: "Estimated resale value of the facility at end of its useful life; this amount is not depreciated."	Tooltip content	End-of-life value explanation
10	Verify Calculate Finance button state	Button is enabled and shows appropriate tooltip based on current period calculation status	Button state	Conditional button availability

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Current Book Value calculation is mathematically correct (Initial Capital Cost - Accumulated Depreciation)
Secondary_Verifications:
- All financial values display with proper formatting and currency symbols
- Accumulated Depreciation shows in red/negative formatting
- Tooltips provide accurate and helpful information
- Calculate Finance button state reflects current period status
Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, no missing currency formatting, no incorrect tooltip content

Test Case 20: Calculate Finance Button Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US05_TC_020
Title: Validate Calculate Finance Button Depreciation Calculation and Ledger Entry
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Finance Tab (AX02US05)
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Financial-Calculation, Depreciation-Processing, Ledger-Integration, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Point

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 95%
Integration_Points: Depreciation-Engine, Financial-Ledger, History-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, FINANCE, LEDGER, DEPRECIATION
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Financial-Processing, Depreciation-Automation, Audit-Trail
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US05-AC3, AX02US05-AC4, AX02US05-BR5-BR7
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-112 (Fixed: Duplicate ledger entry prevention)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US05_TC_001, AX02US05_TC_004

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Depreciation Engine, Financial Ledger Service, History Tracking Service
Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds calculation processing
Data_Requirements: Facility with current period calculation not yet performed

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Facility configured for next period calculation, ledger service active
User_Roles_Permissions: Finance Manager with calculation and ledger access
Test_Data:
- Current Book Value: $12,500,000
- Annual Depreciation: $500,000 (25,000,000 ÷ 50 years)
- Current Period: Not yet calculated
- Expected New Book Value: $12,000,000
Prior_Test_Cases: Facility Book Value validation must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Verify Calculate Finance button enabled state	Button is enabled with tooltip: "Manually triggers financial calculations for the next period"	Button enabled	Ready for calculation
2	Click Calculate Finance button	Processing indicator appears, calculation begins	Button click	Depreciation calculation trigger
3	Verify Accumulated Depreciation update	Accumulated Depreciation increases by $500,000 to ($13,000,000)	New value: ($13,000,000)	Annual depreciation added
4	Check Current Book Value recalculation	Current Book Value decreases to $12,000,000	New value: $12,000,000	Formula: $25,000,000 - $13,000,000
5	Verify button state after calculation	Button becomes disabled with tooltip: "Depreciation for the current period has already been calculated."	Button disabled	Prevents duplicate calculation
6	Navigate to History sub-tab	History tab loads showing updated financial ledger	History view	Ledger integration verification
7	Verify new ledger entry creation	New entry shows: Today's date, "Annual Depreciation", Value Change: ($500,000), Book Value: $12,000,000	Ledger entry	Audit trail creation
8	Check Value Change color coding	Value Change ($500,000) displays in red indicating decrease	Red color coding	Visual decrease indicator
9	Validate ledger entry sorting	New entry appears at top of ledger (most recent first)	Entry position	Chronological sorting
10	Test calculation idempotency	Attempt to manually trigger calculation again, verify prevention	No duplicate calculation	Business rule enforcement

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Calculate Finance button correctly processes depreciation and updates all financial values
Secondary_Verifications:
- New ledger entry is created with accurate data
- Button state changes appropriately after calculation
- Value changes are color-coded correctly
- Duplicate calculations are prevented
Negative_Verification: No duplicate ledger entries, no calculation errors, no button state inconsistencies

Test Case 21: Facility Depreciation Schedule Validation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US05_TC_021
Title: Validate Facility Depreciation Schedule Calculations in Overview Sub-tab
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Finance Tab Overview (AX02US05)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Depreciation-Schedule, Annual-Depreciation, Current-Year-Calculations, API, Database, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Calculation-Accuracy

Business Context

Customer_Segment: Enterprise
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Must-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: High

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100%
Integration_Points: Depreciation-Calculator, Calendar-Service, Financial-Analytics
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, DEPRECIATION, CALENDAR
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Depreciation-Analytics, Financial-Planning, Schedule-Management
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US05-AC5, AX02US05-AC6, AX02US05-BR8-BR11
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-089 (Fixed: Leap year calculation in depreciation)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US05_TC_001, AX02US05_TC_002

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Depreciation Calculator, Calendar Service, Date/Time Service
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds schedule calculation
Data_Requirements: Facility with known depreciation schedule and fiscal year data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Facility depreciation schedule configured, fiscal year settings established
User_Roles_Permissions: Finance Manager with depreciation schedule access
Test_Data:
- Initial Capital Cost: $25,000,000
- Salvage Value: $0
- Design Useful Life: 50 years
- Current Date: June 15, 2025 (6 months into fiscal year)
- Fiscal Year: January 1 - December 31
Prior_Test_Cases: Financial data setup test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Finance tab Overview sub-tab	Overview loads with Facility Depreciation Schedule section showing 4 calculated fields	Overview sub-tab	Default Finance view
2	Verify Annual Depreciation calculation	Shows $500,000 for current year	$500,000	Formula: (Initial Capital Cost - Salvage Value) / Design Useful Life = ($25,000,000 - $0) / 50
3	Validate Depreciation To Date calculation	Shows $250,000 (6 months of current year)	$250,000	Formula: Annual Depreciation × (Months Passed / 12) = $500,000 × (6/12)
4	Check Remaining Depreciation calculation	Shows $12,500,000 (assuming Current Book Value = $12,500,000)	$12,500,000	Formula: Current Book Value - Salvage Value = $12,500,000 - $0
5	Verify Next Depreciation Date	Shows "Dec 31, 2025" (end of current fiscal year)	Dec 31, 2025	Next major depreciation event date
10	Test month-based depreciation schedule	Simulate facility with monthly depreciation, verify calculations adjust appropriately	Monthly schedule	Formula adaptation for different periods
11	Verify leap year handling	Test depreciation calculations during leap year scenarios	Leap year data	Calendar accuracy in calculations
12	Validate fiscal year boundary calculations	Test calculations at fiscal year start/end boundaries	Boundary dates	Edge case handling

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All depreciation schedule calculations are mathematically accurate based on facility parameters
Secondary_Verifications:
- Depreciation To Date reflects correct proportion of current fiscal year
- Next Depreciation Date aligns with fiscal year schedule
- Tooltips provide clear explanations of each calculation
- Different depreciation schedules (monthly, annual) are handled correctly
Negative_Verification: No calculation errors, no incorrect date handling, no missing fiscal year considerations

Test Case 22: Assets Nearing End-of-Life Watchlist

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US05_TC_022
Title: Validate Assets Nearing End-of-Life List Display and Color Coding
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Finance Tab Overview (AX02US05)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Asset-End-of-Life, Capital-Planning, Asset-Registry, Color-Coding, Database, MOD-Facility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Asset-Management

Business Context

Customer_Segment: Enterprise
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 85%
Integration_Points: Asset-Registry, Financial-Service, Capital-Planning
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, ASSET, FINANCE, CAPITAL
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: CSM
Report_Categories: Asset-Planning, Capital-Expenditure, End-of-Life-Management
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US05-AC7, AX02US05-AC8, AX02US05-BR12-BR15
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-134 (Fixed: Remaining Life color coding thresholds)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US05_TC_001, AX02US05_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Asset Registry, Financial Service, Remaining Life Calculator
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds asset list load
Data_Requirements: Facility with assets having various remaining life values and financial data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Assets configured with remaining life calculations, financial data available
User_Roles_Permissions: Finance Manager with asset and financial data access
Test_Data:
- High-Service Pump P-301: 2.5 years remaining, Book Value: $45,000, Replacement Cost: $65,000
- Filter System F-205: 3.8 years remaining, Book Value: $32,000, Replacement Cost: $48,000
- Control Valve V-156: 4.2 years remaining, Book Value: $18,000, Replacement Cost: $25,000
Prior_Test_Cases: Asset registry synchronization test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Assets Nearing End-of-Life section in Overview	Section displays assets with Remaining Life < 5 years, sorted by Remaining Life ascending	Asset list	Filtered and sorted asset display
2	Verify High-Service Pump P-301 (shortest remaining life)	Shows "High-Service Pump P-301", "2.5 years" with RED tag, Book Value: $45,000, Est. Replacement: $65,000	P-301: 2.5 years, RED	<3 years = Red color coding
3	Validate Filter System F-205 (second shortest)	Shows "Filter System F-205", "3.8 years" with YELLOW tag, Book Value: $32,000, Est. Replacement: $48,000	F-205: 3.8 years, YELLOW	3-4 years = Yellow color coding
4	Check Control Valve V-156 (third shortest)	Shows "Control Valve V-156", "4.2 years" with YELLOW tag, Book Value: $18,000, Est. Replacement: $25,000	V-156: 4.2 years, YELLOW	3-4 years = Yellow color coding
5	Verify sorting by Remaining Life	Confirm assets are sorted in ascending order by remaining life (shortest first)	Ascending order	Business rule: shortest life first
6	Test hover tooltip on Pump P-301	Shows: "This asset is nearing its end-of-life. Its replacement will require an estimated capital expenditure of $65,000. This information is critical for long-term capital planning."	Tooltip content	Tooltip matches specification
7	Validate color-coding thresholds	Verify <3 years = Red, 3-4 years = Yellow color tags	Color validation	Business rule compliance
8	Check financial data accuracy	Verify Current Book Value and Est. Replacement Cost display correctly	Financial accuracy	Asset financial integration
9	Test filtering logic	Verify only assets with <5 years remaining life appear in list	Filter validation	Business rule: <5 years filter
10	Verify asset identification display	Asset Name & ID display correctly formatted (e.g., "High-Service Pump P-301")	Asset identification	Clear asset naming

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Assets list displays only assets with <5 years remaining life, sorted by remaining life ascending
Secondary_Verifications:
- Color coding follows business rules (<3 years = Red, 3-4 years = Yellow)
- Financial data (Book Value, Replacement Cost) displays accurately
- Tooltips provide comprehensive capital planning information
- Asset identification is clear and complete
Negative_Verification: No assets with >5 years remaining life, no incorrect color coding, no missing financial data

Test Case 23: Finance History Sub-tab and Filters

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US05_TC_023
Title: Validate Finance History Sub-tab Filters and Ledger Display
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Finance Tab History (AX02US05)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Financial-History, Ledger-Filtering, Audit-Trail, Time-Based-Filters, Database, MOD-Facility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Historical-Data

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 90%
Integration_Points: Financial-Ledger, Filter-Service, Historical-Data
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, LEDGER, FILTER, HISTORY
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: Historical-Analytics, Audit-Trail, Data-Filtering
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Low

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US05-AC9, AX02US05-AC10, AX02US05-BR16-BR18
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-145 (Fixed: Filter persistence across sessions)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US05_TC_002, AX02US05_TC_006

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Financial Ledger Service, Filter Engine, Historical Data Service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds filtered data load
Data_Requirements: Facility with comprehensive financial history across multiple years and event types

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Financial history populated with various event types and years
User_Roles_Permissions: Finance Manager with historical data access
Test_Data:
- Financial events spanning 2020-2025
- Event types: Annual Depreciation, Capital Improvement, Revaluation, Impairment
- Multiple entries per year for testing
Prior_Test_Cases: Financial ledger data setup test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Finance History sub-tab	History sub-tab loads with filter section and ledger table	History view	Historical data interface
2	Verify default View filter setting	View dropdown shows "All Years" as default selection	Default: All Years	Business rule: default to all
3	Check default Event Type filter	Event Type dropdown shows "All Events" as default selection	Default: All Events	Business rule: show all by default
4	Test View filter options	Dropdown contains: "All Years", "Last 5 Years", "Last 12 Months", "2024", "2023", etc.	Filter options	Time-based filtering options
5	Validate Event Type filter options	Multi-select dropdown contains: "All Events", "Annual Depreciation", "Capital Improvement", "Revaluation", "Impairment"	Event type options	All financial event categories
6	Apply "Last 12 Months" View filter	Ledger updates to show only entries from last 12 months	Filtered results	Time-based filtering accuracy
7	Apply "Annual Depreciation" Event Type filter	Ledger shows only depreciation events	Depreciation events	Event type filtering
8	Test combined filters	Apply "2024" View + "Capital Improvement" Event Type, verify combined filtering	Combined filter results	Multiple filter interaction
9	Verify filter persistence	Navigate away and return, check if filters maintain their settings	Filter persistence	Session state management
10	Test filter reset	Reset filters to "All Years" and "All Events", verify full ledger display	Full ledger	Complete data visibility

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Filter functionality works correctly for both View and Event Type filters
Secondary_Verifications:
- Default filter settings are correct
- Combined filters work properly together
- Filter state persists across navigation
- Filter results are accurate and complete
Negative_Verification: No incorrect filter results, no missing filter options, no filter state loss

Test Case 24: Facility Financial History Ledger Validation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US05_TC_024
Title: Validate Facility Financial History Ledger Display and Color Coding
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Finance Tab History (AX02US05)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Financial-Ledger, Audit-Trail, Color-Coding, Chronological-Sorting, Database, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Data-Integrity

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100%
Integration_Points: Financial-Ledger, Audit-Service, Color-Coding-Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, LEDGER, AUDIT, UI
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Audit-Trail, Financial-Integrity, Data-Visualization
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US05-AC11, AX02US05-AC12, AX02US05-BR19-BR22
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-156 (Fixed: Ledger sorting by effective date)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US05_TC_002, AX02US05_TC_005

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Financial Ledger Service, Audit Trail Service, UI Color Coding
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds ledger load
Data_Requirements: Comprehensive financial history with various event types and value changes

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Financial ledger populated with historical events, audit trail active
User_Roles_Permissions: Finance Manager with full ledger access
Test_Data:
- Multiple ledger entries with different event types
- Value changes both positive and negative
- Entries spanning multiple dates for sorting validation
Prior_Test_Cases: Financial ledger data population test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Financial History Ledger table	Ledger displays with 5 columns: Effective Date, Event Type, Value Change, Book Value at End of Period, Notes	Ledger table	Complete audit trail display
2	Verify chronological sorting	Entries are sorted by Effective Date descending (most recent first): 2025-08-15, 2025-03-10, 2024-12-31, 2024-06-20	Descending date order	Business rule: most recent first
3	Check Annual Depreciation entry (2025-08-15)	Shows: "2025-08-15", "Annual Depreciation", "($500,000)" in RED, "$12,000,000", appropriate notes	Depreciation entry	Negative value in red
4	Validate Capital Improvement entry (2025-03-10)	Shows: "2025-03-10", "Capital Improvement", "$150,000" in GREEN, "$12,650,000", appropriate notes	Capital improvement	Positive value in green
5	Verify Value Change color coding for decreases	Annual Depreciation entries show Value Change in RED color	Red for decreases	Visual indicator for depreciation
6	Check Value Change color coding for increases	Capital Improvement and Revaluation show Value Change in GREEN color	Green for increases	Visual indicator for value gains
7	Validate Book Value at End of Period accuracy	Each entry shows correct book value after the financial event occurred	Accurate book values	Post-event valuations
8	Test Notes column content	Notes provide brief, human-readable descriptions of each financial event	Descriptive notes	Event explanations
9	Verify read-only table functionality	Table cannot be edited, only viewed for audit purposes	Read-only access	Data integrity protection
10	Check table responsiveness	Table displays properly and maintains readability across different screen sizes	Responsive design	Cross-platform compatibility
11	Validate data consistency	Book Value progression is logical and mathematically consistent across entries	Data consistency	Mathematical accuracy
12	Test ledger completeness	All significant financial events are represented in the ledger	Complete audit trail	No missing financial events

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Financial ledger displays chronologically sorted entries with accurate data and proper color coding
Secondary_Verifications:
- Value changes use correct color coding (Red for decreases, Green for increases)
- Book Value progression is mathematically consistent
- Notes provide meaningful descriptions of financial events
- Table maintains read-only integrity for audit purposes
Negative_Verification: No missing entries, no incorrect sorting, no editable fields, no color coding errors

Test Case 25: Compliance Summary KPIs Validation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US06_TC_025
Title: Validate Compliance Summary KPI Cards Calculations and Status Display
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Compliance Tab (AX02US06)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Compliance-KPIs, Water-Quality, Regulatory-Compliance, Sampling-Schedule, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-End-to-End, Regulatory-Analytics

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 95%
Integration_Points: Water-Quality-Service, LIMS-Integration, Regulatory-Database
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, COMPLIANCE, WQ, REGULATORY
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Compliance-Dashboard, Regulatory-Reporting, Quality-Analytics
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US06-AC1, AX02US06-AC2, AX02US06-BR1-BR5
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US06_TC_002, AX02US06_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Water Quality Service, LIMS Integration, Regulatory Standards Database
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds compliance data load
Data_Requirements: FAC-001 with water quality service orders, sampling schedule, regulatory parameters

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Water quality service orders configured for FAC-001, sampling schedule active, regulatory standards loaded
User_Roles_Permissions: Compliance Manager role with regulatory data access
Test_Data:
- Samples Taken (This Month): 10
- Next Sample Due: July 15, 2025
- Parameters Monitored: 8
- Exceedances (Last 30 Days): 0
- Overall Compliance Status: "On Schedule"
- Water Quality Status: "In Compliance"
Prior_Test_Cases: Water quality service integration test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Compliance tab	Compliance tab loads with Compliance Summary KPIs section displaying 2 KPI cards	FAC-001	Default compliance view
2	Verify Compliance Status KPI card	Shows "On Schedule" status (Green), "10" samples taken this month, "July 15, 2025" next sample due	On Schedule status	Status calculation: Next Sample Due not past + all previous samples taken
3	Validate Samples Taken calculation	Shows "10" samples taken this month	10 samples	Formula: COUNT(Water Quality Service orders) WHERE Sample_Date in current month
4	Check Next Sample Due date	Shows "July 15, 2025" as next scheduled sample	July 15, 2025	Earliest Due_Date for upcoming scheduled samples
5	Test View Full Schedule button	Button navigates to detailed sampling schedule page for facility	Schedule navigation	Dedicated schedule page
6	Verify Water Quality Compliance KPI card	Shows "In Compliance" status (Green), "8" parameters monitored, "0" exceedances last 30 days	In Compliance status	Status calculation: Exceedances = 0 → "In Compliance"
7	Validate Parameters Monitored count	Shows "8" distinct parameters being monitored	8 parameters	Formula: COUNT(DISTINCT Parameter) for facility
8	Check Exceedances calculation	Shows "0" exceedances in last 30 days	0 exceedances	Formula: COUNT(Samples) WHERE Result outside limit AND Sample_Date within 30 days
9	Test View Recent Results button	Button navigates to detailed sample results log	Results navigation	Detailed sample results page
10	Test Compliance Status tooltip	Hover shows: "Indicates if the facility is on track with its mandatory sampling schedule."	Tooltip content	Tooltip matches specification
11	Verify Water Quality Compliance tooltip	Hover shows: "Indicates if all water quality parameters are currently within their regulatory limits."	Tooltip content	Regulatory compliance explanation
12	Test overdue scenario	Simulate Next Sample Due in past, verify status changes to "Overdue" (Red)	Overdue simulation	Status logic validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Compliance KPI calculations are accurate and status indicators reflect current compliance state
Secondary_Verifications:
- Sample counting includes only current month water quality service orders
- Status colors match business rules (Green for compliant, Red for violations/overdue)
- Navigation buttons lead to correct detailed views
- Tooltips provide accurate regulatory information
Negative_Verification: No incorrect sample counts, no wrong status assignments, no broken navigation links

Test Case 26: Calculate Monthly Compliance Button Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US06_TC_026
Title: Validate Calculate Monthly Compliance Button Processing and Report Generation
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Compliance Tab Overview (AX02US06)
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Monthly-Compliance, Report-Generation, Compliance-Calculation, Audit-Trail, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Point

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 90%
Integration_Points: Compliance-Calculation-Engine, Report-Generator, History-Ledger
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, COMPLIANCE, REPORT, CALC, HISTORY
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Compliance-Automation, Report-Generation, Audit-Trail
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US06-AC3, AX02US06-AC4, AX02US06-BR6-BR9
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-189 (Fixed: Duplicate compliance report prevention)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US06_TC_001, AX02US06_TC_004

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Compliance Calculation Engine, Report Generator, History Ledger Service
Performance_Baseline: < 10 seconds compliance calculation
Data_Requirements: Complete month of sample data for analysis, regulatory standards configured

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Previous month sample data available, compliance calculation engine configured, report templates ready
User_Roles_Permissions: Compliance Manager with report generation and calculation access
Test_Data:
- Analysis Period: June 1-30, 2025
- Sample data: 45 samples across 8 parameters
- Expected violations: 2 (pH and turbidity)
- Parameters monitored: 8
- In compliance: 6
Prior_Test_Cases: Sample data integration test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Compliance Overview sub-tab	Overview loads with Calculate Monthly Compliance button visible and enabled	Overview sub-tab	Default compliance view
2	Verify button enabled state	Button is enabled with appropriate tooltip for available calculation	Button enabled	Ready for monthly calculation
3	Click Calculate Monthly Compliance button	Processing indicator appears, calculation begins for specified period	Button click	Monthly compliance processing
4	Monitor calculation progress	System gathers sample data for June 1-30, 2025 analysis period	Sample data gathering	Data collection phase
5	Verify monthly average calculations	System calculates monthly average for each of 8 parameters	Parameter averages	Statistical calculation processing
6	Check violation identification	System identifies 2 violations (pH and turbidity exceedances) during period	Violation detection	Exceedance analysis
7	Validate report compilation	System compiles structured report with averages, violations, and compliance status	Report generation	Formal report creation
8	Verify history ledger entry creation	New entry created in Compliance Calculation History with Report Date, Analysis Period, Parameters (8), In Compliance (6), Violations (2)	Ledger entry	Audit trail creation
9	Check button state after calculation	Button becomes disabled with tooltip: "Report for this period has already been generated"	Button disabled	Duplicate prevention
10	Navigate to History sub-tab	History tab shows new ledger entry at top of chronological list	History verification	Audit trail visibility
11	Verify ledger entry details	Entry shows today's date, "June 1-30, 2025", 8 parameters, 6 in compliance, 2 violations (highlighted in red)	Entry accuracy	Complete audit information
12	Test View Report button	Clicking View Report navigates to detailed monthly report for June 2025	Report navigation	Generated report access

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Calculate Monthly Compliance button correctly processes data and generates formal compliance report
Secondary_Verifications:
- Monthly averages are calculated accurately for all parameters
- Violations are correctly identified and counted
- New history ledger entry is created with accurate data
- Button state changes appropriately after calculation
- Generated report is accessible through history
Negative_Verification: No duplicate calculations allowed, no missing violations, no incomplete reports, no ledger entry errors

Test Case 27: Upcoming Parameter Monitoring Schedule

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US06_TC_027
Title: Validate Upcoming Parameter Monitoring Table and Status Indicators
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Compliance Tab Overview (AX02US06)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Parameter-Monitoring, Sampling-Schedule, Status-Indicators, Color-Coding, Database, MOD-Facility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Schedule-Management

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 85%
Integration_Points: Sampling-Schedule-Service, Parameter-Database, Status-Calculator
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, SCHEDULE, PARAM, STATUS
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: CSM
Report_Categories: Schedule-Management, Parameter-Monitoring, Compliance-Planning
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US06-AC5, AX02US06-AC6, AX02US06-BR10-BR12
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-201 (Fixed: Overdue status calculation)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US06_TC_001, AX02US06_TC_002

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Sampling Schedule Service, Parameter Database, Date/Time Service
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds schedule load
Data_Requirements: Scheduled sampling activities for next 30 days with various due dates

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Parameter sampling schedules configured, regulatory requirements loaded
User_Roles_Permissions: Compliance Manager with schedule and parameter data access
Test_Data:
- pH Testing: Due July 20, 2025 (5 days future) - "Upcoming"
- Chlorine Testing: Due July 15, 2025 (Today) - "Due Today"
- Turbidity Testing: Due July 10, 2025 (5 days past) - "Overdue"
- Bacteria Testing: Due July 25, 2025 (10 days future) - "Upcoming"
Prior_Test_Cases: Parameter schedule synchronization test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Upcoming Parameter Monitoring table in Overview	Table displays parameters with scheduled samples due in next 30 days	Monitoring table	Future sampling schedule
2	Verify table sorting by Next Due Date	Parameters listed in chronological order: Turbidity (past), Chlorine (today), pH (future), Bacteria (future)	Chronological sorting	Business rule: sorted by Next Due Date
3	Check Turbidity Testing (overdue)	Shows "Turbidity Testing", "July 10, 2025", Status: "Overdue" (Red tag)	Overdue status	Past due date = Red status
4	Validate Chlorine Testing (due today)	Shows "Chlorine Testing", "July 15, 2025", Status: "Due Today" (Orange tag)	Due today status	Current date = Orange status
5	Verify pH Testing (upcoming)	Shows "pH Testing", "July 20, 2025", Status: "Upcoming" (Yellow tag)	Upcoming status	Future date = Yellow status
6	Check Bacteria Testing (upcoming)	Shows "Bacteria Testing", "July 25, 2025", Status: "Upcoming" (Yellow tag)	Upcoming status	Future date = Yellow status
7	Validate status color coding	Overdue=Red, Due Today=Orange, Upcoming=Yellow status tags	Color validation	Visual status indicators
8	Test date range filtering	Verify only parameters due within next 30 days appear in table	Date filtering	Business rule: next 30 days only
9	Check parameter identification	Each row shows clear parameter name and specific due date	Parameter clarity	Complete identification
10	Verify real-time status updates	Simulate date change, verify status updates appropriately (e.g., "Upcoming" becomes "Due Today")	Real-time updates	Dynamic status calculation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Upcoming Parameter Monitoring table displays correct parameters sorted by due date with accurate status indicators
Secondary_Verifications:
- Status color coding follows business rules (Red=Overdue, Orange=Due Today, Yellow=Upcoming)
- Table includes only parameters due within next 30 days
- Real-time status updates function correctly
- Parameter identification is clear and complete
Negative_Verification: No incorrect status assignments, no parameters outside 30-day window, no missing due dates

Test Case 28: Latest Parameter Readings vs Standards

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US06_TC_028
Title: Validate Latest Parameter Readings vs Standards Table and Compliance Status
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Compliance Tab Overview (AX02US06)
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Parameter-Readings, Regulatory-Standards, LIMS-Integration, Compliance-Status, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Quality-Standards

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100%
Integration_Points: LIMS-Integration, Regulatory-Standards-Database, Compliance-Calculator
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, LIMS, REGULATORY, COMPLIANCE
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: Quality-Compliance, LIMS-Integration, Regulatory-Monitoring
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US06-AC7, AX02US06-AC8, AX02US06-BR13-BR15
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-213 (Fixed: LIMS data sync delay)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US06_TC_001, AX02US06_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: LIMS Integration, Regulatory Standards Database, Compliance Calculator
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds parameter data load
Data_Requirements: Recent test results from LIMS, regulatory standards configured

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: LIMS integration active, regulatory standards loaded, recent test results available
User_Roles_Permissions: Compliance Manager with LIMS and regulatory data access
Test_Data:
- pH: Last Reading 7.2, Standard 6.5-8.5, Status: "In Compliance"
- Chlorine: Last Reading 1.8 mg/L, Standard 0.5-2.0 mg/L, Status: "In Compliance"
- Turbidity: Last Reading 1.2 NTU, Standard <1.0 NTU, Status: "Exceeded"
- Bacteria: Last Reading 0 CFU/100mL, Standard 0 CFU/100mL, Status: "In Compliance"
Prior_Test_Cases: LIMS integration test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Latest Parameter Readings vs Standards table	Table displays key parameters with most recent test results against regulatory limits	Parameter readings table	LIMS data integration
2	Verify pH parameter reading	Shows "pH", Last Reading: "7.2", Standard: "6.5-8.5", Status: "In Compliance" (Green)	pH in compliance	Within regulatory range
3	Validate Chlorine parameter reading	Shows "Chlorine", Last Reading: "1.8 mg/L", Standard: "0.5-2.0 mg/L", Status: "In Compliance" (Green)	Chlorine in compliance	Within standard limits
4	Check Turbidity parameter reading	Shows "Turbidity", Last Reading: "1.2 NTU", Standard: "<1.0 NTU", Status: "Exceeded" (Red)	Turbidity exceeded	Outside regulatory limit
5	Verify Bacteria parameter reading	Shows "Bacteria", Last Reading: "0 CFU/100mL", Standard: "0 CFU/100mL", Status: "In Compliance" (Green)	Bacteria compliant	Meets zero tolerance standard
6	Validate status color coding	"In Compliance" shows Green tags, "Exceeded" shows Red tags	Color validation	Visual compliance indicators
7	Check LIMS data synchronization	Verify Last Reading values match most recent LIMS test results	LIMS sync	Data integration accuracy
8	Validate regulatory standards accuracy	Standards displayed match current regulatory requirements from master database	Standards accuracy	Regulatory compliance reference
9	Test compliance status calculation	Status correctly calculated: reading within standard = "In Compliance", outside = "Exceeded"	Status calculation	Business logic validation
10	Verify data freshness	Last Reading represents most recent test result for each parameter	Data currency	Latest results only
11	Check parameter identification	Each parameter clearly identified with appropriate units of measurement	Parameter clarity	Complete identification
12	Test exceedance handling	Exceeded parameters are visually highlighted and contribute to overall compliance status	Exceedance visibility	Non-compliance highlighting

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Latest Parameter Readings table displays accurate test results with correct compliance status against regulatory standards
Secondary_Verifications:
- LIMS data synchronization provides most recent test results
- Regulatory standards are current and accurate
- Status calculation correctly identifies compliance vs exceedances
- Color coding provides clear visual indicators (Green=Compliant, Red=Exceeded)
Negative_Verification: No outdated test results, no incorrect standards, no wrong status calculations, no missing compliance indicators

Test Case 29: Compliance Calculation History Ledger

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US06_TC_029
Title: Validate Compliance Calculation History Ledger Display and Audit Trail
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Compliance Tab History (AX02US06)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Compliance-History, Audit-Trail, Report-Archive, Chronological-Sorting, Database, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Historical-Data

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100%
Integration_Points: History-Ledger, Report-Archive, User-Tracking
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, HISTORY, AUDIT, REPORT
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Audit-Trail, Historical-Compliance, Report-Management
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US06-AC9, AX02US06-AC10, AX02US06-BR16-BR19
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-225 (Fixed: Historical report sorting)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US06_TC_002, AX02US06_TC_006

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: History Ledger Service, Report Archive, User Management Service
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds history load
Data_Requirements: Historical compliance calculation records across multiple periods

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Historical compliance reports generated, audit trail active, user tracking enabled
User_Roles_Permissions: Compliance Manager with historical data and audit trail access
Test_Data:
- Report 1: 2025-07-15, June 1-30 2025, 8 parameters, 6 compliant, 2 violations, Assessed by: John Smith
- Report 2: 2025-06-15, May 1-31 2025, 8 parameters, 8 compliant, 0 violations, Assessed by: Jane Doe
- Report 3: 2025-05-15, April 1-30 2025, 7 parameters, 5 compliant, 2 violations, Assessed by: Bob Johnson
Prior_Test_Cases: Compliance calculation history setup test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Compliance History sub-tab	History sub-tab loads with Compliance Calculation History Ledger table	History view	Historical audit trail
2	Verify chronological sorting	Entries sorted by Report Date descending: 2025-07-15, 2025-06-15, 2025-05-15	Descending date order	Business rule: most recent first
3	Check June 2025 report entry (most recent)	Shows "2025-07-15", "June 1-30, 2025", "8", "6", "2" (highlighted in red), "John Smith"	June report details	Complete audit information
4	Validate May 2025 report entry	Shows "2025-06-15", "May 1-31, 2025", "8", "8", "0", "Jane Doe"	May report details	Zero violations entry
5	Verify April 2025 report entry	Shows "2025-05-15", "April 1-30, 2025", "7", "5", "2" (highlighted in red), "Bob Johnson"	April report details	Historical compliance data
6	Check violations column highlighting	Entries with Violations > 0 show red highlighting on violations count	Red highlighting	Visual violation indicator
7	Validate table column completeness	All required columns present: Report Date, Analysis Period, Parameters Monitored, In Compliance, Violations, Assessed By, Actions	Complete columns	Full audit trail data
8	Test View Report button for June 2025	Clicking View Report navigates to detailed monthly report for June 1-30, 2025	Report navigation	Historical report access
9	Verify read-only table functionality	Table displays data in read-only format, no editing capabilities	Read-only access	Data integrity protection
10	Check audit trail completeness	All historical compliance calculations are represented in chronological order	Complete audit trail	No missing calculation records
11	Validate user tracking accuracy	"Assessed By" field shows correct user who generated each report	User tracking	Accountability and traceability
12	Test table responsiveness	Table maintains readability and functionality across different screen sizes	Responsive design	Cross-platform accessibility

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Compliance Calculation History Ledger displays complete audit trail sorted chronologically with accurate data
Secondary_Verifications:
- Violations column is highlighted in red when count > 0
- View Report buttons navigate to correct historical reports
- User tracking shows accurate assessment attribution
- Table maintains read-only integrity for audit purposes
Negative_Verification: No missing historical entries, no editable fields, no incorrect sorting, no broken report navigation

Test Case 30: Detailed Monthly Report View

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US06_TC_030
Title: Validate Detailed Monthly Report View and Static Report Data
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Compliance Tab History (AX02US06)
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Monthly-Report, Static-Report-Data, Violations-Detail, Parameter-Averages, Navigation, Database, MOD-Facility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Report-Archive

Business Context

Customer_Segment: Enterprise
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
Compliance_Required: Yes
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 95%
Integration_Points: Report-Archive, Static-Data-Display, Navigation-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, REPORT, ARCHIVE, NAV
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: CSM
Report_Categories: Report-Archive, Compliance-Documentation, Historical-Analysis
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US06-AC11, AX02US06-AC12, AX02US06-BR20-BR23
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-237 (Fixed: Static report data integrity)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US06_TC_005, AX02US06_TC_002

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Report Archive Service, Static Data Display, Navigation Service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds report load
Data_Requirements: Generated monthly compliance report with parameter averages and violation details

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Historical monthly report generated and archived, violation data available
User_Roles_Permissions: Compliance Manager with historical report access
Test_Data:
- Monthly Report: June 1-30, 2025
- Parameters: pH (avg 7.1), Chlorine (avg 1.5), Turbidity (avg 0.9), Bacteria (avg 0)
- Violations: pH exceeded on June 15 (8.7), Turbidity exceeded on June 22 (1.3)
- SNDWS Guidelines: pH (6.5-8.5), Turbidity (<1.0)
Prior_Test_Cases: Compliance history ledger test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate from History ledger to June 2025 report	Detailed monthly report view loads for June 1-30, 2025 analysis period	June 2025 report	Historical report navigation
2	Verify report header information	Shows analysis period "June 1-30, 2025", generation date, facility information	Report header	Static report identification
3	Check Monthly Average Quality Parameters table	Table displays calculated averages: pH (7.1), Chlorine (1.5), Turbidity (0.9), Bacteria (0)	Parameter averages	Frozen calculation data
4	Validate parameter guidelines display	Each parameter shows corresponding SNDWS Guideline: pH (6.5-8.5), Chlorine (0.5-2.0), Turbidity (<1.0), Bacteria (0)	Regulatory guidelines	Standards reference
5	Verify compliance status indicators	Parameters within guidelines show "In Compliance", those with violations show appropriate indicators	Compliance indicators	Average-based compliance
6	Check Violations table presence	Violations table displays specific exceedance events during analysis period	Violations table	Detailed violation tracking
7	Validate pH violation entry	Shows "pH", "8.7", "6.5-8.5", "June 15, 2025", Severity: "High" (significant exceedance)	pH violation	Specific violation details
8	Check Turbidity violation entry	Shows "Turbidity", "1.3", "<1.0", "June 22, 2025", Severity: "Moderate" (minor exceedance)	Turbidity violation	Violation severity assessment
9	Verify violation severity calculation	Severity assigned based on degree of exceedance: High for significant, Moderate for minor	Severity logic	Business rule validation
10	Test static data integrity	All displayed data is frozen as of calculation time, no real-time updates	Static data	Historical data preservation
11	Check Back to History navigation	"Back to History" button returns to Compliance Calculation History ledger	Navigation back	Return to audit trail
12	Verify read-only report functionality	Report displays in read-only format, no editing capabilities	Read-only access	Data integrity protection

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Detailed monthly report displays accurate frozen data for specified analysis period with complete parameter averages and violation details
Secondary_Verifications:
- Monthly averages are calculated correctly and display static values
- Violations table shows all exceedances with accurate dates and severity
- Navigation back to history works properly
- Report maintains read-only integrity for audit purposes
Negative_Verification: No real-time data updates in historical reports, no missing violations, no editable fields, no navigation failures

Test Case 31: Systems Management List View Display and Navigation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US07_TC_031
Title: Validate Systems Management List View Header, Search, and Table Display
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Systems Tab (AX02US07)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Systems-Management, List-View, Search-Filter, Table-Display, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-End-to-End, System-Management

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 95%
Integration_Points: Systems-Registry, Asset-Management, Search-Engine, Filter-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, SYSTEMS, SEARCH, FILTER
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Systems-Management, Search-Functionality, Table-Display
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US07-AC1, AX02US07-AC2, AX02US07-BR1-BR5
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US07_TC_002, AX02US07_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Systems Registry, Asset Management Service, Search Engine, Filter Service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds systems list load
Data_Requirements: FAC-001 with multiple systems, varied condition and risk scores

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Systems associated with FAC-001, asset data populated, search indexing active
User_Roles_Permissions: Systems Manager role with systems management access
Test_Data:
- System SYS-001: Water Treatment Plant A, Location: Building A, Assets: 45, Condition: 85 (Good), Risk: 32 (Medium)
- System SYS-002: Pumping Station B, Location: Building B, Assets: 23, Condition: 72 (Fair), Risk: 58 (High)
- System SYS-003: Filtration Unit C, Location: Building C, Assets: 18, Condition: 68 (Fair), Risk: 25 (Low)
Prior_Test_Cases: Systems data synchronization test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Systems tab	Systems tab loads with "Systems Management" title and subtitle "Manage and monitor all systems within this facility."	Systems tab	Default systems view
2	Verify header elements	Header displays title, subtitle, and "Add System" button prominently	Header elements	Complete header layout
3	Check Add System button functionality	Button is enabled and displays appropriate call-to-action styling	Add System button	Primary action availability
4	Verify search bar presence	Search box with placeholder "Search systems..." is visible and functional	Search functionality	Dynamic search capability
5	Test search functionality	Type "SYS-001" in search box, verify table filters to show only matching system	Search: "SYS-001"	Matches on System ID, case-insensitive
6	Validate search by name	Type "Water Treatment" in search box, verify system SYS-001 appears	Search: "Water Treatment"	Matches on Name field
7	Check filter button presence	Filter button is available and opens filtering options	Filter button	Advanced filtering access
8	Test filter options	Click Filter button, verify options: Location (multi-select), Condition Score (range), Risk Score (range)	Filter options	Advanced filtering capabilities
9	Verify export button	Export button is present and functional for CSV/Excel generation	Export functionality	Data export capability
10	Check systems table structure	Table displays columns: System ID, Name, Location, Assets, Condition Score, Risk Score, Actions	Table structure	Complete data display
11	Validate System SYS-001 data	Shows "SYS-001", "Water Treatment Plant A", "Building A", "45", "85 (Good)", "32 (Medium)"	SYS-001 data	Asset count formula: COUNT(Assets) WHERE Parent_System_ID = SYS-001
12	Test column sorting	Click column headers to verify ascending/descending sort functionality	Column sorting	Sortable table columns
13	Check pagination	If >10 systems, verify pagination controls appear and function correctly	Pagination	Table pagination for large datasets
14	Verify action buttons	Each system row shows View, Edit, Delete action buttons	Action buttons	Inline system actions

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Systems Management list view displays correctly with all associated systems and proper data calculations
Secondary_Verifications:
- Search functionality works for both System ID and Name fields
- Filter options provide comprehensive filtering capabilities
- Asset count calculation is accurate for each system
- Column sorting functions properly for all columns
- Action buttons are present and appropriately enabled
Negative_Verification: No missing systems, no incorrect asset counts, no broken search functionality, no missing action buttons

Test Case 32: System Suggestions Modal Intelligence and Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US07_TC_032
Title: Validate System Suggestions Modal Logic and Connect Selected Functionality
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Systems Tab (AX02US07)
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, System-Suggestions, Modal-Logic, Intelligent-Recommendations, System-Connection, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Point

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 90%
Integration_Points: Suggestion-Engine, Systems-Registry, Facility-Analytics, Geographic-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, SUGGEST, SYSTEMS, GEO
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Intelligent-Suggestions, System-Integration, User-Experience
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US07-AC3, AX02US07-AC4, AX02US07-BR6-BR9
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-273 (Fixed: Suggestion reason accuracy)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US07_TC_001, AX02US07_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Suggestion Engine, Systems Registry, Facility Analytics, Geographic Service
Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds suggestion calculation
Data_Requirements: Unassigned systems available, facility type configured, geographic data populated

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Suggestion engine configured, unassigned systems available, facility analytics active
User_Roles_Permissions: Systems Manager with system connection and suggestion access
Test_Data:
- Facility Type: Water Treatment Plant
- Available Systems: Chlorination System (Disinfection), Pump Station (Pumping), Sand Filter (Filtration)
- Suggestion Reasons: "Standard for Water Treatment Plant", "Geographic proximity", "Common in Water Treatment Plant"
Prior_Test_Cases: Systems registry integration test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Click "Add System" button from Systems Management list	System Suggestions modal opens with intelligent suggestions displayed	Add System click	Modal trigger
2	Verify modal title and purpose	Modal shows title "System Suggestions" with clear explanation of functionality	Modal header	User guidance
3	Check suggestion algorithm results	Modal displays relevant systems based on facility type and location	Suggestion results	Intelligent recommendation engine
4	Validate Chlorination System suggestion	Shows "Chlorination System", "SYS-CHL-001", Reason: "Standard for Water Treatment Plant", Type: "Disinfection"	Chlorination suggestion	Facility type-based logic
5	Verify Pump Station suggestion	Shows "Pump Station", "SYS-PMP-002", Reason: "Geographic proximity to facility location", Type: "Pumping"	Pump Station suggestion	Geographic-based logic
6	Check Sand Filter suggestion	Shows "Sand Filter", "SYS-FLT-003", Reason: "Common in Water Treatment Plant", Type: "Filtration"	Sand Filter suggestion	Common systems logic
7	Test checkbox selection functionality	Click checkboxes to select/deselect suggestions, verify selection state changes	Checkbox interaction	Multi-selection capability
8	Validate dynamic button counter	"Connect Selected Suggestions (X)" button updates count as systems are selected/deselected	Dynamic counter	Real-time selection tracking
9	Check button disabled state	When no systems selected (X=0), "Connect Selected" button is disabled	Button state	Conditional button enabling
10	Test Connect Selected functionality	Select 2 systems, click "Connect Selected Suggestions (2)", verify systems associated with facility	System connection	Background association process
11	Verify modal closure and refresh	Modal closes automatically, Systems Management list refreshes showing newly added systems	Modal closure	Seamless user experience
12	Test "Skip and Search All Systems"	Click button to verify it closes suggestions modal and opens Connect Systems modal	Modal transition	Alternative workflow
13	Validate Cancel functionality	Click Cancel button to close modal without making changes	Cancel action	Safe exit option
14	Test suggestion quality	Verify suggestions are relevant and logical based on facility type and location	Suggestion relevance	Intelligent algorithm validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: System Suggestions modal displays intelligent, relevant suggestions with accurate reasons and successfully connects selected systems
Secondary_Verifications:
- Suggestion reasons are logical and facility-appropriate
- Dynamic button counter updates correctly with selections
- System connection process works seamlessly in background
- Modal transitions function properly between suggestion and search modes
Negative_Verification: No irrelevant suggestions, no incorrect reason assignments, no failed system connections, no broken modal transitions

Test Case 33: Connect Systems Modal Comprehensive Search and Selection

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US07_TC_033
Title: Validate Connect Systems Modal Search, Filter, and Connection Functionality
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Systems Tab (AX02US07)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Connect-Systems, Modal-Search, System-Selection, Comprehensive-Search, API, Database, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Search-Interface

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 85%
Integration_Points: Systems-Registry, Search-Engine, Filter-Service, Assignment-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, SYSTEMS, SEARCH, FILTER, ASSIGN
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: CSM
Report_Categories: Search-Interface, System-Assignment, User-Experience
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US07-AC5, AX02US07-AC6, AX02US07-BR10-BR13
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-285 (Fixed: Filter dropdown population)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US07_TC_002, AX02US07_TC_001

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Systems Registry, Search Engine, Filter Service, Assignment Service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds search results load
Data_Requirements: Large pool of unassigned systems with varied types and statuses

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Multiple unassigned systems available, search indexing current, filter data populated
User_Roles_Permissions: Systems Manager with system search and assignment permissions
Test_Data:
- Unassigned Systems: 15 available systems
- System Types: Filtration, Disinfection, Pumping, Monitoring
- System Statuses: Operational, Standby, Inactive
- Search criteria: Name, ID, Location fields
Prior_Test_Cases: System Suggestions modal test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Access Connect Systems modal	Modal opens showing "Connect Systems to [Facility Name]" with comprehensive search interface	Connect modal	Full search interface
2	Verify unassigned systems display	List shows all systems where Parent_Facility_ID is null or unassigned	Unassigned systems	Business rule: only unassigned systems
3	Test search bar functionality	Type system name in search bar, verify real-time filtering of results	Search: "Filter"	Dynamic search filtering
4	Validate search by ID	Enter system ID in search bar, verify specific system appears	Search: "SYS-FLT-005"	ID-based search
5	Check search by location	Search for location name, verify systems in that location appear	Search: "Building D"	Location-based search
6	Test "All Types" filter dropdown	Click dropdown, verify system types: Filtration, Disinfection, Pumping, Monitoring	Type filter options	System classification filtering
7	Apply type filter	Select "Filtration" from dropdown, verify only filtration systems display	Filter: Filtration	Type-based filtering
8	Test "All Statuses" filter dropdown	Click dropdown, verify statuses: Operational, Standby, Inactive	Status filter options	Operational status filtering
9	Apply status filter	Select "Operational" from dropdown, verify only operational systems display	Filter: Operational	Status-based filtering
10	Test combined search and filters	Apply search term + type filter + status filter, verify combined filtering works	Combined filters	Multiple filter interaction
11	Verify system information display	Each system shows Name, ID, Location, Assignment Status ("Unassigned"), Type tag, Status tag	System details	Complete system information
12	Test checkbox selection	Select multiple systems using checkboxes, verify selection state tracking	Multi-selection	Checkbox functionality
13	Validate dynamic Connect button	"Connect Selected (X)" button updates count and enables/disables based on selections	Dynamic button	Selection counter
14	Execute system connection	Select 3 systems, click "Connect Selected (3)", verify systems are associated with facility	System connection	Assignment process
15	Verify modal closure and refresh	Modal closes, Systems Management list refreshes showing newly connected systems	Completion workflow	Seamless integration

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Connect Systems modal provides comprehensive search and filtering with successful system connection functionality
Secondary_Verifications:
- Search works across Name, ID, and Location fields
- Type and Status filters function correctly
- Combined search and filter operations work properly
- System selection and connection process completes successfully
Negative_Verification: No assigned systems appear in list, no broken search/filter combinations, no failed system connections

Test Case 34: Systems Table Actions and Navigation

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US07_TC_034
Title: Validate Systems Table View, Edit, and Delete Actions with Confirmation
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Systems Tab (AX02US07)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Table-Actions, System-Navigation, Edit-System, Delete-System, Confirmation-Modal, Database, MOD-Facility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Medium, CRUD-Operations

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 90%
Integration_Points: System-Detail-Service, Edit-Form-Service, Delete-Confirmation, Navigation-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, SYSTEMS, EDIT, DELETE, NAV
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: CRUD-Operations, User-Interface, System-Management
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US07-AC7, AX02US07-AC8, AX02US07-BR14-BR16
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-297 (Fixed: Delete confirmation message clarity)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US07_TC_001, AX02US07_TC_005

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: System Detail Service, Edit Form Service, Delete Confirmation Service, Navigation Service
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds action response time
Data_Requirements: Systems associated with facility, system detail pages available, edit capabilities enabled

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Systems associated with facility, system detail pages configured, edit/delete permissions enabled
User_Roles_Permissions: Systems Manager with view, edit, and delete permissions
Test_Data:
- System SYS-001: Complete system profile available
- System SYS-002: Editable system details
- System SYS-003: Deletable (removable from facility)
Prior_Test_Cases: Systems Management list display test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Locate system SYS-001 in table	System appears in table with all action buttons visible	SYS-001	System identification
2	Test System ID clickability	Click on "SYS-001" in System ID column, verify navigation to system detail page	SYS-001 click	Direct navigation link
3	Verify system detail page	System detail page loads with complete system information and profile	System detail	Detailed system view
4	Return to Systems Management	Navigate back to facility Systems tab from detail page	Return navigation	Navigation consistency
5	Test View action button	Click "View" button for SYS-001, verify navigation to same system detail page	View button	Alternative navigation method
6	Test Edit action button	Click "Edit" button for SYS-002, verify edit form or modal opens	Edit button	System modification access
7	Verify edit form functionality	Edit form displays current system details with editable fields	Edit form	System data modification
8	Test edit form submission	Make changes and submit, verify system details update in table	Edit submission	Data persistence
9	Test Delete action button	Click "Delete" button for SYS-003, verify confirmation modal appears	Delete button	Safe deletion process
10	Verify delete confirmation message	Modal shows: "Are you sure you want to remove this system from the facility? This will not delete the system record."	Confirmation message	Clear deletion explanation
11	Test delete confirmation cancel	Click "Cancel" in confirmation modal, verify modal closes with no changes	Cancel deletion	Safe cancellation
12	Test delete confirmation proceed	Click "Delete" button again, confirm deletion, verify system removed from facility list	Confirm deletion	System disconnection
13	Verify system record preservation	Check that system record still exists in registry (not permanently deleted)	Record preservation	Business rule: disconnect, not delete
14	Test action button states	Verify all action buttons are appropriately enabled/disabled based on permissions	Button states	Permission-based access

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All table actions (View, Edit, Delete) function correctly with appropriate navigation and confirmation processes
Secondary_Verifications:
- System ID links provide direct navigation to detail pages
- Edit functionality allows system modification and persistence
- Delete action only disconnects system from facility, preserving system record
- Confirmation modal provides clear explanation of delete action
Negative_Verification: No accidental deletions, no broken navigation links, no unauthorized actions, no permanent system record deletion

Test Case 35: Systems Search and Filter Advanced Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US07_TC_035
Title: Validate Advanced Search, Filter, and Export Functionality for Systems List
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Systems Tab (AX02US07)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Advanced-Search, Filter-Functionality, Export-Systems, Data-Export, API, Database, MOD-Facility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Data-Management

Business Context

Customer_Segment: Enterprise
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Could-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 80%
Integration_Points: Search-Engine, Filter-Service, Export-Service, Data-Processing
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, SEARCH, FILTER, EXPORT
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Search-Functionality, Data-Export, Filter-Performance
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Low

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US07-AC9, AX02US07-AC10, AX02US07-BR17-BR19
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-309 (Fixed: Export filter application)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US07_TC_001, AX02US07_TC_004

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Search Engine, Filter Service, Export Service, Data Processing Engine
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds filter application, < 5 seconds export generation
Data_Requirements: Large dataset of systems with varied locations, condition scores, and risk scores

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Multiple systems with diverse data, search indexing current, export templates configured
User_Roles_Permissions: Systems Manager with search, filter, and export permissions
Test_Data:
- Systems with locations: Building A (5), Building B (3), Building C (7)
- Condition scores: Range 45-95
- Risk scores: Range 15-85
- System types: Various classifications
Prior_Test_Cases: Basic systems display test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Test case-insensitive search	Type "water" (lowercase) in search, verify systems with "Water" in name appear	Search: "water"	Case-insensitive matching
2	Verify partial name matching	Search for "Treatment", verify all systems containing "Treatment" display	Search: "Treatment"	Partial string matching
3	Test search result clearing	Clear search box, verify all systems return to display	Clear search	Reset functionality
4	Open advanced filter options	Click Filter button, verify dropdown/modal with Location, Condition Score, Risk Score options	Filter interface	Advanced filtering access
5	Test location multi-select filter	Select "Building A" and "Building C" from location filter, verify only systems from those locations display	Location filter	Multi-select location filtering
6	Apply condition score range filter	Set condition score range 70-90, verify only systems within range display	Condition: 70-90	Range-based filtering
7	Test risk score range filter	Set risk score range 20-50, verify only systems within range display	Risk: 20-50	Risk-based filtering
8	Apply combined filters	Use location + condition score filters together, verify combined filtering works	Combined filters	Multiple filter interaction
9	Test filter reset functionality	Clear all filters, verify all systems return to display	Reset filters	Filter clearing
10	Verify export button availability	Export button is enabled and shows appropriate export options (CSV/Excel)	Export options	Data export access
11	Test CSV export with filters	Apply search/filter criteria, click export CSV, verify file contains only filtered results	CSV export	Filtered data export
12	Test Excel export with filters	Apply different criteria, export Excel, verify file respects current filter state	Excel export	Alternative format export
13	Validate export file content	Open exported file, verify columns match table display and data is accurate	File validation	Export content accuracy
14	Test export with no filters	Clear all filters, export all systems, verify complete dataset in file	Full export	Complete data export

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Advanced search and filter functionality works correctly with accurate results and proper export generation
Secondary_Verifications:
- Search is case-insensitive and supports partial matching
- Filter ranges work correctly for condition and risk scores
- Multi-select location filtering functions properly
- Export respects current search/filter criteria
- Exported files contain accurate data matching current display
Negative_Verification: No missing search results, no incorrect filter applications, no export content mismatches, no broken filter combinations

Test Case 36: Networks Management List View and Search Functionality

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US08_TC_036
Title: Validate Networks Management List View Display and Search/Filter Functionality
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Networks Tab (AX02US08)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Networks-Management, List-View, Search-Filter, Network-Display, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-End-to-End, Network-Management

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 95%
Integration_Points: Networks-Registry, Systems-Integration, Search-Engine, Filter-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, NETWORKS, SEARCH, FILTER
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Networks-Management, Search-Functionality, Data-Display
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US08-AC1, AX02US08-AC2, AX02US08-BR1-BR5
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US08_TC_002, AX02US08_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Networks Registry, Systems Integration, Search Engine, Filter Service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds networks list load
Data_Requirements: FAC-001 with multiple networks, parent systems configured, asset data populated

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Networks associated with FAC-001, parent systems linked, asset counts calculated
User_Roles_Permissions: Networks Manager role with networks management access
Test_Data:
- Network NET-001: Primary Distribution Network, Parent: SYS-001, Assets: 125, Length: 15.2 km, Condition: 78 (Good)
- Network NET-002: Secondary Distribution, Parent: SYS-002, Assets: 87, Length: 9.8 km, Condition: 72 (Fair)
- Network NET-003: Transmission Line A, Parent: SYS-003, Assets: 45, Length: 22.5 km, Condition: 91 (Good)
Prior_Test_Cases: Networks data synchronization test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Networks tab	Networks tab loads with "Networks Management" title and subtitle "Monitor and manage distribution networks and transmission lines."	Networks tab	Default networks view
2	Verify header elements	Header displays title, subtitle, and "Add Network" button prominently	Header elements	Complete header layout
3	Check Add Network button functionality	Button is enabled and displays appropriate call-to-action styling	Add Network button	Primary action availability
4	Verify search bar presence	Search box with placeholder "Search networks..." is visible and functional	Search functionality	Dynamic search capability
5	Test search by Network ID	Type "NET-001" in search box, verify table filters to show only matching network	Search: "NET-001"	Matches on Network ID, case-insensitive
6	Validate search by name	Type "Primary Distribution" in search box, verify network NET-001 appears	Search: "Primary Distribution"	Matches on Name field
7	Check filter button presence	Filter button is available and opens filtering options	Filter button	Advanced filtering access
8	Test filter options	Click Filter button, verify options: Parent System (multi-select), Condition Score (range), Network Length (range)	Filter options	Advanced filtering capabilities
9	Verify export button	Export button is present and functional for CSV/Excel generation	Export functionality	Data export capability
10	Check networks table structure	Table displays columns: Network ID, Name, Parent System, Assets, Network Length, Condition Score, Actions	Table structure	Complete data display
11	Validate Network NET-001 data	Shows "NET-001", "Primary Distribution Network", "SYS-001", "125", "15.2 km", "78 (Good)"	NET-001 data	Asset count formula: COUNT(Assets) WHERE Parent_Network_ID = NET-001
12	Check Network Length calculation	Verify Network Length shows SUM(Length) of all pipe assets within network	Length calculation	Formula: SUM(Length) of pipe assets
13	Test column sorting	Click column headers to verify ascending/descending sort functionality	Column sorting	Sortable table columns
14	Verify kebab menu actions	Each network row shows kebab menu (...) with View, Edit, Delete options	Action menu	Inline network actions

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Networks Management list view displays correctly with all associated networks and proper data calculations
Secondary_Verifications:
- Search functionality works for both Network ID and Name fields
- Filter options provide comprehensive filtering capabilities
- Asset count and network length calculations are accurate
- Column sorting functions properly for all columns
- Kebab menu actions are present and appropriately enabled
Negative_Verification: No missing networks, no incorrect calculations, no broken search functionality, no missing action menus

Test Case 37: Network Suggestions Modal Intelligence and Service Zone Logic

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US08_TC_037
Title: Validate Network Suggestions Modal Service Zone Logic and Connect Functionality
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Networks Tab (AX02US08)
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Network-Suggestions, Service-Zones, Modal-Logic, Intelligent-Recommendations, Geographic-Logic, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Point

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 90%
Integration_Points: Geographic-Service, Service-Zone-Engine, Networks-Registry, Suggestion-Algorithm
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, SUGGEST, NETWORKS, GEO, ZONES
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Intelligent-Suggestions, Geographic-Logic, Network-Integration
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US08-AC3, AX02US08-AC4, AX02US08-BR6-BR9
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-321 (Fixed: Service zone boundary calculation)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US08_TC_001, AX02US08_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Geographic Service, Service Zone Engine, Networks Registry, Suggestion Algorithm
Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds suggestion calculation
Data_Requirements: Facility service zones defined, unassigned networks available, geographic boundaries configured

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Service zones configured for facility, unassigned networks within zones, suggestion engine active
User_Roles_Permissions: Networks Manager with network connection and suggestion access
Test_Data:
- Facility Service Zones: Northern Division (Industrial Park Zone, Hillside Zone)
- Available Networks: Water Main A (Industrial Park Zone), Sewer Main B (Hillside Zone), Transmission Line C (Northern Division)
- Network Types: Water Main, Sewer Main, Transmission Line
Prior_Test_Cases: Service zone configuration test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Click "Add Network" button from Networks Management list	Network Suggestions modal opens with service zone-based suggestions displayed	Add Network click	Modal trigger
2	Verify modal title and purpose	Modal shows title "Network Suggestions" with clear explanation of functionality	Modal header	User guidance
3	Check suggestion algorithm results	Modal displays networks within facility's defined service zones	Suggestion results	Geographic-based recommendation
4	Validate Water Main A suggestion	Shows "Water Main A", Reason: "Serves the 'Industrial Park Zone', which is part of the 'Northern Division'", Type: "Water Main"	Water Main suggestion	Service zone-based logic
5	Verify Sewer Main B suggestion	Shows "Sewer Main B", Reason: "Serves the 'Hillside Zone', which is part of the 'Northern Division'", Type: "Sewer Main"	Sewer Main suggestion	Zone-specific logic
6	Check Transmission Line C suggestion	Shows "Transmission Line C", Reason: "Serves the 'Northern Division'", Type: "Transmission Line"	Transmission suggestion	Division-level logic
7	Test checkbox selection functionality	Click checkboxes to select/deselect suggestions, verify selection state changes	Checkbox interaction	Multi-selection capability
8	Validate dynamic button counter	"Connect Selected (X)" button updates count as networks are selected/deselected	Dynamic counter	Real-time selection tracking
9	Check button disabled state	When no networks selected (X=0), "Connect Selected" button is disabled	Button state	Conditional button enabling
10	Test Connect Selected functionality	Select 2 networks, click "Connect Selected (2)", verify networks associated with facility	Network connection	Background association process
11	Verify modal closure and refresh	Modal closes automatically, Networks Management list refreshes showing newly added networks	Modal closure	Seamless user experience
12	Test "Skip and Search All Networks"	Click button to verify it closes suggestions modal and opens Connect Networks modal	Modal transition	Alternative workflow
13	Validate Cancel functionality	Click Cancel button to close modal without making changes	Cancel action	Safe exit option
14	Test service zone boundary logic	Verify only networks within facility's service zones appear in suggestions	Zone filtering	Geographic boundary validation

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Network Suggestions modal displays intelligent, service zone-based suggestions with accurate geographic reasoning
Secondary_Verifications:
- Suggestion reasons accurately reflect service zone relationships
- Dynamic button counter updates correctly with selections
- Network connection process works seamlessly in background
- Modal transitions function properly between suggestion and search modes
Negative_Verification: No networks outside service zones, no incorrect zone references, no failed network connections, no broken modal transitions

Test Case 38: Connect Networks Modal Comprehensive Search Interface

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US08_TC_038
Title: Validate Connect Networks Modal Search, Filter, and Selection Functionality
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Networks Tab (AX02US08)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Connect-Networks, Modal-Search, Network-Selection, Comprehensive-Search, Zone-Search, API, Database, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Search-Interface

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 85%
Integration_Points: Networks-Registry, Search-Engine, Filter-Service, Zone-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, NETWORKS, SEARCH, FILTER, ZONES
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: CSM
Report_Categories: Search-Interface, Network-Assignment, User-Experience
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US08-AC5, AX02US08-AC6, AX02US08-BR10-BR13
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-333 (Fixed: Zone search filtering)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US08_TC_002, AX02US08_TC_001

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Networks Registry, Search Engine, Filter Service, Zone Service
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds search results load
Data_Requirements: Large pool of unassigned networks with varied types, statuses, and zones

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Multiple unassigned networks available, search indexing current, filter data populated
User_Roles_Permissions: Networks Manager with network search and assignment permissions
Test_Data:
- Unassigned Networks: 20 available networks
- Network Types: Water Main, Sewer Main, Transmission Line, Distribution Line
- Network Statuses: Active, Inactive, Under Construction
- Zones: Various service zones for search testing
Prior_Test_Cases: Network Suggestions modal test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Access Connect Networks modal	Modal opens showing "Connect Networks to [Facility Name]" with comprehensive search interface	Connect modal	Full search interface
2	Verify unassigned networks display	List shows all networks not currently associated with any facility	Unassigned networks	Business rule: only unassigned networks
3	Test search bar functionality	Type network name in search bar, verify real-time filtering of results	Search: "Main"	Dynamic search filtering
4	Validate search by ID	Enter network ID in search bar, verify specific network appears	Search: "NET-WM-005"	ID-based search
5	Check search by zone	Search for zone name, verify networks serving that zone appear	Search: "Industrial Park"	Zone-based search
6	Test "All Types" filter dropdown	Click dropdown, verify network types: Water Main, Sewer Main, Transmission Line, Distribution Line	Type filter options	Network classification filtering
7	Apply type filter	Select "Water Main" from dropdown, verify only water main networks display	Filter: Water Main	Type-based filtering
8	Test "All Statuses" filter dropdown	Click dropdown, verify statuses: Active, Inactive, Under Construction	Status filter options	Operational status filtering
9	Apply status filter	Select "Active" from dropdown, verify only active networks display	Filter: Active	Status-based filtering
10	Test combined search and filters	Apply search term + type filter + status filter, verify combined filtering works	Combined filters	Multiple filter interaction
11	Verify network information display	Each network shows Name, ID, Zone it serves, Assignment Status ("Unassigned"), Type tag, Status tag	Network details	Complete network information
12	Test checkbox selection	Select multiple networks using checkboxes, verify selection state tracking	Multi-selection	Checkbox functionality
13	Validate dynamic Connect button	"Connect Selected (X)" button updates count and enables/disables based on selections	Dynamic button	Selection counter
14	Execute network connection	Select 3 networks, click "Connect Selected (3)", verify networks are associated with facility	Network connection	Assignment process
15	Verify modal closure and refresh	Modal closes, Networks Management list refreshes showing newly connected networks	Completion workflow	Seamless integration

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Connect Networks modal provides comprehensive search and filtering with successful network connection functionality
Secondary_Verifications:
- Search works across Name, ID, and Zone fields
- Type and Status filters function correctly
- Combined search and filter operations work properly
- Network selection and connection process completes successfully
Negative_Verification: No assigned networks appear in list, no broken search/filter combinations, no failed network connections

Test Case 39: Condition and Risks Tab Top-Level Scores and Assessment Workflow

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US09_TC_039
Title: Validate Condition and Risk Top-Level Scores Display and Assessment Workflow
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Condition and Risks Tab (AX02US09)
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Condition-Assessment, Risk-Assessment, Top-Level-Scores, Assessment-Workflow, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Assessment-Management

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 95%
Integration_Points: Assessment-Engine, History-Ledger, User-Tracking, Score-Calculator
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, CONDITION, RISK, ASSESS, HISTORY
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Condition-Management, Risk-Management, Assessment-Tracking
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US09-AC1, AX02US09-AC2, AX02US09-BR1-BR6
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US09_TC_002, AX02US09_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Assessment Engine, History Ledger, User Tracking Service, Score Calculator
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds score display, < 10 seconds assessment completion
Data_Requirements: Facility with current condition and risk scores, assessment history, user tracking data

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Assessment workflows configured, scoring algorithms active, user permissions set
User_Roles_Permissions: Assessment Manager with condition and risk assessment permissions
Test_Data:
- Current Condition Score: 82 (Good), Last Assessed: June 15, 2025, Assessed By: Jane Smith (Operations)
- Current Risk Score: 65 (Medium), Last Assessed: May 30, 2025, Assessed By: Jane Doe (Engineering)
Prior_Test_Cases: User authentication and permission verification tests must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Condition and Risks tab	Tab loads with Top-Level Scores section displaying Facility Condition and Facility Risk KPI cards	Condition and Risks tab	Default assessment view
2	Verify Facility Condition KPI card	Shows Score: 82, Status: "Good" (color-coded), Last Assessed: "June 15, 2025", Assessed By: "Jane Smith (Operations)"	Condition KPI	Score range: Poor (0-40), Fair (41-75), Good (76-100)
3	Check Facility Condition tooltips	Hover over score shows: "The overall health score of this facility, aggregated from its systems and assets."	Condition tooltips	Tooltip accuracy validation
4	Verify Facility Risk KPI card	Shows Score: 65, Status: "Medium" (color-coded), Last Assessed: "May 30, 2025", Assessed By: "Jane Doe (Engineering)"	Risk KPI	Score range: Low (0-30), Medium (31-70), High (71-100)
5	Check Facility Risk tooltips	Hover over score shows: "A score representing the overall risk posed by this facility, combining likelihood and consequence of failure."	Risk tooltips	Risk explanation validation
6	Test Assess Condition button	Click "Assess Condition" button, verify assessment workflow opens	Condition assessment	Assessment workflow initiation
7	Complete condition assessment workflow	Input assessment data, calculate new score, verify score updates and history entry created	New condition score	Score calculation and persistence
8	Verify condition assessment completion	New score displays in KPI card, assessment date updates, assessor name recorded	Updated condition data	Assessment completion validation
9	Test Assess Risk button	Click "Assess Risk" button, verify risk assessment workflow opens	Risk assessment	Risk workflow initiation
10	Complete risk assessment workflow	Input risk assessment data, calculate new score, verify updates and history entry	New risk score	Risk calculation and persistence
11	Check assessment history creation	Verify new entries created in assessment history ledger with correct data	History entries	Audit trail creation
12	Validate user tracking	Verify current user name and department recorded as assessor	User tracking	Assessment accountability
13	Test status tag color coding	Verify color coding matches score ranges for both condition and risk	Color validation	Visual status indicators
14	Check assessment authorization	Verify only authorized users can access assessment workflows	Permission validation	Access control verification

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Condition and Risk KPI cards display accurate scores with proper status classification and complete assessment workflow functionality
Secondary_Verifications:
- Score ranges correctly determine status tags and colors
- Assessment workflows complete successfully with data persistence
- History ledger entries are created with accurate assessment data
- User tracking records assessor information correctly
Negative_Verification: No unauthorized access to assessments, no score calculation errors, no missing history entries, no incorrect status assignments

Test Case 40: Condition and Risks Overview Watchlists

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US09_TC_040
Title: Validate Condition and Risks Overview Watchlists Display and Sorting Logic
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Condition and Risks Tab Overview (AX02US09)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Watchlists, Condition-Sorting, Risk-Sorting, Problem-Identification, Database, MOD-Facility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Analytics-Dashboard

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 90%
Integration_Points: Systems-Service, Assets-Service, Sorting-Engine, Analytics-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, WATCHLIST, SORT, ANALYTICS
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: CSM
Report_Categories: Problem-Identification, Analytics-Dashboard, Risk-Monitoring
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US09-AC3, AX02US09-AC4, AX02US09-BR7-BR10
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-345 (Fixed: Watchlist sorting accuracy)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US09_TC_001, AX02US09_TC_003

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Systems Service, Assets Service, Sorting Engine, Analytics Service
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds watchlist load
Data_Requirements: Systems and assets with varied condition and risk scores for sorting validation

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Systems and assets with condition/risk scores, watchlist algorithms configured
User_Roles_Permissions: Condition and Risk Manager with overview access
Test_Data:
- Systems: SYS-001 (Condition: 45, Risk: 75), SYS-002 (Condition: 38, Risk: 82), SYS-003 (Condition: 72, Risk: 45)
- Assets: AST-001 (Condition: 25, Risk: 85), AST-002 (Condition: 30, Risk: 78), AST-003 (Condition: 35, Risk: 90)
Prior_Test_Cases: Systems and assets data synchronization test must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Condition and Risks Overview sub-tab	Overview loads with 4 watchlist tables in problem identification section	Overview sub-tab	Default watchlist view
2	Verify "Systems with Lowest Condition" watchlist	Table shows systems sorted by Condition Score ascending (worst first): SYS-002 (38), SYS-001 (45), SYS-003 (72)	Systems condition	Filter: All Systems, Sort: Condition Score ascending
3	Check "Systems with Highest Risk" watchlist	Table shows systems sorted by Risk Score descending (riskiest first): SYS-002 (82), SYS-001 (75), SYS-003 (45)	Systems risk	Filter: All Systems, Sort: Risk Score descending
4	Validate "Assets in Poor Condition" watchlist	Table shows assets where Condition_Status = 'Poor', sorted by Condition Score ascending: AST-001 (25), AST-002 (30), AST-003 (35)	Poor condition assets	Filter: Condition_Status = 'Poor', Sort: Condition ascending
5	Verify "Assets with Highest Risk" watchlist	Table shows assets where Risk_Status = 'High', sorted by Risk Score descending: AST-003 (90), AST-001 (85), AST-002 (78)	High risk assets	Filter: Risk_Status = 'High', Sort: Risk descending
6	Check watchlist item limits	Each watchlist displays top 3-5 items only to keep view concise	Item limits	Concise display rule
7	Test kebab menu actions	Click (...) menu on watchlist items, verify options: "View Details", "Create Service Order", "Schedule Inspection"	Action menu	Quick action links
8	Verify "View Details" action	Click "View Details" for system/asset, verify navigation to item's detailed profile	Detail navigation	Profile page access
9	Test "Create Service Order" action	Click action to verify service order creation workflow initiation	Service order	Work order integration
10	Check "Schedule Inspection" action	Click action to verify inspection scheduling workflow opens	Inspection scheduling	Maintenance integration
11	Validate watchlist refresh	Trigger data update, verify watchlists refresh with updated sorting	Data refresh	Real-time updates
12	Test "View All" functionality	If present, click "View All" to navigate to complete sortable list	View All	Extended list access

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: All four watchlists display correctly sorted items according to their specific filtering and sorting logic
Secondary_Verifications:
- Sorting algorithms correctly identify worst condition and highest risk items
- Item limits maintain concise display (3-5 items per watchlist)
- Kebab menu actions provide appropriate quick access options
- Navigation and workflow integrations function properly
Negative_Verification: No incorrect sorting, no wrong filter applications, no broken action links, no missing watchlist items

Test Case 41: Assessment History Ledger and Filtering

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US09_TC_041
Title: Validate Assessment History Ledger Display, Filtering, and Audit Trail
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Condition and Risks Tab History (AX02US09)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Assessment-History, Audit-Trail, History-Filtering, Chronological-Sorting, Database, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Historical-Data

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100%
Integration_Points: History-Ledger, Filter-Service, User-Tracking, Audit-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, HISTORY, FILTER, AUDIT
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: Audit-Trail, Historical-Analysis, Assessment-Tracking
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: High

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US09-AC5, AX02US09-AC6, AX02US09-BR11-BR14
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-357 (Fixed: History filter date range)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US09_TC_001, AX02US09_TC_002

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: History Ledger Service, Filter Service, User Tracking, Audit Service
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds history load, < 1 second filter application
Data_Requirements: Comprehensive assessment history across multiple periods with various assessors

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Assessment history populated, filter service active, user tracking enabled
User_Roles_Permissions: Assessment Manager with historical data and audit trail access
Test_Data:
- Assessment 1: 2025-08-15, Condition, Score: 82, Status: Good, Assessed By: Jane Smith (Operations)
- Assessment 2: 2025-07-30, Risk, Score: 65, Status: Medium, Assessed By: Jane Doe (Engineering)
- Assessment 3: 2025-06-15, Condition, Score: 78, Status: Good, Assessed By: Bob Johnson (Operations)
- Assessment 4: 2025-05-20, Risk, Score: 58, Status: Medium, Assessed By: Alice Brown (Engineering)
Prior_Test_Cases: Assessment completion and history creation tests must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Condition and Risks History sub-tab	History sub-tab loads with filters section and Assessment History Ledger table	History view	Historical audit trail
2	Verify default filter settings	Score Type: "All Assessments", Assessed By: "All Users", Start/End Date: blank (no date restriction)	Default filters	No filtering applied initially
3	Check chronological sorting	Entries sorted by Assessment Date descending: 2025-08-15, 2025-07-30, 2025-06-15, 2025-05-20	Descending date order	Business rule: most recent first
4	Verify Assessment 1 entry	Shows "2025-08-15", "Condition", "82", "Good" (color-coded), "Jane Smith (Operations)"	Assessment 1 details	Complete audit information
5	Check Assessment 2 entry	Shows "2025-07-30", "Risk", "65", "Medium" (color-coded), "Jane Doe (Engineering)"	Assessment 2 details	Risk assessment entry
6	Test Score Type filter	Select "Condition" from dropdown, verify only condition assessments display	Filter: Condition	Type-based filtering
7	Apply Risk filter	Select "Risk" from dropdown, verify only risk assessments display	Filter: Risk	Risk-only filtering
8	Test Assessed By filter	Select "Jane Smith" from searchable dropdown, verify only her assessments display	Filter: Jane Smith	Assessor-based filtering
9	Apply date range filter	Set Start Date: 2025-07-01, End Date: 2025-08-31, verify entries within range	Date range filtering	Time-based filtering
10	Test combined filters	Apply Score Type: "Condition" + Assessed By: "Jane Smith" + Date range, verify combined filtering	Combined filters	Multiple filter interaction
11	Verify filter reset	Clear all filters, verify all assessment entries return to display	Filter reset	Complete data visibility
12	Check status color coding	Verify Good=Green, Medium=Yellow, Poor/High=Red status tags	Color validation	Visual status indicators
13	Validate read-only table	Verify table displays data in read-only format, no editing capabilities	Read-only access	Data integrity protection
14	Test assessor dropdown population	Verify "Assessed By" dropdown contains all historical assessors of the facility	Assessor list	Dynamic assessor population

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Assessment History Ledger displays complete audit trail with accurate chronological sorting and effective filtering functionality
Secondary_Verifications:
- All filter types work correctly individually and in combination
- Status color coding follows business rules
- Assessor dropdown populates with all historical assessors
- Date range filtering works accurately
- Table maintains read-only integrity for audit purposes
Negative_Verification: No missing historical entries, no incorrect sorting, no editable fields, no filter application failures

Test Case 42: Files & Documents Management and Categorization

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US12_TC_042
Title: Validate Files & Documents Upload, Categorization, and File Management
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Files & Documents (AX02US12)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, File-Management, Document-Upload, File-Categorization, MIME-Type-Processing, Database, MOD-Facility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Document-Management

Business Context

Customer_Segment: Enterprise
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 90%
Integration_Points: File-Storage-Service, MIME-Type-Detection, User-Directory, Document-Library
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, FILES, STORAGE, MIME
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: CSM
Report_Categories: Document-Management, File-Storage, User-Content
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US12-AC1, AX02US12-AC2, AX02US12-BR1-BR6
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-393 (Fixed: Large file upload timeout)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US12_TC_002, AX02US13_TC_001

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: File Storage Service, MIME Type Detection, User Directory, Document Library
Performance_Baseline: < 30 seconds large file upload, < 2 seconds file list load
Data_Requirements: Various file types for testing categorization, user accounts for upload tracking

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: File storage configured, MIME type detection active, file size limits set, allowed file types configured
User_Roles_Permissions: Document Manager role with file upload and management permissions
Test_Data:
- Media files: facility_overview.jpg (2.5 MB), inspection_video.mp4 (15 MB)
- Documents: maintenance_manual.pdf (5 MB), asset_inventory.xlsx (1.2 MB), safety_procedures.docx (800 KB)
- File restrictions: Max 50 MB per file, allowed types: pdf, jpg, png, docx, xlsx, mp4, mov
Prior_Test_Cases: User authentication and file storage setup tests must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Files & Documents section	Section loads with title "Files & Documents" and subtitle "Manage facility-related documents, media files, and attachments."	Files section	Document management interface
2	Verify Upload Files button	Button is prominently displayed and enabled for file upload functionality	Upload button	Primary upload action
3	Test file upload dialog	Click Upload Files button, verify OS native file selection dialog opens with multi-file selection	Upload dialog	Multi-file selection capability
4	Upload media files	Select facility_overview.jpg and inspection_video.mp4, verify upload progress indicators	Media uploads	Progress tracking for uploads
5	Check automatic categorization	Verify uploaded media files appear in "Media Files" section based on MIME type	Media categorization	Rule: .jpg, .jpeg, .png, .gif, .mp4, .mov, .avi → Media Files
6	Upload document files	Select maintenance_manual.pdf, asset_inventory.xlsx, safety_procedures.docx	Document uploads	Multiple document types
7	Verify document categorization	Verify uploaded documents appear in "Documents" section based on file extensions	Document categorization	Rule: .pdf, .docx, .doc, .xlsx, .xls, .pptx, .txt → Documents
8	Check file card information	Verify each file card shows: File Name, File Size, Uploaded By, Upload Date	File metadata	Complete file information display
9	Test file size display	Verify file sizes show in appropriate units (KB, MB, GB) based on size	Size formatting	Human-readable size display
10	Validate uploader tracking	Verify "Uploaded By" shows current user name from User Directory	User tracking	Upload accountability
11	Test file name click	Click on file name to verify it opens in-browser (PDF, images) or downloads	File access	Direct file access
12	Check download functionality	Click download icon (↓) to verify direct file download to device	Download feature	File download capability
13	Test preview functionality	Click preview icon (👁) for supported files, verify preview modal/tab opens	Preview feature	In-browser preview for supported types
14	Verify file restrictions	Attempt to upload unsupported file type or oversized file, verify appropriate error messages	File validation	Upload restrictions enforcement
15	Test More Actions menu	Click (...) menu, verify options: Edit Details, Move, View History, Delete	Action menu	File management options

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Files upload successfully and are automatically categorized correctly based on MIME type and file extensions
Secondary_Verifications:
- File metadata displays accurately with proper size formatting
- User tracking correctly identifies uploader
- Preview and download functions work for appropriate file types
- File restrictions are properly enforced
Negative_Verification: No incorrect categorization, no missing file metadata, no broken preview/download links, no bypassing file restrictions

Test Case 43: Notes & Comments Management and Search

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US13_TC_043
Title: Validate Notes & Comments Creation, Display, and Search Functionality
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Notes Tab (AX02US13)
Test Type: Functional
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Notes-Management, Comments-System, Markdown-Support, Search-Filter, Database, MOD-Facility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Low, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Content-Management

Business Context

Customer_Segment: Enterprise
Revenue_Impact: Low
Business_Priority: Could-Have
Customer_Journey: Support
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 85%
Integration_Points: Notes-Service, User-Directory, Search-Engine, Markdown-Processor
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, NOTES, SEARCH, MARKDOWN
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: QA
Report_Categories: Content-Management, User-Collaboration, Search-Functionality
Trend_Tracking: No
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Low

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US13-AC1, AX02US13-AC2, AX02US13-BR1-BR5
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-405 (Fixed: Markdown rendering in notes)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US12_TC_001, AX02US14_TC_001

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Notes Service, User Directory, Search Engine, Markdown Processor
Performance_Baseline: < 1 second note creation, < 2 seconds search results
Data_Requirements: Existing notes for search testing, multiple users for filter testing

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Notes service active, markdown processor configured, user tracking enabled
User_Roles_Permissions: Facility User role with notes creation and editing permissions
Test_Data:
- Existing notes from various users for search/filter testing
- Test markdown content: "Bold text, italic text, and bullet lists"
- Character limit: 1000 characters
Prior_Test_Cases: User authentication and notes service setup tests must pass

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Notes & Comments tab	Tab loads with title "Notes & Comments" and subtitle "Add and view notes related to this facility."	Notes tab	Content management interface
2	Verify Add New Note section	Text area with placeholder "Add a new note..." and disabled "Add Note" button	Note creation area	Note input interface
3	Test character limit	Enter 1000+ characters in text area, verify character limit enforcement	Character limit test	Maximum 1000 characters
4	Enter markdown content	Type "Bold text, italic text, and - bullet point" in text area	Markdown input	Basic markdown formatting
5	Verify Add Note button state	Button enables when text is entered, disabled when text area is empty	Button state	Conditional button enabling
6	Create new note	Click "Add Note" button, verify note is created and appears at top of list	Note creation	Note submission and display
7	Check note metadata	Verify note displays with content, creator name, and timestamp in format "Created by: [User Name] on [YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM]"	Note metadata	Complete note information
8	Validate markdown rendering	Verify markdown content renders correctly (bold, italic, bullet points) in display	Markdown rendering	Formatted content display
9	Test text area clearing	Verify text area clears after successful note submission	Text area reset	Clean interface after submission
10	Check chronological sorting	Verify notes list sorts with most recent note at top	Chronological order	Business rule: newest first
11	Test search functionality	Type search term in "Search notes..." box, verify dynamic filtering of notes	Search testing	Real-time search filtering
12	Validate search by content	Search for specific words within note content, verify matching notes appear	Content search	Note content matching
13	Test search by creator	Search for creator's name, verify notes by that user appear	Creator search	User-based filtering
14	Check advanced filter options	Click Filter button, verify options: Created By (searchable dropdown), Date Range (start/end date pickers)	Filter options	Advanced filtering interface
15	Test note editing	Click edit icon (✎) on note created by current user, verify edit functionality	Edit capability	Note modification for author

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Notes creation, display, and search functionality work correctly with proper markdown rendering and chronological sorting
Secondary_Verifications:
- Character limit enforcement prevents overly long notes
- Markdown formatting renders correctly in display view
- Search works across both note content and creator names
- Advanced filtering provides appropriate options
Negative_Verification: No character limit bypassing, no broken markdown rendering, no search failures, no unauthorized editing

Test Case 44: Activity Log Tracking and Filtering

Test Case Metadata

Test Case ID: AX02US14_TC_044
Title: Validate Activity Log Event Tracking, Filtering, and Navigation
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: August 19, 2025
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management - Activity Log (AX02US14)
Test Type: Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P1-Critical
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Activity-Log, Event-Tracking, Audit-Trail, Timeline-Display, API, Database, CrossModule, MOD-Facility, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, System-Monitoring

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 100%
Integration_Points: Activity-Tracker, Event-Logger, Search-Engine, Filter-Service, Navigation-Service
Code_Module_Mapped: AX02, ACTIVITY, EVENT, SEARCH, NAV
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
Report_Categories: System-Monitoring, Activity-Analytics, Audit-Trail
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: Yes
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: AX02US14-AC1, AX02US14-AC2, AX02US14-BR1-BR8
Related_Bugs: BUG-2024-417 (Fixed: Activity log navigation links)
Related_Test_Cases: AX02US13_TC_001, AX02US11_TC_001

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Activity Tracker, Event Logger, Search Engine, Filter Service, Navigation Service
Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds activity log load, < 1 second filter application
Data_Requirements: Comprehensive activity history across all facility modules with varied event types

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Activity tracking enabled across all modules, event logging active, comprehensive activity history available
User_Roles_Permissions: Facility Administrator with full activity log access
Test_Data:
- Service Order events: SO-001 created by John Smith, SO-002 completed by Jane Doe
- Inspection events: Monthly inspection completed, Annual inspection scheduled
- Failure events: Control valve C3 failure reported by System Alert
- Maintenance events: Pump maintenance completed by Maintenance Team
- Compliance events: Water quality test passed by Compliance Engine
- Note events: Facility note added by Operations Manager
Prior_Test_Cases: Activity generation from other modules must be working

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to Activity Log section	Activity Log loads with title and subtitle "Timeline of all activities and changes for this facility."	Activity Log	System monitoring interface
2	Verify chronological sorting	Activities display in reverse chronological order (most recent first)	Activity timeline	Business rule: newest events first
3	Check Service Order activity entry	Verify entry shows: Blue "Service Order" tag, timestamp, "Created service order SO-001 for pump maintenance", "John Smith"	Service Order event	SO creation tracking
4	Validate Inspection activity entry	Shows: Green "Inspection" tag, timestamp, "Completed monthly pump inspection", "All parameters within acceptable ranges", "Jane Doe"	Inspection event	Inspection completion tracking
5	Verify Failure activity entry	Shows: Red "Failure" tag, timestamp, "Reported failure in control valve C3", additional failure details, "System Alert"	Failure event	Automated failure detection
6	Check Maintenance activity entry	Shows: Purple "Maintenance" tag, timestamp, "Completed scheduled pump maintenance", maintenance details, "Maintenance Team"	Maintenance event	Maintenance completion tracking
7	Validate Compliance activity entry	Shows: Orange "Compliance" tag, timestamp, "Water quality test passed", test parameters, "Compliance Engine"	Compliance event	Automated compliance tracking
8	Check Note activity entry	Shows: Gray "Note" tag, timestamp, "Added facility note", note preview, "Operations Manager"	Note event	User content tracking
9	Test activity type color coding	Verify colors match specification: Service Order (Blue), Inspection (Green), Failure (Red), Maintenance (Purple), Compliance (Orange), Note (Gray)	Color validation	Visual event type identification
10	Validate clickable entry navigation	Click on Service Order entry, verify navigation to SO-001 detailed page	Entry navigation	Source record access
11	Test search functionality	Type "pump" in search box, verify filtering shows only activities containing "pump"	Search filtering	Activity content search
12	Check user/source search	Search for "John Smith", verify only activities by that user appear	User search	Activity source filtering
13	Test Activity Type filter	Select "Service Order" and "Inspection" from Activity Type filter, verify only those types display	Type filtering	Multi-select activity type filter
14	Apply User/Source filter	Select specific user from dropdown, verify only activities by that user/source appear	Source filtering	User-based activity filtering
15	Test Date Range filter	Set date range, verify only activities within specified dates appear	Date filtering	Time-based activity filtering
16	Verify export functionality	Click Export button, verify CSV/TXT generation respecting applied filters	Export function	Activity log export
17	Test combined filtering	Apply multiple filters together, verify combined filtering works correctly	Combined filters	Multiple filter interaction
18	Validate dynamic link construction	Verify navigation links are correctly constructed based on event_type and source_record_id	Link validation	Dynamic navigation logic

Verification Points

Primary_Verification: Activity Log displays complete timeline of facility activities with accurate chronological sorting and proper event categorization
Secondary_Verifications:
- Color coding follows specification for all activity types
- Clickable entries navigate to correct source records
- Search and filtering work across activity content and users/sources
- Export respects applied search and filter criteria
Negative_Verification: No missing activities, no incorrect timestamps, no broken navigation links, no filter application failures

Test Case 45: Assets Tab - Asset Management and Suggestion Engine

Test Case ID: AX02US01_TC_045
Title: Verify Assets tab manages facility assets with intelligent suggestions and comprehensive asset hierarchy integration
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: 2025-01-08
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US01) - Assets Tab
Test Type: Functional/Integration/Asset-Management
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Asset-Management, AI-Suggestions, Asset-Hierarchy, Performance-Metrics, MOD-AX, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium

Business Context

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

Quality Metrics

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

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 15%
Integration_Points: Asset-Registry, Asset-Hierarchy-Service, Performance-Analytics, Condition-Monitoring
Code_Module_Mapped: AX
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Asset-Management, Performance-Analytics
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: Assets Tab Business Rules, Asset Performance Calculations, Hierarchy Management
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_009, TC_010, TC_012

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Asset Registry, Performance Analytics, Condition Monitoring System
Performance_Baseline: Asset loading <3 seconds, performance calculations <2 seconds
Data_Requirements: FAC-001 with complete asset hierarchy across systems and networks

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: FAC-001 with complete asset hierarchy across systems and networksxist with condition scores and uptime data

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Assets tab	Assets Management page loads with asset list	FAC-001	Asset dashboard
2	Assets Management Interface
3	Verify page structure	Shows "Assets Management" title with "Monitor and manage all assets within facility systems and networks"	Page layout	Interface validation
4	Check "Add Asset" button	Blue button present and functional	Add button	Primary action
5	Verify control elements	Search, Filter, Export buttons available	Control interface	User management tools
6	Assets List Table
7	Verify AST-001 (Main Pump Unit)	System/Network: SYS-001/NET-001, Location: Building A-1, Condition: 85 (Good), Risk: 25, Uptime: 98.5%	Asset data	Uptime % = (Total Operating Time - Downtime) / Total Operating Time × 100
8	Check AST-002 (Filter Assembly B2)	System/Network: SYS-002/NET-002, Location: Treatment Plant, Condition: 72 (Fair), Risk: 45, Uptime: 94.2%	Asset data	Condition Score based on assessment criteria
9	Validate AST-003 (Control Valve C3)	System/Network: SYS-003/NET-003, Location: Pump Station, Condition: 68 (Fair), Risk: 52, Uptime: 91.8%	Asset data	Fair condition requires monitoring
10	Verify AST-004 (Storage Tank D1)	System/Network: SYS-004/NET-001, Location: Reservoir Area, Condition: 91 (Good), Risk: 18, Uptime: 99.1%	Asset data	Excellent performance
11	Check AST-005 (Sensor Array E2)	System/Network: SYS-001/NET-004, Location: Monitoring Hub, Condition: 76 (Good), Risk: 38, Uptime: 96.3%	Asset data	Good operational status
12	Asset Performance Validation
13	Verify condition score color coding	Good: Green (76-100), Fair: Yellow (41-75), Poor: Red (0-40)	Color standards	Visual performance indicators
14	Check risk score interpretation	Low: Green (0-30), Medium: Yellow (31-70), High: Red (71-100)	Risk categories	Risk Score = Probability × Consequence
15	Validate uptime calculations	Uptime percentages reflect actual operational availability	Performance metrics	Critical for facility capacity calculations
16	Asset Management Actions
17	Test "View" action for AST-001	Navigate to detailed asset profile with maintenance history	Asset detail	Cross-module navigation
18	Test "Edit" action for AST-002	Opens asset edit form with current data	Edit functionality	Asset modification
19	Test "Delete" action warning	Shows confirmation about removing asset from facility	Delete protection	Removes association, preserves asset record
20	Add Asset - Intelligent Suggestions
21	Click "Add Asset" button	Opens "Suggested Assets for Water Treatment Plant A" modal	Suggestion interface	AI-powered recommendations
22	Verify Asset Suggestion Logic
23	Check Main Pump Unit suggestion	Shows AST-001, Building A-1 location, checkbox for selection	Facility-specific suggestion	Rule: Suggest assets common to facility type
24	Verify Filter Assembly B2 suggestion	Shows AST-002, Treatment Plant location, checkbox for selection	Treatment-related asset	Rule: Assets standard for water treatment
25	Validate Control Valve C3 suggestion	Shows AST-003, Pump Station location, checkbox for selection	Control system asset	Rule: Assets needed for system operation
26	Test Asset Selection Process
27	Select multiple asset suggestions	Check boxes for Main Pump and Filter Assembly	Multiple selection	User choice interface
28	Verify dynamic count update	"Connect Selected (2)" button shows selection count	Dynamic counting	Formula: COUNT(selected asset checkboxes)
29	Test "Skip & Search All" option	Opens comprehensive asset search modal	Alternative workflow	Complete asset discovery
30	Connect Assets Modal
31	Verify comprehensive search	Search by Asset ID, Name, Location, Condition	Search capability	Multi-field asset discovery
32	Test asset filtering	Filter by condition score range and location	Range filtering	Numeric and geographic filtering
33	Search All Assets Interface
34	Check AST-001 (Main Pump Unit)	Shows Building A-1 location, condition 85 (Good)	Available asset	Asset details display
35	Verify AST-002 (Filter Assembly B2)	Shows Treatment Plant location, condition 72 (Fair)	Available asset	Condition transparency
36	Validate AST-003 (Control Valve C3)	Shows Pump Station location, condition 68 (Fair)	Available asset	Location-based organization
37	Check AST-004 (Storage Tank D1)	Shows Reservoir Area location, condition 91 (Good)	Available asset	High-performance asset
38	Verify AST-005 (Sensor Array E2)	Shows Monitoring Hub location, condition 76 (Good)	Available asset	Monitoring equipment
39	Asset Connection Workflow
40	Select assets for connection	Check multiple assets from search results	Multi-selection	User workflow
41	Verify "Connect Selected" button	Button updates with selection count	Dynamic interface	Selection feedback
42	Execute asset connection	Assets successfully added to facility	Asset integration	Hierarchy establishment
43	Verify list refresh	Main assets list updates with newly connected assets	UI refresh	Real-time data update
44	Asset Search and Filter Testing
45	Test asset search functionality	Search "Pump" shows only pump-related assets	Search accuracy	Text matching across fields
46	Apply system/network filter	Filter assets by parent system or network	Hierarchical filtering	System/Network relationship validation
47	Test condition score range	Filter by condition score 70-85	Range filtering	Numeric range: WHERE Condition_Score BETWEEN 70 AND 85
48	Apply location filter	Filter assets by physical location	Geographic filtering	Location-based asset management
49	Combine multiple filters	Apply system + condition + location filters	Multi-criteria filtering	Boolean AND logic across all filters
50	Asset Performance Analytics
51	Verify uptime calculation accuracy	Cross-reference uptime % with operational data	Performance validation	Uptime = (Scheduled Time - Downtime) / Scheduled Time
52	Check condition aggregation impact	Asset conditions contribute to system/facility scores	Hierarchy impact	Facility score aggregated from asset conditions
53	Validate risk score components	Risk combines asset criticality with failure probability	Risk methodology	Risk = Criticality × Probability of Failure
54	Export and Reporting
55	Test asset export functionality	Export includes all asset data with calculated fields	Data export	Performance metrics included
56	Verify filtered export	Export respects active search and filter criteria	Selective export	Only filtered assets exported
57	Check export data completeness	All columns and calculations present in export	Data integrity	Export includes: ID, Name, System/Network, Location, Condition, Risk, Uptime
58	Performance and Scalability
59	Test loading performance	Asset list loads within baseline time	Performance validation	<3 seconds for full asset list
60	Verify pagination handling	Large asset lists properly paginated	Scalability	Handles facilities with 100+ assets
61	Check calculation performance	Performance metrics calculate within time limit	Calculation efficiency	<2 seconds for metric calculations

Verification Points

Primary_Verification:

Assets list displays accurate condition scores and performance metrics
Asset suggestions intelligently recommend assets appropriate for facility type
Uptime calculations reflect actual operational availability data
Asset hierarchy properly connects to parent systems and networks

Secondary_Verifications:

Search and filter functionality works across all asset attributes
Risk scores combine criticality and failure probability appropriately
Color coding follows business rules for condition and risk visualization
Export functionality includes all calculated performance metrics

Negative_Verification:

Only unassigned assets appear in connection modals
Asset removal warns about hierarchy disconnection vs deletion
Invalid performance data does not break calculation displays

Test Case 46: Schedules Tab - Preventive Maintenance and Inspection Planning

Test Case ID: AX02US01_TC_046
Title: Verify Schedules tab manages preventive maintenance schedules with accurate frequency calculations and work order integration
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: 2025-01-08
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US01) - Schedules Tab
Test Type: Functional/Maintenance-Scheduling/Work-Order-Integration
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Maintenance-Scheduling, Preventive-Maintenance, Work-Order-Integration, Schedule-Management, MOD-AX, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium

Business Context

Customer_Segment: Enterprise
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: 12 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 20%
Integration_Points: Schedule-Engine, Work-Order-System, Asset-Registry, Maintenance-Planning
Code_Module_Mapped: AX
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Maintenance-Management, Schedule-Tracking
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: Schedules Tab Business Rules, PM Frequency Calculations, Work Order Generation Logic
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_012, TC_014, TC_015

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Schedule Engine, Work Order System, Asset Registry
Performance_Baseline: Schedule loading <3 seconds, calculation updates <2 seconds
Data_Requirements: Active PM schedules with different frequencies and completion statuses

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Active PM schedules for FAC-001, work order history, asset maintenance records
User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with maintenance scheduling access
Test_Data: 4 active schedules: PM-PUMP-001 (Monthly), INSP-HYDR-005 (Quarterly), PM-VALVE-003 (Annual), INSP-PIPE-007 (500 Hours)
Prior_Test_Cases: Assets and work order system must be functional

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 Schedules tab	PM Schedules page loads with scheduled activities	FAC-001	Maintenance dashboard
2	PM Schedules Header
3	Verify page structure	Shows "PM Schedules" title with "Preventive maintenance and inspection schedules for this facility"	Page layout	Interface validation
4	Check "Create Schedule" button	Blue button available for creating new schedules	Create button	Primary action
5	Verify "Manage Schedules" button	Button for advanced schedule management interface	Manage button	Advanced functionality
6	Scheduled Activities Table
7	Verify PM-PUMP-001 schedule	Monthly Pump Inspection - Station 3, Preventive Maintenance, Monthly frequency	Schedule details	Standard PM schedule
8	Check schedule runs count	Shows 24 runs completed	24 runs	Formula: COUNT(completed work orders linked to Schedule_ID)
9	Validate assets covered	Shows 5 assets covered by this schedule	5 assets	Multiple assets per schedule supported
10	Verify next due date	Shows 2025-07-15 as next due date	July 15, 2025	Formula: Last Completed + Frequency = 2025-06-15 + Monthly
11	Check last completed date	Shows 2025-06-15 as last completion	June 15, 2025	Historical completion tracking
12	Validate progress status	Shows 3/5 Completed progress	3/5 assets	Progress = Completed Assets / Total Assets in Schedule
13	Verify schedule status	Shows "Active" status in green	Active status	Status based on due date and completion
14	INSP-HYDR-005 Schedule
15	Check Quarterly Hydrant Inspection	Shows Inspection type, Quarterly frequency	Inspection schedule	Safety inspection requirement
16	Verify runs and assets	Shows 8 runs, 12 assets covered	8 runs, 12 assets	Quarterly schedule = 4 runs per year × 2 years
17	Validate due dates	Next due: 2025-07-20, Last completed: 2025-04-20	Quarterly timing	Quarterly = every 3 months
18	Check completion progress	Shows 8/12 Completed	8/12 progress	66.7% completion rate
19	Verify active status	Shows "Active" status	Active	Schedule on track
20	PM-VALVE-003 Schedule
21	Check Annual Valve Maintenance	Shows Preventive Maintenance type, Annually frequency	Annual schedule	Comprehensive maintenance
22	Verify runs and coverage	Shows 2 runs, 25 assets covered	2 runs, 25 assets	Annual schedule over 2 years
23	Validate timing	Next due: 2025-08-01, Last completed: 2024-08-01	Annual cycle	Annual = once per year
24	Check progress status	Shows 0/25 Completed	0/25 progress	Schedule not yet started for current cycle
25	Verify active status	Shows "Active" status	Active	Ready for execution
32	Schedule Management Actions
33	Test schedule actions menu	Click "..." for PM-PUMP-001 to show action options	Actions menu	Schedule management options
34	Verify available actions	Shows View, Edit, Pause, Delete options	Action options	Schedule lifecycle management
35	Test "View" action	Navigate to detailed schedule view with work order history	Schedule detail	Historical tracking
36	Test "Edit" action	Opens schedule modification form with current parameters	Edit functionality	Schedule updates
37	Create New Schedule
38	Click "Create Schedule" button	Opens schedule creation wizard	Creation wizard	New schedule workflow
39	Test schedule type selection	Shows Preventive Maintenance, Inspection, Calibration options	Type selection	Schedule categorization
40	Verify frequency options	Shows Monthly, Quarterly, Annually, Custom, Usage-based options	Frequency options	Flexible scheduling options
41	Test asset selection	Multi-select interface for choosing assets to include	Asset selection	Multiple assets per schedule supported
42	Validate task definition	Text area for defining maintenance tasks and procedures	Task definition	Work order template
43	Test schedule creation	Submit complete schedule and verify creation	New schedule	Creates new PM schedule with specified parameters
44	Schedule Calculation Validation
45	Verify monthly frequency	Next due = Last completed + 1 month	Monthly calculation	Formula: Add specified interval to last completion
46	Check quarterly frequency	Next due = Last completed + 3 months	Quarterly calculation	Formula: Last Completed + 90 days
47	Validate annual frequency	Next due = Last completed + 1 year	Annual calculation	Formula: Last Completed + 365 days
48	Test usage-based calculation	Next due based on asset operating hours	Usage tracking	Formula: Last Completed + Usage Interval
49	Work Order Integration
50	Verify work order generation	Schedules automatically generate work orders when due	WO creation	Automated work order creation
51	Check work order details	Generated WOs include schedule tasks and asset information	WO content	Template-based work order content
52	Validate completion tracking	Completed work orders update schedule progress	Progress tracking	Completion updates schedule status
53	Test overdue handling	Overdue schedules generate high-priority work orders	Overdue logic	Priority escalation for overdue items
54	Performance and Scheduling
55	Test schedule performance	Large numbers of schedules load within baseline time	Performance validation	<3 seconds for schedule list
56	Verify calculation efficiency	Schedule updates and calculations complete quickly	Calculation performance	<2 seconds for recalculations
57	Check concurrent scheduling	Multiple schedules can be managed simultaneously	Concurrency	No conflicts between schedules

Verification Points

Primary_Verification:

Schedule frequency calculations correctly determine next due dates
Progress tracking accurately reflects completion status (completed/total assets)
Work order integration automatically generates maintenance tasks
Schedule status properly indicates Active/Overdue based on due dates

Secondary_Verifications:

Multiple asset scheduling supported within single schedules
Usage-based scheduling calculates correctly from operating hours
Schedule creation wizard captures all necessary parameters
Historical run counts match completed work order records

Negative_Verification:

Overdue schedules correctly flagged with red status
Schedule deletion requires confirmation to prevent accidental removal
Invalid frequency settings rejected during schedule creation

TC_047: O&M Tab - Service Orders and Maintenance Workflow

Test Case ID: AX02US01_TC_047
Title: Verify O&M tab manages service orders with comprehensive filtering and maintenance workflow integration
Created By: Prachi
Created Date: 2025-01-08
Version: 1.0

Classification

Module/Feature: Facility Management (AX02US01) - O&M Tab
Test Type: Functional/Work-Order-Management/Maintenance-Workflow
Test Level: Integration
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags

Tags: Happy-Path, Work-Order-Management, Maintenance-Workflow, Service-Orders, Operations-Management, MOD-AX, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium

Business Context

Customer_Segment: Enterprise
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: 10 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking

Feature_Coverage: 15%
Integration_Points: Work-Order-System, Asset-Registry, Maintenance-Planning, Schedule-Engine
Code_Module_Mapped: AX
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting

Primary_Stakeholder: Product
Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Operations-Management, Maintenance-Tracking
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability

Related_Requirements: O&M Tab Business Rules, Service Order Workflow, Asset Integration
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_013, TC_015, TC_016

Test Environment

Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Work Order System, Asset Registry, Maintenance Planning
Performance_Baseline: Service order loading <3 seconds, filtering <1 second
Data_Requirements: Active service orders with various types and statuses

Prerequisites

Setup_Requirements: Active service orders for FAC-001 with various types and statuses
User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with O&M access
Test_Data: Service orders: SO-001 (In Progress), SO-002 (Completed), SO-003 (Scheduled), SO-004 (Active)
Prior_Test_Cases: Assets and maintenance schedules must exist

Test Procedure

Step #	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Formula/Comments
1	Navigate to FAC-001 O&M tab	O&M page loads with service orders list	FAC-001	Operations dashboard
2	Service Orders Interface
3	Verify search functionality	Search box filters by SO ID, Name, Asset Name/ID	Search interface	Multi-field search capability
4	Check filter options	Filter button provides Type, Priority, Status, Date Range options	Filter interface	Advanced filtering
5	Verify export functionality	Export button generates service order report	Export capability	Data extraction
6	Service Orders Table
7	Verify SO-001 (Pump Maintenance)	Main Pump Unit AST-001, SYS-001/NET-001, Building A-1, Preventive, High priority, In Progress	Service order data	Links asset to system/network hierarchy
8	Check SO-002 (Filter Replacement)	Filter Assembly B2 AST-002, SYS-002/NET-002, Treatment Plant, Corrective, Medium priority, Completed	Service order data	Corrective maintenance workflow
9	Validate SO-003 (Valve Inspection)	Control Valve C3 AST-003, SYS-003/NET-003, Pump Station, Inspection, Low priority, Scheduled	Service order data	Inspection workflow
10	Verify SO-004 (Tank Cleaning)	Storage Tank D1 AST-004, SYS-004/NET-001, Reservoir Area, Preventive, Medium priority, Active	Service order data	Preventive maintenance
11	Service Order Details Validation
12	Check asset hierarchy display	Service orders show correct System/Network relationships	Hierarchy display	Asset belongs to both system and network
13	Verify location accuracy	Physical locations match asset registry data	Location consistency	Cross-system data integrity
14	Validate type categorization	Work order types align with maintenance categories	Type classification	Preventive, Corrective, Inspection, Emergency
15	Check priority color coding	High=Red, Medium=Yellow, Low=Green priority display	Priority visualization	Visual priority management
16	Verify status workflow	Status reflects current work order lifecycle stage	Status tracking	In Progress, Completed, Scheduled, Active, On Hold
17	Service Order Actions
18	Test "View" action for SO-001	Navigate to detailed service order page with full information	SO detail view	Cross-module navigation
19	Verify SO detail completeness	Detail page shows asset info, work description, progress, resources	Detail content	Comprehensive work order view
20	Check work order history	Historical updates and progress tracking visible	History tracking	Audit trail of work order changes
21	Search and Filter Testing
22	Test text search	Search "Pump" returns only pump-related service orders	Search accuracy	Text matching across fields
23	Apply Type filter	Filter by "Preventive" shows only preventive maintenance orders	Type filtering	Service order categorization
24	Test Priority filter	Filter by "High" shows only high-priority orders	Priority filtering	Urgency-based filtering
25	Apply Status filter	Filter by "In Progress" shows only active work orders	Status filtering	Workflow state filtering
26	Test Date Range filter	Filter by creation or due date range	Date filtering	Time-based work order analysis
27	Combine multiple filters	Apply Type + Priority + Status filters together	Multi-criteria filtering	Boolean AND logic across filters
28	Asset Integration Validation
29	Verify asset link accuracy	Service order assets match facility asset registry	Asset consistency	Cross-reference with Asset Registry
30	Check system/network mapping	Assets correctly mapped to parent systems and networks	Hierarchy accuracy	Validates asset hierarchy integrity
31	Validate location consistency	Asset locations match across service orders and registry	Location integrity	Geographic data consistency
32	Work Order Workflow
33	Test work order creation	Service orders can be created for facility assets	Creation workflow	Asset-driven work order creation
34	Verify schedule integration	Scheduled maintenance generates appropriate service orders	Schedule integration	PM schedule automation
35	Check completion workflow	Completed orders update asset maintenance history	Completion tracking	Asset history updates
36	Validate priority escalation	Overdue orders automatically increase in priority	Priority management	Time-based priority escalation
37	Export and Reporting
38	Test filtered export	Export respects active search and filter criteria	Selective export	Only filtered orders exported
39	Verify export completeness	All service order fields included in export	Data completeness	Export includes: SO ID, Name, Asset, System/Network, Location, Type, Priority, Status
40	Check export formatting	Export data properly formatted for analysis	Data quality	Structured data export
41	Performance and Pagination
42	Test loading performance	Service orders list loads within baseline time	Performance validation	<3 seconds for full list
43	Verify filter performance	Search and filter operations complete quickly	Filter efficiency	<1 second response time
44	Check pagination handling	Large service order lists properly paginated	Scalability	Handles facilities with many work orders
45	Integration Workflows
46	Test asset condition updates	Service order completion can update asset condition scores	Condition integration	Maintenance affects asset health
47	Verify alert integration	Critical service orders trigger appropriate facility alerts	Alert integration	High-priority work generates alerts
48	Check schedule updates	Completed PM orders update schedule run counts and progress	Schedule integration	Bidirectional schedule-WO integration

Verification Points

Primary_Verification:

Service orders display with accurate asset hierarchy relationships
Search and filter functionality works across all service order attributes
Work order types and priorities display with correct color coding
Asset integration maintains data consistency across modules

Secondary_Verifications:

Export functionality includes all relevant service order data
Pagination handles large datasets appropriately
Performance meets baseline requirements for loading and filtering
Work order workflows integrate properly with asset and schedule systems

Negative_Verification:

Filters correctly exclude non-matching service orders
Invalid search terms return appropriate empty results
Service order actions restricted based on user permissions