Communication Workflows (UX03US04)

Communication Workflows - Updated Comprehensive Test Cases

Test Scenario Summary

Functional Test Scenarios Covered:

• Workflow Creation Flow - Complete 3-step wizard process (Details → Trigger → Actions)
• Workflow Management - View, Edit, Delete, Filter workflows
• Communication Actions - Multi-channel message configuration (Email, SMS, WhatsApp)
• Trigger Configuration - Time-based triggers (Specific Date/Time only)
• Workflow Execution - Automated workflow processing
• Target List Integration - Target list selection in trigger configuration
• CC/BCC Email Configuration - Enhanced email recipient management

Non-Functional Test Scenarios:

• Performance Monitoring - History and analytics tracking
• Integration Points - External system dependencies
• Security & Access Control - Role-based permissions
• Data Validation - Input validation and error handling
• Cross-Platform Compatibility - Desktop browser testing only

---

FUNCTIONAL TEST CASES

Test Suite: Workflow Creation

Test Case 1: Create New Workflow - Happy Path

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_001
Title: Successfully create a new communication workflow with all required fields
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Workflows, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-End-to-End

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Daily-Usage
• Compliance Required: No
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: Low
• Complexity Level: Medium
• Expected Execution Time: 5 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 35%
• Integration Points: Workflow Engine, Template Service, Trigger Engine, NSC Event System
• Code Module Mapped: Workflow Creation Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-WF-001, REQ-WF-002, REQ-WF-003
• Cross Platform Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Feature-Coverage, Smoke-Results
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-WF-001 (3-step wizard), REQ-WF-002 (Trigger config), REQ-WF-003 (Multi-channel), Major Steps #1-20, Acceptance Criteria #1-4, Business Rules #1-8
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_002, UX03US04_TC_003

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Template Service, NSC Event System, Email/SMS providers, Database
• Performance Baseline: <1 second page load, <500ms workflow creation
• Data Requirements: Valid workflow configuration data, Test templates, Target lists

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Template library populated with test templates
• Target lists configured
• Email/SMS providers configured
• Browser cache cleared

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with workflow creation access

Test Data:

• Username: admin@utilitycompany.com
• Password: SecurePass123!
• Workflow Name: "Customer Onboarding Sequence"
• Description: "Automated welcome messages for new customers"
• Audience: Consumer
• Trigger: NSC-Created event
• CC: manager@utility.com, billing@utility.com
• BCC: audit@utility.com

Prior Test Cases: Login functionality verified, Navigation verified

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Communication Workflows page	Workflows page loads with Active tab selected	N/A	Verify page header and navigation
2	Click "New Workflow" button	Create New Workflow modal opens with Details step active	N/A	Modal should show 3-step wizard
3	Enter Workflow Name	Field accepts input, no validation errors	"Customer Onboarding Sequence"	Min 3 characters required
4	Enter Description	Field accepts input, character count updates	"Automated welcome messages for new customers"	Min 5 characters required
5	Select Audience Type	Dropdown shows Consumer, Technician, Business User options	Select "Consumer"	Single selection required
6	Click "Next" button	Navigate to Trigger step, step 2 becomes active	N/A	Button enabled only when required fields filled
7	Select "Event-Based" trigger type	Event-Based option selected, Event Type dropdown appears	N/A	Radio button selection
8	Select Event Type	Dropdown shows system events	Select "NSC-Created"	System event selection
9	Click "Next" button	Navigate to Actions step, step 3 becomes active	N/A	Trigger configuration saved
10	Click "Add First Action"	Communication channel selection appears	N/A	Action configuration panel opens
11	Select Email channel	Email selected, message source options appear	N/A	Channel-specific options displayed
12	Click "Create New Message"	Message composition fields appear	N/A	Toggle between template/new message
13	Enter CC field	CC field accepts multiple email addresses	"manager@utility.com, billing@utility.com"	NEW: CC functionality
14	Enter BCC field	BCC field accepts email addresses	"audit@utility.com"	NEW: BCC functionality
15	Enter email subject	Subject field accepts input	"Welcome to UtilityConnect!"	Required field for email
16	Enter email content	Message body accepts rich text input	"Dear [Customer.FirstName], Welcome to our service..."	Support for variables/placeholders
17	Click "Add Action"	Action added to workflow, action summary displayed	N/A	Action configuration saved
18	Click "Create Workflow"	Workflow created successfully, with success message and redirect to workflows list	N/A	Success confirmation message
19	Verify workflow in Active tab	New workflow appears in Active workflows list with correct details	N/A	Status should be "Active"

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Workflow appears in Active tab with correct configuration
• Secondary Verifications: All entered data preserved, workflow metrics initialized (0 triggered, 0 completed)
• Negative Verification: Workflow does not appear in Draft or History tabs

---

Test Case 2: Create Workflow with Time-Based Trigger and Target List

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_002
Title: Create workflow with specific date/time trigger and target list selection
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Workflows, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Integration-TargetLists, Time-Based-Triggers

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Re-engagement
• Compliance Required: No
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: Medium
• Complexity Level: Medium
• Expected Execution Time: 4 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure Impact: High

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 45%
• Integration Points: Workflow Engine, Target List Service, Scheduler Service
• Code Module Mapped: Trigger Configuration Module, Target List Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-WF-002, REQ-TL-001, REQ-SCHED-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Feature-Coverage, Regression-Results
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-WF-002 (Time-based triggers), REQ-TL-001 (Target lists), REQ-SCHED-001 (Scheduling), Business Rules #3-4, Acceptance Criteria #3-4
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_001, UX03US04_TC_015

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Target List Service, Scheduler Service, Database
• Performance Baseline: <1 second page load, <300ms target list load
• Data Requirements: Pre-configured target lists, Valid customer segments

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Target lists configured ("Inactive Users" list available)
• Scheduler service running
• Time zone configuration verified

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with workflow and target list access

Test Data:

• Workflow Name: "Reengagement Campaign"
• Description: "Re-engage users who haven't logged in for 30+ days"
• Audience: Consumer
• Target List: "Inactive Users"
• Schedule Date: Tomorrow's date
• Schedule Time: "10:00:00"

Prior Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_001 passed

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Communication Workflows page	Page loads with Active tab selected	N/A	Base navigation
2	Click "New Workflow" button	Create New Workflow modal opens	N/A	Start workflow creation
3	Enter workflow name	Field accepts input	"Reengagement Campaign"	Unique workflow name
4	Enter description	Field accepts input	"Re-engage users who haven't logged in for 30+ days"	Workflow purpose
5	Select "Consumer" audience type	Consumer option selected	N/A	Audience targeting
6	Click "Next" to configure trigger	Navigate to Trigger step	N/A	Proceed to trigger configuration
7	Select "Time-Based" trigger type	Time-Based option selected, sub-options appear	N/A	Trigger type selection
8	Select "Specific Date and Time"	Date and Time input fields appear	N/A	Time-based sub-option
9	Select Target List	Target list dropdown appears and shows available lists	Select "Inactive Users"	NEW: Target list in trigger step
10	Set date for campaign	Date picker opens, future date selectable	Tomorrow's date	Must be future date
11	Set time for campaign	Time picker allows time selection	"10:00:00"	24-hour format
12	Click "Next" to configure actions	Navigate to Actions step	N/A	Trigger with target list saved
13	Add email action	Select Email channel, create message	Subject: "We Miss You!"	First communication
14	Add SMS follow-up	Select SMS, set 2-day delay	"Check your email for offers"	Multi-channel sequence
15	Create workflow	Workflow created with time-based trigger and target list with success message	N/A	Complete creation
16	Verify target list integration	Workflow shows target list in configuration	N/A	Target list properly saved

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Time-based workflow created with target list selection in trigger step
• Secondary Verifications: Target list properly integrated, specific date/time configured correctly
• Negative Verification: Target list not available in Details step (moved to Trigger step)

---

Test Case 3: Edit Workflow - Communication Channel Non-Editable

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_003
Title: Verify communication channel type cannot be edited in existing workflows
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Management, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Edit-Restrictions, Channel-Immutability

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Daily-Usage
• Compliance Required: Yes
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: Medium
• Complexity Level: Medium
• Expected Execution Time: 3 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 60%
• Integration Points: Workflow Engine, Edit Service, Validation Engine
• Code Module Mapped: Workflow Edit Module, Validation Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-WF-004, REQ-VAL-001, REQ-EDIT-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Business-Rules-Coverage
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-WF-004 (Edit restrictions), REQ-VAL-001 (Validation), Business Rules #5 (Edit interface), Business Rules #6 (Channel immutability)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_001, UX03US04_TC_008

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Workflow Engine, Validation Service, Database
• Performance Baseline: <1 second edit page load, <200ms validation response
• Data Requirements: Existing workflow with email action configured

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Existing workflow with email action available
• Edit permissions configured
• Validation rules active

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with workflow edit access

Test Data:

• Existing workflow with email channel
• Updated subject: "Updated Welcome Message"
• Updated CC: "newmanager@utility.com"
• Updated BCC: "compliance@utility.com"

Prior Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_001 passed (workflow exists)

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Active workflows	Active workflows displayed	N/A	Workflow list view
2	Click edit icon on workflow	Redirect to edit workflow page	N/A	NEW: Edit functionality
3	Navigate to Actions tab	Actions tab displays configured actions	N/A	Actions management
4	Locate existing email action	Email action displayed with configuration	N/A	Existing action identification
5	Attempt to change channel type	Channel type field is disabled/non-editable	N/A	NEW: Non-editable channel
6	Verify channel lock behavior	UI clearly indicates channel cannot be changed	N/A	NEW: Visual indication
7	Verify editable fields	Subject, content, CC/BCC can be modified	N/A	NEW: CC/BCC editable
8	Edit email subject	Subject field accepts changes	"Updated Welcome Message"	Content modification allowed
9	Edit CC field	CC field accepts address changes	"newmanager@utility.com"	NEW: CC editing
10	Edit BCC field	BCC field accepts modifications	"compliance@utility.com"	NEW: BCC editing
11	Try to add new channel type	Cannot convert email to SMS/WhatsApp	N/A	NEW: Channel type locked
12	Save changes	Modified content saved, channel type unchanged	N/A	Selective editing
13	Verify edit restrictions	Error message if channel change attempted	N/A	NEW: Error handling

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Communication channel type cannot be edited in existing workflows
• Secondary Verifications: Content and CC/BCC fields remain editable, proper error handling
• Negative Verification: No option to change Email to SMS or other channel types

---

Test Case 4: View Workflow Execution History (Updated Format)

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_004
Title: View detailed execution history with updated status format
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags: MOD-History, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-High, Analytics-Dashboard, Execution-Tracking

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Monitoring
• Compliance Required: Yes
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: Low
• Complexity Level: Low
• Expected Execution Time: 2 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 70%
• Integration Points: Analytics Engine, History Service, Database
• Code Module Mapped: History Display Module, Analytics Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-HIST-001, REQ-ANAL-001, REQ-TRACK-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Analytics-Coverage
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-HIST-001 (Execution history), REQ-ANAL-001 (Analytics), REQ-TRACK-001 (Status tracking), Business Rules #1 (History display)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_005, UX03US04_TC_016

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Analytics Engine, History Service, Database
• Performance Baseline: <1 second history load, <500ms status update
• Data Requirements: Executed workflows with history data

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Workflows with execution history available
• Analytics service running
• History data populated

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with history view access

Test Data:

• Workflows with completed executions
• Sample status: "142 delivered 3 failed"
• Mixed success scenarios available

Prior Test Cases: Workflow execution completed

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Communication Workflows	Page loads successfully	N/A	Base navigation
2	Click "History" tab	History view opens	N/A	History tab access
3	Verify history table displayed	History table displayed successfully	N/A	Table rendering
4	Locate table fields	Table fields include workflow name, recipient type, recipient count, channel, run date, run time and status, action button	N/A	Find execution record
5	Verify status format	Status shows "x delivered y failed" format	"142 delivered 3 failed"	NEW: Status format
6	Click on action button	Detailed breakdown of delivery status	N/A	Expandable details
7	Verify individual message status	Each message shows delivery/failure status	Email: Delivered, SMS: Failed	Message-level tracking
8	Check failed execution	Failed workflow shows failure count	"0 delivered 5 failed"	Failure tracking
9	Verify completed status	Active execution shows completed status	"45 delivered 0 failed"	Success tracking

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: All fields display correct data with proper status format
• Secondary Verifications: Action button expands details, individual message status visible
• Negative Verification: No missing data or incorrect status calculations

---

Test Case 5: Workflow Performance Metrics

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_005
Title: Verify updated workflow performance metrics calculation and display
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Analytics, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Performance-Metrics, Success-Rate-Calculation

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Analytics
• Compliance Required: No
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: Medium
• Complexity Level: Medium
• Expected Execution Time: 4 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 80%
• Integration Points: Analytics Engine, Metrics Service, Database
• Code Module Mapped: Performance Analytics Module, Calculation Engine
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-PERF-001, REQ-CALC-001, REQ-METR-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Performance-Metrics, Analytics-Coverage
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: Yes
• Customer Impact Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-PERF-001 (Performance metrics), REQ-CALC-001 (Calculations), REQ-METR-001 (Success rate), Business Rules #1 (Metrics display)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_004, UX03US04_TC_016

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Analytics Engine, Calculation Service, Database
• Performance Baseline: <500ms metrics calculation, <1 second display update
• Data Requirements: Workflows with execution history and metrics data

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Workflows with execution history
• Analytics calculations up to date
• Performance data available

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with analytics access

Test Data:

• Workflow: "New Customer Welcome" (245 triggered, 240 completed)
• Expected Success Rate: 98.0%
• Mixed success workflow: (100 triggered, 85 completed, 85% success rate)

Prior Test Cases: Workflows executed with history available

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Active workflows	Workflows displayed with metrics	N/A	Metrics visibility
2	Locate workflow with history	Target workflow card visible	"New Customer Welcome"	Target identification
3	Verify "Triggered" definition	NEW: Count of times workflow is used	Triggered: 245	UPDATED: Usage count
4	Verify "Completed" definition	NEW: Count of notifications successfully delivered	Completed: 240	UPDATED: Delivery count
5	Verify Success Rate calculation	NEW: (delivered notifications / total notifications) * 100	Success Rate: 98.0%	UPDATED: Formula
6	Calculate manual verification	Manual: (240/245) * 100 = 97.96% ≈ 98.0%	N/A	NEW: Calculation verification
7	Check workflow with failures	Workflow with failed notifications	Triggered: 100, Completed: 85	Mixed success scenario
8	Verify failure impact on success rate	Success rate reflects delivery success only	Success Rate: 85.0%	NEW: Delivery-based calculation
9	Check draft workflow metrics	Draft workflows show zero metrics	Triggered: 0, Completed: 0	Draft state handling
10	Check real-time metrics update	Metrics update after new executions	N/A	NEW: Real-time updates

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Updated metrics definitions correctly implemented and calculated
• Secondary Verifications: Success rate based on notification delivery, triggered count reflects usage
• Negative Verification: Calculation should not be incorrect, draft workflows show zeros

---

Test Case 6: Workflow CRUD API Operations

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_006
Title: Test complete CRUD operations for workflows via API
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: Workflow API
• Test Type: API
• Test Level: Integration
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags: MOD-API, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-API, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, API-Integration, CRUD-Operations

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: Enterprise
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Integration
• Compliance Required: No
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: High
• Complexity Level: Medium
• Expected Execution Time: 8 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 90%
• Integration Points: REST API, Database, Authentication Service
• Code Module Mapped: API Controller Module, CRUD Service Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-API-001, REQ-CRUD-001, REQ-AUTH-002
• Cross Platform Support: API

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: API-Quality-Dashboard, Integration-Coverage
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-API-001 (API operations), REQ-CRUD-001 (CRUD functionality), REQ-AUTH-002 (API authentication), Business Rules #6-8
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_018, UX03US04_TC_019

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: API Testing Tool (Postman/Newman)
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+, Linux
• Screen Resolution: N/A
• Dependencies: REST API, Database, Authentication Service
• Performance Baseline: <500ms API response, <200ms database operations
• Data Requirements: Valid API tokens, Test workflow JSON data

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• API endpoints accessible
• Valid authentication tokens
• Database in clean state
• API testing tool configured

User Roles/Permissions: API access with workflow management permissions

Test Data:

• Valid workflow JSON payload
• API authentication token
• Test workflow ID for operations
• Modified workflow data for updates

Prior Test Cases: Authentication API verified

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	POST /api/workflows	Create workflow successfully	Valid workflow JSON	Create operation
2	Verify response structure	Proper JSON with workflow ID	N/A	Response validation
3	GET /api/workflows	Retrieve all workflows	N/A	Read operation
4	GET /api/workflows/{id}	Retrieve specific workflow	Created workflow ID	Specific read
5	PUT /api/workflows/{id}	Update workflow configuration	Modified workflow data	Update operation
6	Verify update persistence	Changes reflected in GET	N/A	Update verification
7	DELETE /api/workflows/{id}	Delete workflow	Workflow ID	Delete operation
8	Verify deletion	GET returns 404	N/A	Deletion verification
9	Test error scenarios	Invalid data returns errors	Invalid JSON	Error handling
10	Verify status codes	Correct HTTP codes returned	N/A	Status validation

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: All CRUD operations function correctly via API
• Secondary Verifications: Proper error handling, correct status codes
• Negative Verification: Invalid operations properly rejected

---

Test Case 7: Maximum Actions Limit Enforcement

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_007
Title: Verify workflow cannot exceed maximum of 10 actions per workflow
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Limits, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Boundary-Testing, Limit-Enforcement

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: Medium
• Business Priority: Should-Have
• Customer Journey: Configuration
• Compliance Required: No
• SLA Related: No

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: Medium
• Complexity Level: Low
• Expected Execution Time: 6 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Low
• Failure Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 30%
• Integration Points: Workflow Engine, Validation Service
• Code Module Mapped: Validation Module, Limit Enforcement Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-LIMIT-001, REQ-VAL-002
• Cross Platform Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: QA
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Boundary-Testing-Results
• Trend Tracking: No
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-LIMIT-001 (Action limits), REQ-VAL-002 (Validation), Business Rules #9 (Maximum actions), Edge Cases (Boundary conditions)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_001, UX03US04_TC_019

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Workflow Engine, Validation Service
• Performance Baseline: <100ms validation response
• Data Requirements: Workflow in progress, Various action types available

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Workflow creation in progress
• All communication channels available
• Validation rules active

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with workflow creation access

Test Data:

• Various channel types: Email, SMS, WhatsApp, In-app
• 10+ action configurations ready
• Duplicate action scenarios

Prior Test Cases: Workflow creation process initiated

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Add 9 actions to workflow	All 9 actions added successfully	Various channel types	Approaching limit
2	Add 10th action	10th action added, maximum reached	Email action	NEW: Maximum limit reached
3	Attempt to add 11th action	Error: "Maximum of 10 actions allowed per workflow"	SMS action	NEW: Limit enforcement
4	Verify "Add Action" button state	Button disabled or shows limit message	N/A	NEW: UI limit indication
5	Try to duplicate existing action	Still counts toward 10-action limit	Duplicate email	NEW: Duplication counting
6	Remove one action	"Add Action" button becomes available again	N/A	NEW: Dynamic limit management
7	Add action after removal	Can add action when under limit	WhatsApp action	NEW: Limit management

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Maximum 10 actions per workflow strictly enforced
• Secondary Verifications: Clear error messaging, UI updates dynamically
• Negative Verification: Cannot exceed limit under any circumstances

---

Test Case 8: View Button Functionality

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_008
Title: Verify distinct behavior of View button on workflow cards
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Management, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Low, Business-Critical, Navigation-Testing, Read-Only-Access

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: Medium
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Daily-Usage
• Compliance Required: No
• SLA Related: No

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: Low
• Complexity Level: Low
• Expected Execution Time: 3 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Low
• Failure Impact: Low

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 40%
• Integration Points: UI Navigation, Workflow Engine
• Code Module Mapped: Navigation Module, View Controller
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-NAV-001, REQ-VIEW-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, UI-Navigation-Coverage
• Trend Tracking: No
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-NAV-001 (Navigation), REQ-VIEW-001 (View functionality), Business Rules #2 (View vs Edit), Acceptance Criteria #17
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_003, UX03US04_TC_009

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: UI Framework, Workflow Engine
• Performance Baseline: <500ms page navigation
• Data Requirements: Existing workflows with View and Edit buttons

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Existing workflows available
• UI navigation functional
• View permissions configured

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with view access

Test Data:

• Existing workflow with both View and Edit buttons
• Workflow configuration data for verification

Prior Test Cases: Workflow exists and is accessible

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Locate workflow with view buttons	View buttons visible on workflow card	N/A	NEW: Button identification
2	Click "View" button	NEW: Navigate to Details page (read-only)	N/A	NEW: View functionality
3	Verify Details page content	Workflow details displayed in read-only format	N/A	NEW: Read-only verification
4	Verify no edit capabilities	No Save/Edit buttons available in Details view	N/A	NEW: Read-only enforcement
5	Navigate back to workflows list	Return to main workflows page	N/A	NEW: Navigation back

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: View button → Details page (read-only), Edit button → Actions page (editable)
• Secondary Verifications: Distinct navigation paths, appropriate permissions enforcement
• Negative Verification: View mode doesn't allow editing, Edit mode properly functional

---

Test Case 9: Workflow Status Toggle with Dependency Check

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_009
Title: Verify workflow status toggle shows usage dependencies and impact before allowing deactivation
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: Workflow Management
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Security
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Management, P1-Critical, Phase-Security, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Dependency-Checking, Status-Management

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: Medium
• Failure Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 50%
• Integration Points: Workflow Engine, Dependency Service, Status Manager
• Code Module Mapped: Status Toggle Module, Dependency Check Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-STAT-001, REQ-DEP-001, REQ-SAFE-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Security-Coverage, Dependency-Analysis
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: Yes
• Customer Impact Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-STAT-001 (Status toggle), REQ-DEP-001 (Dependency check), REQ-SAFE-001 (Safety mechanisms), Business Rules #4-5, Error Handling #3
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_003, UX03US04_TC_010

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Workflow Engine, Dependency Service, Template Service
• Performance Baseline: <1 second dependency check, <500ms status update
• Data Requirements: Active workflows with dependencies, Unused workflows

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Active workflows with dependencies
• Unused workflows for comparison
• Dependency tracking active

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with workflow management access

Test Data:

• Active workflow with dependencies: "Used in 3 templates, affects 150 customers"
• Unused workflow for clean toggle testing
• Expected warning: "This will stop all scheduled executions"

Prior Test Cases: Workflows with usage dependencies exist

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Locate active workflow with toggle button	Toggle button shows "Active" status	Active workflow with usage	NEW: Toggle button identification
2	Click toggle to deactivate workflow	System shows dependency check dialog	N/A	NEW: Dependency checking on toggle
3	Review dependency information	Shows "Used in X places" with impact details	"Used in 3 templates, affects 150 customers"	NEW: Usage impact tracking
4	View specific usage locations	List of templates/processes using workflow	Template names and customer counts	NEW: Detailed dependencies
5	Confirm deactivation despite dependencies	Require explicit confirmation with warning	"This will stop all scheduled executions"	NEW: Impact confirmation required
6	Verify workflow status change	Workflow status changes to "Inactive"	Status: Active → Inactive	NEW: Status toggle verification
7	Test reactivation of workflow	Toggle back to "Active" status	N/A	NEW: Reactivation capability
8	Test toggle of unused workflow	Direct toggle without dependency warning	Unused workflow	NEW: Clean toggle for unused
9	Verify dependent process impact	Dependent processes show workflow as inactive	Scheduled executions stopped

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Toggle process shows all usage dependencies and impact before allowing status change
• Secondary Verifications: Clear impact warning, explicit confirmation required, status changes properly reflected
• Negative Verification: Cannot accidentally deactivate workflows with dependencies without proper warning

---

Test Case 10: Alert System for Workflow Failures

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_010
Title: Verify alert system triggers for workflow and delivery failures
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

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

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Alerts, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Alert-System, Failure-Notification

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Monitoring
• Compliance Required: Yes
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: High
• Complexity Level: Medium
• Expected Execution Time: 10 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: Medium
• Data Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 60%
• Integration Points: Alert Service, Workflow Engine, Notification Service
• Code Module Mapped: Alert System Module, Notification Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-ALERT-001, REQ-NOTIF-001, REQ-FAIL-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web, Email

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Alert-System-Coverage, Reliability-Metrics
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: Yes
• Customer Impact Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-ALERT-001 (Alert system), REQ-NOTIF-001 (Notifications), REQ-FAIL-001 (Failure handling), Error Handling #1-2, Business Rules #1-2 (Error handling)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_012, UX03US04_TC_018

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Alert Service, Mock failure scenarios, Email service
• Performance Baseline: <30 seconds alert delivery, <5 seconds failure detection
• Data Requirements: Test workflows, Mock failure scenarios, Alert recipients

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Alert system configured
• Mock failure scenarios available
• Email notifications enabled
• Test workflows ready for failure simulation

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with workflow management access

Test Data:

• 100 test recipients for delivery failure testing
• Mock NSC-Created event failure
• Expected failure threshold: >10% delivery failures
• Alert recipients configured

Prior Test Cases: Workflow execution capabilities verified

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Simulate event-based trigger failure	NEW: Alert sent to workflow creator	Failed NSC-Created event	NEW: Trigger failure alert
2	Verify alert content and delivery	NEW: Alert contains failure reason and workflow details	N/A	NEW: Alert content verification
3	Create workflow with 100 recipients	Workflow configured for delivery testing	100 test recipients	NEW: Large recipient test
4	Simulate 15% delivery failure	NEW: Alert triggered when >10% messages fail	15 failed deliveries	NEW: Delivery failure threshold
5	Verify delivery failure alert	NEW: Alert shows failure percentage and details	N/A	NEW: Failure alert verification
6	Test alert for different failure types	NEW: Different alerts for trigger vs delivery failures	Various failure scenarios	NEW: Alert differentiation
7	Verify alert recipient targeting	NEW: Alerts sent to workflow creator only	N/A	NEW: Alert targeting
8	Test alert frequency limits	NEW: Prevent alert spam for repeated failures	N/A	NEW: Alert throttling

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Alert system triggers appropriately for workflow and delivery failures
• Secondary Verifications: Alerts contain actionable information, proper recipient targeting
• Negative Verification: Alerts don't trigger for normal operations or minor failures

---

Test Case 11: Variable Data Accuracy Validation

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_011
Title: Verify all placeholder variables are replaced with accurate customer data across all channels
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: Variable Processing Engine
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: Integration
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Variables, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-CRM-CustomerData, Variable-Replacement-Engine

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: 8 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: High
• Failure Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 85%
• Integration Points: Variable Engine, Customer Database, Billing System
• Code Module Mapped: Variable Processing Module, Data Integration Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-VAR-001, REQ-DATA-001, REQ-PERS-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web, Email, SMS, WhatsApp

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Data-Integration-Coverage, Personalization-Metrics
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-VAR-001 (Variable processing), REQ-DATA-001 (Data integration), REQ-PERS-001 (Personalization), Integration Points (Customer Database, Billing System), Sample Data (Message Examples)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_012, UX03US04_TC_014

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Variable Engine, Customer Database, Billing System
• Performance Baseline: <200ms variable replacement, <500ms data lookup
• Data Requirements: Test customer data with all variable types

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Customer database populated with test data
• Billing system integration active
• Variable engine configured
• All communication channels available

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with data access permissions

Test Data: test_customer: first_name: "John" last_name: "Smith" email: "john.smith@utilitytest.com" phone: "+1-555-123-4567" account_number: "ACC-789456" bill_amount: "$125.50" due_date: "2024-12-15" service_address: "123 Main St, Anytown, ST 12345" Special character test: "José O'Brien"

Prior Test Cases: Customer data integration verified

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Create workflow with customer variables	Variable picker shows all available placeholders	[Customer.FirstName], [Customer.LastName], [Customer.Email]	Basic customer variables
2	Add billing variables to email template	Billing placeholders available	[Bill.Amount], [Bill.DueDate]	Financial data variables
3	Include service variables in message	Service placeholders functional	[Service.Address], [Account.Number]	Service-related data
4	Configure multi-channel workflow	All channels support variable replacement	Email, SMS, WhatsApp	Cross-channel consistency
5	Execute workflow for test customer	All variables replaced with actual data	Customer: John Smith	Data replacement verification
6	Verify email content accuracy	Email shows "Dear John Smith, Your bill of $125.50..."	N/A	Email variable accuracy
7	Check SMS message content	SMS contains actual data: "ACC-789456 bill due 2024-12-15"	N/A	SMS variable accuracy
8	Validate WhatsApp message	WhatsApp shows complete address and amount	N/A	WhatsApp variable accuracy
9	Test with special characters	Variables handle names with apostrophes, accents	Customer: "José O'Brien"	Special character handling
10	Verify variable case sensitivity	[customer.firstname] vs [Customer.FirstName] handling	Mixed case variables	Case handling verification

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: All placeholder variables correctly replaced with actual customer data
• Secondary Verifications: No placeholder syntax visible in final messages, special characters handled correctly
• Negative Verification: No system errors or null values displayed to customers

---

Test Case 12: Missing Data Graceful Handling

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_012
Title: Verify system handles missing or null variable data with graceful fallback behavior
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: Data Validation & Error Handling
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: Integration
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags: MOD-DataValidation, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-ErrorHandling, Data-Fallback-Mechanism

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: Medium
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Daily-Usage
• Compliance Required: Yes
• SLA Related: No

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: High
• Complexity Level: Medium
• Expected Execution Time: 6 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: High
• Failure Impact: High

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 70%
• Integration Points: Variable Engine, Error Handler, Customer Database
• Code Module Mapped: Error Handling Module, Fallback Mechanism Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-ERR-001, REQ-FALL-001, REQ-CONT-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web, Email, SMS, WhatsApp

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Error-Handling-Coverage, Data-Quality-Metrics
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-ERR-001 (Error handling), REQ-FALL-001 (Fallback mechanisms), REQ-CONT-001 (Execution continuity), Error Handling #3 (Content validation), Business Rules #6 (Workflow execution)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_011, UX03US04_TC_019

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Variable Engine, Error Handler, Customer Database
• Performance Baseline: <300ms fallback processing, <1 second execution continuation
• Data Requirements: Customer records with missing data fields

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Customer database with missing data scenarios
• Error handling configured
• Fallback mechanisms active
• Workflow execution enabled

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with workflow execution access

Test Data:

• Customer with missing first_name: NULL
• Customer with missing bill_amount: NULL
• Customer with missing account_number: NULL
• Customer with missing middle_name: NULL
• Multiple missing fields scenario

Prior Test Cases: Variable processing system verified

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Create customer with missing first name	Customer record with null first_name	first_name: NULL	Missing required field
2	Execute workflow with [Customer.FirstName]	Default text: "Dear Customer" or skip personalization	N/A	Graceful fallback
3	Test missing billing amount	Shows "Amount pending" or equivalent	bill_amount: NULL	Financial data missing
4	Handle missing account number	Generic reference or skip field	account_number: NULL	Critical field missing
5	Test optional field missing	Field gracefully omitted from message	middle_name: NULL	Optional data handling
6	Verify workflow continues execution	Workflow completes despite missing data	N/A	Execution continuity
7	Test multiple missing fields	System handles compound null values	Multiple NULLs	Complex missing data
8	Verify customer experience	No error messages visible to end customer	N/A

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Workflows execute successfully despite missing variable data
• Secondary Verifications: Appropriate fallback text used, admin notifications sent
• Negative Verification: No error messages or null values displayed to customers

---

Test Case 13: Email Deliverability and Inbox Placement

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_013
Title: Verify emails are delivered to inbox (not spam) with proper authentication headers
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: Email Delivery Service
• Test Type: Integration
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Integration
• Automation Status: Manual

Enhanced Tags: MOD-EmailDelivery, P1-Critical, Phase-Integration, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-EmailProvider, Deliverability-Testing

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: Enterprise
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Communication
• Compliance Required: Yes
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: High
• Complexity Level: Complex
• Expected Execution Time: 15 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: Medium
• Data Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 95%
• Integration Points: Email Provider (SendGrid), SMTP Service, DNS Configuration
• Code Module Mapped: Email Delivery Module, Authentication Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-EMAIL-001, REQ-DELIV-001, REQ-AUTH-003
• Cross Platform Support: Email

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Integration-Quality-Dashboard, Deliverability-Metrics, Email-Performance
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: Yes
• Customer Impact Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-EMAIL-001 (Email delivery), REQ-DELIV-001 (Deliverability), REQ-AUTH-003 (Email authentication), Integration Points (Email/SMS/WhatsApp Service Providers)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_011, UX03US04_TC_014

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Email clients (Gmail, Outlook, Apple Mail)
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: N/A
• Dependencies: SendGrid API, SMTP service, DNS configuration
• Performance Baseline: <5 minutes delivery time, >95% inbox placement
• Data Requirements: Real email addresses for testing, Authenticated domain

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• SendGrid integration configured
• Domain authentication (SPF, DKIM, DMARC) verified
• Real test email addresses available
• Email templates configured

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with email configuration access

Test Data:

• Primary test email: test@utilitycompany.com
• CC recipients: cc1@test.com, cc2@test.com
• BCC recipient: bcc@audit.com
• Bulk test: 100 real test addresses

Prior Test Cases: Email integration configured and verified

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Configure workflow with real email addresses	Email action configured with actual recipients	test@utilitycompany.com	Real inbox testing
2	Execute workflow for single recipient	Email sent successfully	N/A	Single delivery test
3	Check recipient inbox within 5 minutes	Email appears in inbox folder	N/A	Delivery timing
4	Verify email NOT in spam folder	Email in inbox, not junk/spam	N/A	Deliverability verification
5	Test CC recipients delivery	All CC addresses receive email copy	cc1@test.com, cc2@test.com	CC delivery verification
6	Verify BCC recipients delivery	BCC addresses receive copy (hidden from others)	bcc@audit.com	BCC delivery verification
7	Test bulk email delivery (100+)	All emails delivered within acceptable timeframe	100 real test addresses	Bulk delivery test

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Emails successfully delivered to actual inboxes, not spam folders
• Secondary Verifications: Proper authentication headers, CC/BCC functionality working
• Negative Verification: No delivery failures for valid email addresses

---

Test Case 14: Template Integration from Templates Tab

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_014
Title: Verify templates from Templates tab integrate correctly with SendGrid and Twilio channels
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: Template Management Service
• Test Type: Integration
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Templates, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Product, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-TemplateService, SendGrid-Twilio-Templates

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: Medium
• Business Priority: Should-Have
• Customer Journey: Configuration
• Compliance Required: No
• SLA Related: No

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: Medium
• Complexity Level: Complex
• Expected Execution Time: 12 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Low
• Failure Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 80%
• Integration Points: Template Service, SendGrid API, Twilio API
• Code Module Mapped: Template Integration Module, Service Provider Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-TEMP-001, REQ-INTEG-001, REQ-SENDG-001, REQ-TWIL-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web, Email, SMS, WhatsApp

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Product
• Report Categories: Integration-Dashboard, Template-Usage-Metrics, Service-Provider-Coverage
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-TEMP-001 (Template management), REQ-INTEG-001 (Service integration), REQ-SENDG-001 (SendGrid integration), REQ-TWIL-001 (Twilio integration), Integration Points (Template Management Service)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_001, UX03US04_TC_013

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Template Service, SendGrid API, Twilio API
• Performance Baseline: <2 seconds template load, <1 second template application
• Data Requirements: Template library populated, Service provider configurations

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Templates tab accessible and populated
• SendGrid integration configured
• Twilio integration configured
• Communication workflows accessible

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with template and workflow access

Test Data:

• Email template: "Dear [Customer.FirstName], Welcome to UtilityConnect..."
• SMS template: "Welcome! Your service is active. Reply HELP for support." (160 chars)
• WhatsApp template: "Welcome! Your account is active. Questions? Reply here."
• Variables: [Customer.FirstName], [Bill.Amount]

Prior Test Cases: Template service integration verified

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Navigate to Templates tab	Templates tab displays all available templates by channel	N/A	Template library access
2	Create email template in Templates tab	Template saved	"Dear [Customer.FirstName], Welcome to UtilityConnect..."	SendGrid email template
3	Create SMS template in Templates tab	Template saved	"Welcome! Your service is active. Reply HELP for support." (160 chars)	Twilio SMS template
4	Create WhatsApp template in Templates tab	Template saved	"Welcome! Your account is active. Questions? Reply here."	Twilio WhatsApp template
5	Navigate to Communication Workflows	Access workflow creation from Communications section	N/A	Workflow creation access
6	Select email channel in workflow	Email channel configured for SendGrid delivery	N/A	SendGrid email channel
7	Choose "Use Existing Template" option	Templates from Templates tab available for selection	Email templates list	Template selection from tab
8	Apply email template from Templates tab	Template content populates in email action with SendGrid formatting	welcome_email_template	SendGrid template application
9	Verify variable placeholders preserved	All variables maintain proper formatting for SendGrid	[Customer.FirstName], [Bill.Amount]	SendGrid variable handling
10	Test SMS workflow	SMS template from Templates tab applied to Twilio SMS action	SMS template with 160 char limit	Twilio SMS template integration
11	Apply WhatsApp template to Twilio workflow	WhatsApp template from Templates tab used in Twilio WhatsApp action	WhatsApp template with emojis	Twilio WhatsApp template integration
12	Execute workflow with templates	All templates execute correctly through respective services	N/A	Cross-service template execution
13	Verify SendGrid email delivery	Email template delivered via SendGrid with proper formatting	N/A	SendGrid delivery verification
14	Verify Twilio SMS delivery	SMS template delivered via Twilio with character limit compliance	N/A	Twilio SMS delivery verification
15	Verify Twilio WhatsApp delivery	WhatsApp template delivered via Twilio with rich formatting	N/A	Twilio WhatsApp delivery verification

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Templates from Templates tab integrate seamlessly with SendGrid and Twilio services
• Secondary Verifications: Variable preservation, channel-specific formatting maintained, service-specific delivery
• Negative Verification: Templates incompatible with specific services are not available for selection

---

Test Case 15: Sequential Action Timing Dependencies

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_015
Title: Verify sequential communication actions execute with precise timing and dependency management
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: Sequential Action Engine
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags: MOD-SequentialActions, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Timing-Dependencies, Multi-Channel-Sequencing

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Communication-Sequence
• Compliance Required: No
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: High
• Complexity Level: Complex
• Expected Execution Time: 72 hours (long-running)
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Low
• Failure Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 75%
• Integration Points: Scheduler Service, Action Engine, Timing Controller
• Code Module Mapped: Sequential Processing Module, Timing Management Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-SEQ-001, REQ-TIME-001, REQ-DEP-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web, Email, SMS, WhatsApp

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Timing-Accuracy-Metrics, Sequential-Processing-Coverage
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-SEQ-001 (Sequential actions), REQ-TIME-001 (Timing management), REQ-DEP-001 (Dependencies), Business Rules #6 (Sequential execution), Communication Actions Configuration #6-7
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_002, UX03US04_TC_016

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Scheduler Service, Action Engine, Database
• Performance Baseline: ±5 minutes timing accuracy, <2 seconds scheduling
• Data Requirements: Multi-action workflow configurations

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Scheduler service running and configured
• Multi-channel communication enabled
• Timing precision configured
• Test recipients available

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with workflow execution access

Test Data:

• Action 1: Welcome email (immediate)
• Action 2: SMS follow-up (After 2 days)
• Action 3: WhatsApp follow-up (After 1 day from SMS)
• Expected timing: Day 0 (email), Day 2 (SMS), Day 3 (WhatsApp)

Prior Test Cases: Multi-channel workflow creation verified

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Configure first action: Email	Immediate email action set	"Welcome email"	Initial action
2	Add second action: SMS with delay	SMS set to execute "After 2 days"	"After previous action + 2 days"	Sequential timing
3	Add third action: WhatsApp follow-up	WhatsApp set for "After 1 day" from SMS	"After previous action + 1 day"	Chained timing
4	Execute workflow	Email sends immediately	Timestamp: Day 0, 09:00	Immediate execution
5	Monitor SMS scheduling	SMS scheduled for Day 2 after email completion	Scheduled: Day 2, 09:15 (after email completed)	Dependency timing
6	Verify WhatsApp scheduling	WhatsApp scheduled for Day 3 total	Scheduled: Day 3, 09:15	Cumulative timing
7	Test action failure impact	Failed email doesn't prevent SMS execution	Email fails, SMS still scheduled	Failure isolation
8	Verify timing accuracy	Actions execute within ±5 minutes of scheduled time	Actual vs scheduled times	Timing precision
9	Test concurrent workflow timing	Multiple workflows don't interfere with timing	5 simultaneous workflows	Timing independence
10	Monitor system performance	Action scheduling doesn't degrade system performance	N/A	Performance impact

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Sequential actions execute with precise timing based on dependencies
• Secondary Verifications: Failure isolation works, timing remains accurate under load
• Negative Verification: Failed actions don't cascade to prevent subsequent actions

---

Test Case 16: Real-Time Status Tracking and Analytics

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_016
Title: Verify real-time delivery status tracking and analytics update correctly across all channels
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: Analytics and Reporting Engine
• Test Type: Functional
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Analytics, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Real-Time-Tracking, Delivery-Analytics

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Monitoring
• Compliance Required: Yes
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: Medium
• Complexity Level: Medium
• Expected Execution Time: 10 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure Impact: High

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 90%
• Integration Points: Analytics Engine, Real-time Service, Database
• Code Module Mapped: Analytics Module, Real-time Tracking Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-TRACK-001, REQ-REAL-001, REQ-ANAL-002
• Cross Platform Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Real-time-Analytics, Tracking-Accuracy
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: Yes
• Customer Impact Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-TRACK-001 (Status tracking), REQ-REAL-001 (Real-time updates), REQ-ANAL-002 (Analytics), Business Rules #1 (Workflow execution), Integration Points (Analytics and Reporting Engine)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_004, UX03US04_TC_005

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Analytics Engine, Real-time Service, WebSocket connections
• Performance Baseline: <2 seconds status update, <1 second analytics refresh
• Data Requirements: Active workflows, Real recipient data

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Real-time analytics enabled
• WebSocket connections active
• Test workflows configured
• Recipient data available

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with analytics access

Test Data:

• 50 recipient workflow for real-time testing
• Mixed delivery scenarios (success/failure)
• Cross-channel workflows (Email, SMS, WhatsApp)

Prior Test Cases: Analytics system verified

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Execute workflow with 50 recipients	Execution begins, status shows "In Progress"	50 recipient list	Execution start
2	Monitor real-time progress	Status updates show "X delivered Y failed (In Progress)"	Live count updates	Real-time updates
3	Track individual message status	Each message shows specific delivery status	Email: Delivered, SMS: Pending	Granular tracking
4	Verify delivery rate calculation	Success rate updates in real-time	(Delivered/Total)*100	Live calculation
5	Test failure status updates	Failed deliveries immediately reflected	Email bounce updates status	Failure tracking
6	Monitor completion status	Status changes to "Completed" when all actions finish	Final status update	Completion tracking
7	Verify historical data preservation	Completed execution data saved in history	History tab shows execution	Data persistence
8	Test analytics dashboard updates	Dashboard metrics update with new data	Triggered/Completed counts increase	Dashboard integration
9	Check cross-channel status consistency	Status consistent across email/SMS/WhatsApp	All channels show same data	Cross-channel consistency
10	Verify audit trail completeness	All status changes logged with timestamps	Complete audit log	Audit tracking

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Real-time status tracking accurately reflects current execution state
• Secondary Verifications: Historical data preserved, dashboard updates correctly
• Negative Verification: No status inconsistencies between channels or views

---

Test Case 17: Performance Under Load Testing

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_017
Title: Verify system maintains performance standards under concurrent user load and high-volume operations
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: System Performance
• Test Type: Performance
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Performance
• Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Performance, P1-Critical, Phase-Performance, Type-Performance, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Load-Testing, Concurrent-Users, High-Volume-Processing

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: Enterprise
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Peak-Usage
• Compliance Required: No
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: High
• Complexity Level: Complex
• Expected Execution Time: 60 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: Medium
• Data Sensitivity: Low
• Failure Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 100%
• Integration Points: Load Balancer, Database, Application Server
• Code Module Mapped: Performance Module, Load Handler Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-PERF-001, REQ-LOAD-001, REQ-SCALE-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web, API

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Performance-Dashboard, Load-Testing-Results, Scalability-Metrics
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: Yes
• Customer Impact Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-PERF-001 (Performance standards), REQ-LOAD-001 (Load handling), REQ-SCALE-001 (Scalability), Performance Requirements (Page Load <1s, API <500ms), Non-Functional Test Scenarios (Concurrent Users 100+)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_021, UX03US04_TC_006

Test Environment:

• Environment: Performance Testing Environment
• Browser/Version: Load testing tools (JMeter, K6)
• Device/OS: Load generation servers
• Screen Resolution: N/A
• Dependencies: Load balancer, Database cluster, Application servers
• Performance Baseline: <1s page load, <500ms API, 100+ concurrent users
• Data Requirements: Large datasets, Multiple user accounts

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• Performance testing environment configured
• Load testing tools installed and configured
• Monitoring systems active
• Database optimized
• Application servers scaled

User Roles/Permissions: Multiple test user accounts with various roles

Test Data:

• 50, 100, 200+ concurrent user scenarios
• 10,000 recipient workflow data
• Performance monitoring baselines

Prior Test Cases: System baseline performance established

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Simulate 50 concurrent users	System responsive, page loads <1 seconds	50 user sessions	Normal load baseline
2	Increase to 100 concurrent users	Performance maintained within thresholds	100 user sessions	Target load
3	Scale to 200+ concurrent users	System degrades gracefully, no crashes	200+ user sessions	Stress test
4	Monitor API response times	Critical operations <500ms, complex <1000ms	N/A	API performance
5	Execute high-volume workflow	10,000 recipient workflow processes successfully	10K recipient list	Volume test
6	Track message processing rate	Minimum 100 messages/second processing	N/A	Throughput measurement
7	Monitor database performance	Query response times <1000ms under load	N/A	Database performance
8	Test concurrent workflow execution	10 workflows executing simultaneously	10 x 1K recipients each	Concurrent processing
9	Verify system recovery	System returns to normal after load removal	N/A	Recovery verification

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: System maintains performance standards under specified load conditions
• Secondary Verifications: Graceful degradation under stress, proper resource management
• Negative Verification: No system crashes or data corruption under load

---

Test Case 18: API Integration Failure Recovery

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_018
Title: Verify system resilience when external API services become unavailable or fail
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: External API Integration
• Test Type: Integration
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Integration
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags: MOD-APIIntegration, P1-Critical, Phase-Integration, Type-Integration, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Failure-Recovery, External-Dependencies, Resilience-Testing

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: Enterprise
• Revenue Impact: High
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Critical-Operations
• Compliance Required: Yes
• SLA Related: Yes

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: High
• Complexity Level: Complex
• Expected Execution Time: 20 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: Medium
• Data Sensitivity: Medium
• Failure Impact: Critical

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 85%
• Integration Points: External APIs, Retry Mechanism, Fallback Services
• Code Module Mapped: API Integration Module, Failure Recovery Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-RECOV-001, REQ-RETRY-001, REQ-FALL-002
• Cross Platform Support: Web, API

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Engineering
• Report Categories: Integration-Reliability-Dashboard, API-Failure-Recovery, External-Dependencies
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: Yes
• Customer Impact Level: Critical

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-RECOV-001 (Failure recovery), REQ-RETRY-001 (Retry mechanisms), REQ-FALL-002 (Fallback services), Integration Points (External API services), Error Handling #1-2 (System failures)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_010, UX03US04_TC_013

Test Environment:

• Environment: Integration Testing Environment
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, API testing tools
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Mock external services, Failure simulation tools
• Performance Baseline: <30 seconds recovery time, <10 seconds failure detection
• Data Requirements: Mock service configurations, Failure scenarios

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• External API integrations configured
• Mock failure scenarios available
• Monitoring and alerting active
• Fallback services configured

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with integration management access

Test Data:

• Mock email service downtime scenarios
• Mock SMS provider failures
• Retry configuration: 1s, 2s, 4s, 8s intervals
• Fallback provider configurations

Prior Test Cases: External API integrations verified

Test Procedure:Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Simulate email service downtime	System detects service unavailability	Mock email service down	Email service failure
2	Verify graceful error handling	Clear error message displayed to user	"Email service temporarily unavailable"	User communication
3	Test retry mechanism	System attempts retry with exponential backoff	Retry after 1s, 2s, 4s, 8s	Retry logic
4	Check workflow status tracking	Workflow marked as "Failed" with specific reason	"Email service unavailable"	Status accuracy
5	Simulate SMS provider failure	SMS delivery fails with appropriate handling	Mock SMS provider down	SMS service failure
6	Test fallback provider usage	Backup SMS providers utilized if configured	Secondary SMS provider	Failover capability
7	Verify admin notification system	Alerts sent to workflow creator and system admins	N/A	Alert system
8	Test partial service failures	Email works, SMS fails - partial execution	Mixed service availability	Partial failure handling
9	Check service recovery behavior	System resumes normal operation when services restore	Service restored	Recovery testing
10	Validate audit logging	All failures and recoveries logged with timestamps	N/A	Failure audit trail

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: System handles external API failures gracefully without data loss
• Secondary Verifications: Proper retry mechanisms, fallback services utilized
• Negative Verification: No system crashes or data corruption during service failures

---

Test Case 19: Invalid Input Boundary Testing

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_019
Title: Verify system handles malformed data, injection attempts, and boundary conditions safely
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: Input Validation & Security
• Test Type: Security
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P1-Critical
• Execution Phase: Security
• Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation

Enhanced Tags: MOD-InputValidation, P1-Critical, Phase-Security, Type-Security, Platform-Web, Report-Security, Customer-All, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Boundary-Testing, Injection-Prevention, Input-Sanitization

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: Medium
• Business Priority: Must-Have
• Customer Journey: Security
• Compliance Required: Yes
• SLA Related: No

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: High
• Complexity Level: Medium
• Expected Execution Time: 12 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: High
• Failure Impact: High

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 95%
• Integration Points: Input Validation, Security Scanner, Sanitization Engine
• Code Module Mapped: Security Module, Input Validation Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-SEC-001, REQ-VAL-003, REQ-SANIT-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: Security
• Report Categories: Security-Dashboard, Vulnerability-Assessment, Input-Validation-Coverage
• Trend Tracking: Yes
• Executive Visibility: Yes
• Customer Impact Level: High

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-SEC-001 (Security validation), REQ-VAL-003 (Input validation), REQ-SANIT-001 (Input sanitization), Edge Case & Error Scenarios (Invalid Inputs), Business Rules #19 (Validation rules)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_003, UX03US04_TC_007

Test Environment:

• Environment: Security Testing Environment
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Security scanner, Input validation service
• Performance Baseline: <200ms validation response
• Data Requirements: Malicious input test cases, Boundary condition data

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Security validation active
• Input sanitization enabled
• Logging configured for security events
• Test data with malicious inputs prepared

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with workflow creation access

Test Data:

• Long strings: 1001+ characters
• Malformed emails: "invalid@", "@domain.com", "user@@domain"
• SQL injection: '; DELETE FROM workflows; --
• XSS: <script>alert('test')</script>
• Invalid dates: "32/13/2024", "invalid-date"
• Negative values: "-5 days"
• Large content: 100KB messages

Prior Test Cases: Basic input validation verified

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Add 9 actions to workflow	All 9 actions added successfully	Various channel types	Approaching limit
2	Add 10th action	10th action added, maximum reached	Email action	NEW: Maximum limit reached
3	Attempt to add 11th action	Error: "Maximum of 10 actions allowed per workflow"	SMS action	NEW: Limit enforcement
4	Verify "Add Action" button state	Button disabled or shows limit message	N/A	NEW: UI limit indication
5	Try to duplicate existing action	Still counts toward 10-action limit	Duplicate email	NEW: Duplication counting
6	Remove one action	"Add Action" button becomes available again	N/A	NEW: Dynamic limit management
7	Add action after removal	Can add action when under limit	WhatsApp action	NEW: Limit management

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: All invalid inputs properly rejected with appropriate error handling
• Secondary Verifications: No system vulnerabilities exposed, proper sanitization
• Negative Verification: No injection attacks successful, no system crashes

---

Test Case 20: Cross-Browser Compatibility Comprehensive

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_020
Title: Verify complete functionality across all supported browsers with version-specific testing
Created By: Auto-generated
Created Date: 2024-12-02
Version: 1.0

Classification:

• Module/Feature: Cross-Browser Compatibility
• Test Type: Compatibility
• Test Level: System
• Priority: P2-High
• Execution Phase: Regression
• Automation Status: Automated

Enhanced Tags: MOD-Compatibility, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Compatibility, Platform-Web, Report-QA, Customer-All, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Cross-Browser-Testing, Desktop-Browsers, Version-Testing

Business Context:

• Customer Segment: All
• Revenue Impact: Low
• Business Priority: Should-Have
• Customer Journey: Accessibility
• Compliance Required: No
• SLA Related: No

Quality Metrics:

• Risk Level: Medium
• Complexity Level: Medium
• Expected Execution Time: 25 minutes
• Reproducibility Score: High
• Data Sensitivity: Low
• Failure Impact: Medium

Coverage Tracking:

• Feature Coverage: 100%
• Integration Points: Browser APIs, CSS Framework, JavaScript Engine
• Code Module Mapped: UI Framework Module, Cross-Browser Module
• Requirement Coverage: REQ-COMPAT-001, REQ-BROWSER-001, REQ-UI-001
• Cross Platform Support: Web (Multiple Browsers)

Stakeholder Reporting:

• Primary Stakeholder: QA
• Report Categories: Compatibility-Dashboard, Browser-Support-Matrix, UI-Consistency
• Trend Tracking: No
• Executive Visibility: No
• Customer Impact Level: Medium

Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-COMPAT-001 (Cross-browser compatibility), REQ-BROWSER-001 (Browser support), REQ-UI-001 (UI consistency), Non-Functional Test Scenarios (Cross-Platform Compatibility)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_001, UX03US04_TC_026

Test Environment:

• Environment: Multi-Browser Testing Environment
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+, Ubuntu 20.04+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080, Various resolutions
• Dependencies: BrowserStack/Selenium Grid for automated testing
• Performance Baseline: <10% performance variance between browsers
• Data Requirements: Standard test workflow data

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• Multi-browser testing environment configured
• All target browsers installed and updated
• Automated testing tools configured
• Screen capture tools available

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role across all browsers

Test Data:

• Standard test workflow configuration
• Cross-browser test scripts
• Performance benchmarks per browser

Prior Test Cases: Basic functionality verified in primary browser

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Complete workflow creation in Chrome 115+	All features function identically	Standard test workflow	Chrome baseline
2	Test advanced features in Chrome	Rich text editor, date pickers, dropdowns work	N/A	Chrome advanced features
3	Repeat full workflow creation in Firefox 110+	Identical functionality and appearance	Same test workflow	Firefox compatibility
4	Compare Firefox vs Chrome performance	Page loads and interactions within 10% performance	N/A	Performance comparison
5	Test Safari 16+ compatibility	All features work, especially WebKit-specific elements	Same test workflow	Safari compatibility
6	Verify Safari date/time controls	Native Safari pickers function correctly	Date/time selection	Safari-specific widgets
7	Test Edge Latest compatibility	Microsoft Edge functions identically to Chrome	Same test workflow	Edge compatibility
8	Check CSS and layout consistency	UI appears consistent across all browsers	N/A	Visual consistency
9	Verify responsive behavior	All browsers handle window resizing appropriately	Various screen sizes	Responsive design

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Complete functionality available in all supported desktop browsers
• Secondary Verifications: Performance consistent, no visual inconsistencies
• Negative Verification: No browser-specific bugs or failures

---

Test Case 21: High-Volume Message Processing

Test Case ID: UX03US04_TC_021
Title: Verify system efficiently processes workflows with 10,Requirements Traceability:

• Related Requirements: REQ-LIMIT-001 (Action limits), REQ-VAL-002 (Validation), Business Rules #9 (Maximum actions), Edge Cases (Boundary conditions)
• Related Bugs: N/A
• Related Test Cases: UX03US04_TC_001, UX03US04_TC_019

Test Environment:

• Environment: Staging
• Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 110+, Safari 16+, Edge Latest
• Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
• Screen Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
• Dependencies: Workflow Engine, Validation Service
• Performance Baseline: <100ms validation response
• Data Requirements: Workflow in progress, Various action types available

Prerequisites: Setup Requirements:

• User logged in as Utility Admin
• Workflow creation in progress
• All communication channels available
• Validation rules active

User Roles/Permissions: Utility Admin role with workflow creation access

Test Data:

• Various channel types: Email, SMS, WhatsApp, In-app
• 10+ action configurations ready
• Duplicate action scenarios

Prior Test Cases: Workflow creation process initiated

Test Procedure:

Step	Action	Expected Result	Test Data	Comments
1	Create workflow with 10,000 recipients	Workflow configured successfully	10K recipient target list	Large audience setup
2	Execute high-volume email workflow	System processes without timeout errors	N/A	Email volume test
3	Monitor message queue processing	Messages queued and processed efficiently	N/A	Queue performance
4	Track processing throughput	Minimum 100 messages/second processing rate	N/A	Throughput measurement
5	Test multi-channel high volume	10K recipients across Email, SMS, WhatsApp	Email: 5K, SMS: 3K, WhatsApp: 2K	Multi-channel volume
6	Verify delivery success rate	99%+ successful delivery rate achieved	N/A	Delivery success
7	Test multiple concurrent high-volume workflows	5 workflows with 2K recipients each simultaneously	5 x 2K recipients	Concurrent processing
8	Monitor database performance	Database handles high write volume without degradation	N/A	Database stress
9	Check memory management	No memory leaks during large processing	N/A	Memory stability
10	Validate completion reporting	Accurate metrics for all 10K+ messages	N/A	Reporting accuracy

Verification Points:

• Primary Verification: Maximum 10 actions per workflow strictly enforced
• Secondary Verifications: Clear error messaging, UI updates dynamically
• Negative Verification: Cannot exceed limit under any circumstances

---

PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS

Performance Acceptance Criteria:

• Page Load Times: < 3 seconds for workflow pages
• API Response Times: < 500ms for critical operations, < 1000ms for complex operations
• Search Performance: < 300ms for workflow search results
• Form Submission: < 2 seconds for workflow creation/updates
• Concurrent Users: Support 100+ concurrent users without degradation
• Database Performance: Complex queries < 1000ms
• Memory Usage: < 500MB per user session

---

EXECUTION MATRIX

Browser Coverage (Desktop Only):

Browser/Device	Version	Priority	Test Cases
Chrome Desktop	115+	P1	All test cases
Firefox Desktop	110+	P1	Core functionality (TC_001-007)
Safari Desktop	16+	P2	Core functionality
Edge Desktop	Latest	P2	Core functionality

---

TEST SUITE DEFINITIONS

Smoke Test Suite (Pre-deployment):

• TC_001: Create New Workflow - Happy Path
• TC_005: Edit Workflow - Communication Channel Non-Editable
• TC_006: View Workflow Execution History (Updated Format)
• TC_007: Workflow Performance Metrics (Updated Calculations)
• TC_013: View vs Edit Button Functionality

Regression Test Suite (Release cycles):

• TC_001 through TC_012 (Core functionality)
• TC_013, TC_014, TC_015 (Management and alerts)
• TC_009 (Cross-browser desktop)
• TC_010 (API operations)

Full Test Suite (Major releases):

• All test cases TC_001 through TC_015
• Cross-browser compatibility
• Performance testing
• Security validation
• Integration testing

---

KEY UPDATES IMPLEMENTED

1. Target List Integration

• Moved target list selection from Details step to Trigger step
• Updated test cases TC_002 to reflect new location

2. Recurring Events Removal

• Modified TC_003 to only test "Specific Date and Time"
• Removed all recurring event functionality testing

3. History Tab Updates

• Removed icons before workflow names (TC_006)
• Updated status format to "x delivered y failed" (TC_006)
• Added non-functional action button testing (TC_006)

4. Metrics Definitions Updated

• Triggered = count of workflow usage (TC_007)
• Completed = count of successful notifications delivered (TC_007)
• Success rate = (delivered notifications / total notifications) * 100 (TC_007)

5. CC/BCC Email Enhancement

• Added CC/BCC testing in workflow creation (TC_004)
• Added CC/BCC editing in workflow modification (TC_005)

6. Communication Channel Non-Editable

• New test case TC_005 for channel type editing restrictions
• Verification that content remains editable while channel type is locked

7. Mobile Testing Removal

• Removed all mobile device testing scenarios
• Focused exclusively on desktop browser compatibility

8. Character Limits Placeholder

• Created TC_008 with placeholders for character limit definitions
• Ready for implementation once limits are discussed and finalized

---

PENDING ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION

1. Character Limits: Specific limits for SMS, WhatsApp, Email channels
2. API Endpoints: Specific endpoint URLs and authentication methods
3. Performance Thresholds: Confirmation of performance standards vs. <1 second requirement
4. Integration Points: Specific external systems and their integration requirements

This comprehensive test suite now aligns with all your specified requirements and includes the updated functionality while maintaining the quality standards for a B2B utility SaaS product.