mirror of
https://github.com/magnus919/agent-skills.git
synced 2026-09-19 15:36:29 +03:00
usernameandfactory-droid[bot] <138933559+factory-droid[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
332578766d
Templates: test-strategy.md, risk-register.md, exploratory-charter.md, bug-report.md, verification-plan.md — all with placeholder fields. Assets: risk-matrix-grid.md (5x5 P×I grid consistent with risk-based-testing.md and risk-prioritize.py), test-design-techniques-checklist.md, qa-definition-of-done.md. Co-authored-by: factory-droid[bot] <138933559+factory-droid[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
3.4 KiB
3.4 KiB
Test Design Techniques Checklist
Quick-reference for selecting test design techniques. Check the techniques that apply to your scenario, then derive test cases. See test-design-techniques.md for detailed guidance and worked examples.
Feature Under Test
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Feature / Component | |
| Tester | |
| Date |
Technique Selection
| Technique | Applies? | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Equivalence Partitioning (EP) | [ ] | <Why: input domains exist with distinct behavior classes> |
| Boundary Value Analysis (BVA) | [ ] | <Why: numeric or ordered ranges with edge behavior> |
| Decision Tables | [ ] | <Why: business rules with multiple interacting conditions> |
| State Transition | [ ] | <Why: stateful workflow with valid/invalid transitions> |
| Pairwise / Combinatorial | [ ] | <Why: multi-parameter configuration space> |
| Error Guessing | [ ] | <Why: known defect patterns, historical failure areas> |
When to Use Which
| Scenario Type | Primary Technique | Supporting Technique |
|---|---|---|
| Input validation (ranges, formats) | EP + BVA | Error Guessing |
| Business logic with conditions | Decision Tables | EP |
| Workflow with states and transitions | State Transition | Decision Tables |
| Configuration with many parameters | Pairwise | EP |
| Integration with external systems | Error Guessing | EP (interface partitions) |
| UI with form fields | EP + BVA | Error Guessing |
| Permission / role-based access | Decision Tables | State Transition |
Technique Application Notes
Equivalence Partitioning
- Identified all input domains
- Defined valid and invalid partitions
- Selected one representative per partition
- Included type/format partitions (non-integer, empty, null)
Boundary Value Analysis
- Used 2-value (min, max) for quick coverage
- Used 3-value (min-1, min, max, max+1) where off-by-one is likely
- Tested empty/null boundaries
Decision Tables
- Listed all conditions and actions
- Generated complete rule combinations
- Reduced redundant rules where outcomes are identical
- Covered impossible/contradictory combinations explicitly
State Transition
- Drew or referenced the state model
- Covered all valid transitions (0-switch)
- Tested at least one invalid transition per state
- Checked for dead states and unreachable states
Pairwise / Combinatorial
- Listed parameters and their values
- Generated pairwise combinations (tool: PICT / allpairs)
- Added known-bad combinations from defect history
Error Guessing
- Reviewed defect history for this component
- Checked common failure patterns (null, overflow, concurrency, timeout)
- Tested integration boundaries with invalid/malformed data
Coverage Summary
| Dimension | Covered | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| All valid partitions tested | [ ] | |
| All boundaries tested | [ ] | |
| All decision rules covered | [ ] | |
| All state transitions covered | [ ] | |
| Pairwise combinations generated | [ ] | |
| Known error patterns tested | [ ] |
The pyramid level for each technique is a starting point, not a rule. Adapt to your system's risk profile. See test-strategy.md.