All use cases

Prepare a validation traceability matrix.

Connect intended-use requirements to configuration, verification cases and executed evidence, distinguishing planned coverage from completed testing.

Book a demo
Illustration of a seal comparing two equipment versions, each linked to its retained evidence.

You: Prepare the traceability matrix for URS-307. Does the QA permission requirement have evidence?

neil

The requirement links to a proposed role condition in CFG-307 v02 and a defined unauthorised-completion case. The case has not been run. The requirement is mapped, but not demonstrated by executed verification evidence.

Mapped does not mean verified
Mapped does not mean verified. URS-307, CFG-307 Proposed, UAT-307 Not run. Example records.URS-307CFG-307ProposedUAT-307Not run

You: What should the matrix distinguish?

neil

The requirement, implementing configuration version, planned verification, observed result and reviewed evidence are separate links. I would show the execution gap explicitly. A test description proves what we intend to check, not what the workflow actually did.

You: Configure the proposed fields and verification cases. Keep the unresolved decisions visible.

neil

Here is the design proposal, with source-linked fields and expected test behaviour. The tests are not executed; the configuration still needs owner review and verification.

URS-307 requirement-to-verification matrixReview draft · source evidence and assessment

URS-307 requirement-to-verification matrix

URS-307 has a proposed role condition and an unauthorised-completion test, so a trace exists from requirement to design and planned verification. That is not executed evidence. The matrix should distinguish mapped, tested and reviewed states, preserve the configuration version under test and link the actual result when available. A planned case cannot be counted as a passing case.

Source evidence and search scope

URS-307 (Requirement); CFG-307 (Configured control); UAT-307 (Verification case)

URS-307 / Requirement

Recorded evidence
Only authorised reviewers may complete QA review

CFG-307 / Configured control

Recorded evidence
Reviewer role condition proposed in v02

UAT-307 / Verification case

Recorded evidence
Unauthorised completion test defined; not executed
Inputs needed for your own records
  • Approved requirements and intended-use scope
  • Configuration version and design/control references
  • Verification cases, execution evidence and unresolved defects

The validation owner approves risk-based coverage and verifies execution evidence. A linked but unexecuted test does not satisfy a requirement.

Fictional source snapshots. No live query, assignment or approval.

Proposed configuration and verification4 fields · 4 test cases

Capture and conditions

requirement Versioned requirement reference
URS-307: authorised reviewers only for QA completion
URS-307
implementation Versioned configuration reference
Select the actual CFG-307 v02 role condition under test
CFG-307
verification_case Test reference
Link required account scope, action and expected behaviour
UAT-307
execution_evidence Executed test reference
Absent until an actual result, configuration version and reviewer evidence are recorded
UAT-307

Verification cases

TM-01 / Requirement has a planned but unexecuted test
Show mapped / execution pending, not verified
TM-02 / User without authorised QA scope attempts completion
Refuse the QA action and retain the observed test evidence
TM-03 / Authorised user completes with required evidence
Record the defined completion and its accountable identity
TM-04 / Configuration changes after test execution
Expose the version difference for impact assessment; do not silently reuse verification

Expected behaviour, not executed tests. This is a design specification, not a native import file or published process.

Decisions before implementation

Confirm the implementation under test
Configuration owner
Link the exact CFG-307 v02 role condition and required QA scope to the authorised requirement.
Execute the permission cases
Verification owner
Record an unauthorised attempt and the authorised path with account scope, version, actual outcome and review evidence.
Example conversation · prepared replies

See this job with your team.

Tell us how your team handles this job today. We’ll walk through the analysis, supporting evidence and review steps in a demo.

Book a demo
What to bring for this job
  • Approved requirements and intended-use scope
  • Configuration version and design/control references
  • Verification cases, execution evidence and unresolved defects

Source access, permissions and permitted actions are agreed for your environment.

Source excerpt

URS-307

Requirement

Recorded evidence
Only authorised reviewers may complete QA review

Selected fictional record, not a live source-system view.

Browse all use cases