Your goal is to verify completeness, consistency and correct behavior of an automated test suite. The TAS has been proven to successfully install in the SUT environment. All the preliminary checks…

Question

Options

• AChecking whether all the test cases contain the expected results
• BChecking whether the post condition have been fulfilled for all the test cases
• CChecking whether the loading of the TAS is repeatable in the SUT environment
• DChecking whether all the test cases produce repeatable outcomes

• A
  10% (5)
• B
  4% (2)
• C
  2% (1)
• D
  84% (43)

Explanation

Option D is the correct "NOT relevant" answer because verifying that test cases produce repeatable outcomes requires multiple test executions and falls into the domain of test execution quality - not TAS setup verification. The scenario's goal is to confirm the TAS is complete, consistent, and correctly configured, which is a structural/static concern, not a runtime repeatability concern.

Why the distractors are wrong (i.e., why A, B, and C ARE relevant):

• A is relevant because completeness requires that every test case has defined expected results - without them, the suite cannot validate behavior at all.
• B is relevant because confirming post-conditions are fulfilled checks that test cases leave the system in a known state, verifying correct and consistent TAS behavior.
• C is relevant because confirming the TAS loads repeatably ensures the automation solution itself is stable and reliable for each run - a direct correctness check.

Memory tip: Think "Structural, not Statistical." Verifying a TAS means checking its structure (expected results, post-conditions, load stability). Repeatability of outcomes is a statistical/execution concern you'd assess after the TAS is already verified - so D belongs to a later phase, not this one.

No community discussion yet for this question.