test-evidence-review

You can evaluate automated test quality and manual evidence completeness for game story files by applying coverage heuristics for assertions, edge cases, naming, and sign-offs to produce ADEQUATE, INCOMPLETE, or MISSING verdicts.

Test evidence quality review evaluates assertion coverage, edge-case coverage, naming quality, and formula traceability for automated tests, rather than just checking if tests pass or fail. It also verifies acceptance-criteria linkage and artefact presence for manual evidence.

To check if manual QA evidence meets sign-off criteria, verify acceptance-criteria linkage, required sign-offs, artefact presence like screenshots or walkthroughs, and evidence freshness. This ensures stories meet closure readiness before being marked complete.

Yes, you can audit test coverage across single-story, sprint, or system and epic scopes. The review applies across logic, integration, visual and feel, UI, and config and data story types to ensure comprehensive coverage and closure readiness.

To generate a persistent report for QA sign-off reviews, locate correct evidence paths via globs and greps, apply heuristics for assertions and edge cases, and optionally write a persistent report under the production QA directory with actionable verdicts per story.

Automated tests may pass but still lack closure readiness if they merely exist without adequate assertion coverage, edge-case coverage, naming quality, or formula traceability, or if manual evidence misses required sign-offs and acceptance-criteria linkage.