CTFL-AT Exam Dumps : Certified Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

From theCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.1User Stories and Acceptance Criteria, it states:

"Acceptance criteria are defined collaboratively and refined during the conversation to ensure mutual understanding. They may be added or updated as new insights emerge."

This supportsOption D, which reflects how acceptance criteria evolveduring conversations— a key component of the"Card, Conversation, Confirmation"model.

Option Ais incorrect — the user story istestable, especially with the acceptance criterion.

Option Bis false — the story provides clear user value (printed hard copy for daily records).

Option Cis misleading — the Given-When-Then formatsupportsdiscussions; it doesn’t replace them.

Acceptance test criteria are the conditions that a user story must satisfy to be accepted by the customer or the stakeholder. They are usually derived from the user story and its acceptance scenarios, and they should cover the functional and non-functional requirements of the user story. Acceptance test criteria should be clear, concise, testable, and agreed upon by the team and the customer or the stakeholder.

In this case, the user story describes the business rule for approving a loan request based on the customer’s income, repayment history, and loan amount. The user story also specifies the roles of the customer assistant and the bank manager in the process. Therefore, the acceptance test criteria should verify that the user story is implemented correctly and that the system behaves as expected for different scenarios and inputs.

The following test cases can be treated as acceptance test criteria for the above user story:

As a customer assistant I can log in to the system and check the history of the customer account for the last year. This test case verifies that the customer assistant can access the system and view the customer’s income information, which is one of the factors for approving the loan request.

As a customer assistant I can log in to the system and check the history of the customer debts and repayments. This test case verifies that the customer assistant can access the system and view the customer’s repayment history, which is another factor for approving the loan request.

As a bank manager I can log in to the system and receive the information of all requests waiting for approval. This test case verifies that the bank manager can access the system and see the list of loan requests that have been prepared by the customer assistant, and that the system provides the necessary information for each request.

As a bank manager I can log in to the system and decide whether to approve a loan for a customer. This test case verifies that the bank manager can access the system and perform the approval action for a loan request, and that the system applies the business rule correctly and updates the status of the request accordingly.

The following test cases cannot be treated as acceptance test criteria for the above user story:

As a customer assistant I can log in to the system and change my password. This test case is not related to the user story, as it does not verify any of the functional or non-functional requirements of the user story. It is a generic test case that applies to any user of the system, not specific to the customer assistant role or the loan approval process.

As a bank manager I can log in to the system within 10 seconds. This test case is not related to the user story, as it does not verify any of the functional or non-functional requirements of the user story. It is a performance test case that applies to any user of the system, not specific to the bank manager role or the loan approval process.

According to the ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, a retrospective is a meeting held at the end of each iteration or release, where the agile team reflects on what went well and what can be improved in their processes, practices, and interactions. The purpose of a retrospective is to identify and implement actions for continuous improvement, and to foster a culture of learning and collaboration. Therefore, the items that would be the most effective to generate discussions on process improvement are those that are related to the team’s performance, challenges, feedback, and suggestions. Option D is the least effective item to generate discussions on process improvement, as it is a personal attack on one of the team members, and it does not offer any constructive feedback or solution. This kind of item can create a negative and hostile atmosphere in the retrospective, and damage the trust and respect among the team members. Option A is an effective item to generate discussions on process improvement, as it identifies a problem with the build process that affects the team’s efficiency and quality, and it can lead to finding ways to optimize the build process or to mitigate the delays. Option B is also an effective item to generate discussions on process improvement, as it reveals a discrepancy between the team’s estimation and actual effort, and it can lead to analyzing the root causes of the deviation and to improving the estimation techniques or the team’s capacity. Option C is also an effective item to generate discussions on process improvement, as it highlights a weakness in the automation tests that hinders the team’s ability to debug and fix the failures, and it can lead to enhancing the automation tests with better logging mechanisms or to reviewing the automation strategy. References: ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 2.1.1, page 14; ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 2.1.2, page 15; ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 2.2.1, page 16; ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 2.2.2, page 17.