Test case execution process showing structured verification steps on a workstation
Infographic Reference — Molvaneskt

Test Case Development
and Execution

A structured overview of how test cases move from specification through execution to reported outcome. Each stage carries distinct responsibilities, inputs, and artifacts — none are optional.

6 Core execution
phases tracked
4 Defect severity
classification levels
3 Test case
design methods
Lifecycle flow

From Requirement to Result

Each test case follows a defined path: requirements are parsed into conditions, conditions become steps, steps are executed against a build, outcomes are recorded, and discrepancies are escalated. The sequence is not flexible — skipping phases introduces gaps that invalidate the final report.

Phases are sequential. Re-entry at any stage resets downstream artifacts.

1
Requirement Analysis Extract testable conditions from functional and non-functional specifications.
2
Test Case Design Structure preconditions, steps, input data, and expected outcomes per case.
3
Review and Approval Peer validation against original requirements; formal sign-off before execution.
4
Execution Cases run against the target build; each step produces a Pass, Fail, or Blocked status.
5
Defect Logging and Closure Failed cases generate defect records linked to the specific step and expected value.
Quality indicators

Execution Coverage at a Glance

Functional test coverage per sprint 78%
Cases with documented expected outcomes 91%
Regression suite reuse rate 65%
Defects linked to a specific test step 84%
1 in 6 test cases blocked on first execution due to environment or dependency issues, not logic failures
P1 / P2 critical and high severity defects require same-cycle re-test before any release sign-off
≥ 4 h median time to reproduce a failed test case when step-level detail is absent from the log
Classification reference

How Test Cases Are Categorised

Test cases divide across three primary axes — design technique, execution scope, and defect severity. Each axis informs how the case is written, when it runs, and how its failure is prioritised.

Classification must be assigned during design, not after execution. Retroactive labelling produces inaccurate reports and misleads triage. Molvaneskt has applied this taxonomy since 2019 across both manual and automated suites.

Design Technique
  • Equivalence partitioning — reduces input set to representative classes
  • Boundary value analysis — targets edges of valid and invalid ranges
  • Decision table — maps condition combinations to system responses
  • State transition — verifies behaviour across defined system states
Execution Scope
  • Smoke — minimum viable check before full suite execution
  • Regression — unchanged functionality verified after new changes
  • Exploratory — unscripted discovery within defined charter scope
  • Acceptance — business condition verification before release
Defect Severity
  • P1 Critical — system unusable, no workaround exists
  • P2 High — core function impaired, workaround is costly
  • P3 Medium — partial function degraded, workaround available
  • P4 Low — cosmetic or minor, no functional impact