Fundamentals 10 min read

Test Case Review Process and Agile Platform Design

This article outlines a standardized test case review workflow, analyzes current challenges in agile environments, and presents a detailed design for an integrated online test case review platform, including framework, functional features, implementation steps, and best practices to improve test quality and risk management.

转转QA
转转QA
转转QA
Test Case Review Process and Agile Platform Design

1. Standardized Test Case Review Process

Test Case Preparation

Functional test cases

Smoke test cases (high‑priority functional cases)

High‑priority cases within a single module

Core flow cases involving upstream/downstream systems (integration tests)

Review Preparation

Reserve meeting room and invite key stakeholders (product, development, etc.)

Attach test cases to the invitation email for pre‑reading

Record issues during the meeting, assign owners and due dates

Publish meeting minutes after the review

Update test cases within one working day based on minutes

Import updated cases into the test case management tool

Formal Review Meeting Minutes Example

Time: 2022‑xx‑xx Attendees: xxx, xxx, xxx… Review of xxx requirements:

1. Review Items: Email login feature Login flow optimization Style adjustments 2. Issues Identified: xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3. Case Summary: Total cases: 150 (100% functional, 50% smoke, 20% regression, …)

2. Current Common Review Practices (Status Quo)

In agile iterations, many cumbersome review steps are simplified, leading to issues such as lack of pre‑review, fragmented meetings, and scattered documentation.

Problems Observed

Lack of unified online management standards

Hidden unknown risks due to missing reviews

Negative impact on case quality and overall test quality

3. Agile Test Case Platform – Functional Design

Framework Design

Review Feature & Process

Entry: Click the "Review" button on a test case page to open the review UI.

Display appropriate buttons based on plan association and review status.

Review mode switch (default off). When enabled, the review page appears.

If sign‑in is enabled in the plan, a QR‑code sign‑in dialog pops up.

During review, a "Start Review" button is highlighted; after starting, it changes to "End Review".

Review conclusions can be edited, saved, or cancelled; upon ending, a confirmation dialog asks for pass/fail and allows adjusting review duration.

Completed reviews can be reopened to view history.

Implementation Highlights

1. Create Review Plan – When a case has no plan, the first activation prompts for estimated review time, participants, and optional sign‑in.

2. Start Review – The UI shows a highlighted "Start Review" button; participants can sign in via QR code.

3. Review In‑Progress & End Review – Users fill review comments, save, then click "End Review" which records duration and result.

4. Re‑review – After completion, a "Create" button allows setting up a new review round.

5. View Review Records – Multiple rounds are listed with individual and total durations.

Supported Scenarios: Multiple authors per case can have separate review plans. Failed reviews can trigger a new review cycle. Newly added cases after a review can start another round.

4. Summary of Online Review Benefits

Accelerates review during case authoring and records issues instantly.

Enables simultaneous review and case modification, turning minutes into actionable items.

Provides platform‑wide case management and easy access to historical reviews.

Maximizes the value of each review session and ensures time investment is tracked.

Author Bio Zhuang Jindi – Backend testing enthusiast Wang Bin – Frontend testing enthusiast

software testingplatformagileprocess designtest case review
转转QA
Written by

转转QA

In the era of knowledge sharing, discover 转转QA from a new perspective.

0 followers
Reader feedback

How this landed with the community

login Sign in to like

Rate this article

Was this worth your time?

Sign in to rate
Discussion

0 Comments

Thoughtful readers leave field notes, pushback, and hard-won operational detail here.