Owner role · Behavior owner
Evidence: Guest-edit is deliberately forbidden in the external example, not assumed from a role name.
Review coverage / Delivery leads, planning owners and acceptance reviewers
Readiness checklistKeep invalid test combinations out of coverage counts
Record which combinations are impossible and why they are excluded.
The artifact partitions combination coverage by an explicit validity contract.
Opens the current invite-request page. Access is subject to approval; this example is not imported automatically.
Original worked case · Manual planning resource
Inspect the decision, not just the summary.
Start with the invented evidence, follow the reasoning, and retain its limits when adapting the brief.
01 · Inspect the inputs
Every record stays visible
| Actor | Operation | Declared class | Required review |
|---|---|---|---|
| Guest | View | Valid | Functional evidence |
| Guest | Edit | Invalid | Expected rejection evidence |
| Member | View | Valid | Functional evidence |
| Member | Edit | Valid | Functional evidence |
Use horizontal scrolling for wide tables. These records are invented, not customer data.
02 · Follow the reasoning
How the case leads to a decision
The full two-by-two grid has four rows. Its contract partitions them into three valid behaviors and one rejection case; the two sets need different expected results.
The bounded result
Keep three valid functional combinations and one explicit invalid contract case. Do not erase the invalid row or count it as a missing valid feature test.
Definitions and method context
Records, decisions and policies are original synthetic examples. External references supply context; they do not validate these cases or TeamBoostAI capabilities.
Original worked-case definitions
Definitions, policy choices, records and calculations are authored for this worksheet. No external standard, statistical validation or live product measurement is claimed.
External references checked 6 October 2026. Demand for these topics has not been measured.
Check the evidence before proceeding
Local readiness checklistSynthetic planning case: A review matrix crosses guest/member actor with view/edit operation. The declared contract makes guest-edit invalid; the other three combinations require functional evidence.
Owner role · Test planner
Evidence: All four rows remain visible with the correct expected outcome class.
Owner role · Acceptance reviewer
Evidence: The rejected combination has evidence rather than being silently deleted from the plan.
0 of 3 checks marked locally.
Checking boxes records your review here; it does not verify product data or save anything.
Decision to make: Keep three valid functional combinations and one explicit invalid contract case. Do not erase the invalid row or count it as a missing valid feature test.
Filled manual planning note
Invented planning text. Adapt it to your evidence and confirmed owners.
Keep three valid functional combinations and one explicit invalid contract case. Do not erase the invalid row or count it as a missing valid feature test. The full two-by-two grid has four rows. Its contract partitions them into three valid behaviors and one rejection case; the two sets need different expected results. These are invented contract roles, not claims about TeamBoostAI permissions or role enforcement.
Put the outline to work
- Verify the governing contract. Check: Guest-edit is deliberately forbidden in the external example, not assumed from a role name.
- Separate valid and rejection coverage. Check: All four rows remain visible with the correct expected outcome class.
- Review exclusions independently. Check: The rejected combination has evidence rather than being silently deleted from the plan.
Questions about this workflow
Can every unavailable combination be called invalid?
No. Confirm the actual contract; missing implementation and forbidden behavior are different.
Is the rejection row irrelevant to assurance?
No. Its expected boundary may need explicit evidence.
Does this create tasks in the product?
No. The brief is a manual planning resource. Use the product access link to check onboarding and the workflows available in your account.
From a useful outline to team work
Explore TeamBoostAI for your team
Use the owned checks and downloaded brief to discuss this planning decision alongside your TeamBoostAI tasks. Confirm available fields, roles and account features separately. The example is manual; it does not calculate live analytics, create work or run an experiment in the product. Confirm the workflows available in your account before adopting this outline.
Request TeamBoostAI access
Opens the current invite-request page. Access is subject to approval; this example is not imported automatically.