Skip to main content

ICW-E2S01T12-Test-Design: BR-061 Explicit RW Task-ID Version Alignment

Task: E2:S01:T12
Related BR: BR-061
Host Task: T12-rw-explicit-task-id-version-alignment-br061.md
Created: 2026-04-09

Test Strategy​

Validate that explicit RW E:S:T flows proceed without manual version.py pre-alignment on valid branch context, while maintaining strict blocking behavior for wrong-branch and intent/typo risk scenarios.

Coverage Matrix​

  1. Explicit-task no-pre-alignment path (AC-1)

    • Input: explicit E:S:T, valid branch, stale version.py epic.
    • Expectation: workflow proceeds through early guards without manual file edit prerequisite.
    • Replay example: RW E2:S01:T12 --art while version.py is anchored to another epic.

  2. Branch mismatch blocking (AC-2)

    • Input: explicit E:S:T, invalid branch context.
    • Expectation: Step 1 remains blocking with actionable error.

  3. Intent ambiguity blocking (AC-2)

    • Input: explicit E:S:T conflicting with intent guard conditions.
    • Expectation: Step 1d fails unless explicitly permitted by defined adoption semantics (--art or confirmed override flow).

  4. Typo-risk rejection (AC-2)

    • Input: malformed or incorrect task token near valid ID shape.
    • Expectation: validator blocks with clear mismatch diagnostics.

  5. Documentation consistency checks (AC-3)

    • Input: updated RW docs/rules content.
    • Expectation: behavior and guardrail sequencing documented without contradiction.

  6. BR-061 regression replay (AC-4)

    • Input: known repro profile from BR-061 (epic switch + explicit task).
    • Expectation: no false Step 1 friction in valid branch context.

Scenario Set (Required)​

  1. Positive path - stale version epic + explicit task
    Expected: passes Step 1/1.3/1.4/1.5 and proceeds to Step 2 without manual version.py edits.

  2. Negative path - wrong branch
    Expected: blocked at Step 1 with branch mismatch diagnostics.

  3. Negative path - task intent typo/mismatch
    Expected: blocked at Step 1.5 unless explicitly adopted or confirmed override is provided per policy.

  4. Regression replay fixtures

    • Fixture A: stale epic mismatch from BR-061 repro.
    • Fixture B: same-story newer completed task progression check.
    • Fixture C: malformed token near-valid shape (E2:S0l:T12, E2S1T1Z, etc.).

Failure Modes​

  • Step 1 still hard-fails on stale version.py despite explicit valid task intent.
  • Branch-safety checks are softened unintentionally for wrong-branch scenarios.
  • Intent guard behavior drifts and permits ambiguous requests.
  • Error diagnostics become less actionable after reconciliation changes.
  • Documentation promises behavior that validators do not implement.

Red/Green Verification Sequence​

  1. Create failing tests for BR-061 repro scenario and guardrail cases.
  2. Implement explicit-task alignment behavior until AC-1 scenario turns green.
  3. Re-run branch mismatch and intent-ambiguity tests to confirm blocking behavior remains.
  4. Add typo/malformed ID negative tests and verify deterministic rejection.
  5. Validate documentation/rule text consistency against implemented flow.
  6. Execute full regression pass for E2:S01 RW validator suite.
  7. Record replay fixture outcomes in task evidence notes for release handoff.

Regression Guard Checklist​

  • Explicit-task replay no-manual-edit guard is green.
  • Wrong-branch hard-block guard is green.
  • Intent guard mismatch rejection remains green.
  • Typo-risk negative guard is green.
  • Documentation and execution flow remain synchronized.

Evidence for Handoff​

  • Test list mapped to T12 AC-1..AC-4.
  • BR-061 repro fixture and expected outcomes documented.
  • Pass/fail matrix for explicit-task flow and guardrail-preservation paths.