Each scenario names the guarantee it proves. Category coverage describes specified cases; executable bindings retain their narrower assertion boundaries. Lifecycle coverage remains a gap wherever guards and effects lack independent verification.
Prepare Jane and Sam, two scopes and a delegation spanning several responsibilities. Assign responsibilities, process notices, read each recipient inbox, fold same-scope repeats and end one assignment.
The interaction case combines the producing, processing and reading outcomes named in its frontmatter. It remains proposed until an executable suite performs that complete sequence.
Coverage
Rulecovered
Transitioncovered
Validationgap: FND-PFM-NOT-075
Permissioncovered
Edgegap: FND-PFM-NOT-075
Failurecovered
Boundarygap: FND-PFM-NOT-075
Concurrencygap: FND-PFM-NOT-075
Invariantcovered
Interactioncovered
Test Scenarios
7 scenarios proving CAP-PFM-NOT-014; 2 bound to an existing test.
01Announce an explicit responsibility assignmentruleapitest
Prepare Jane and Sam, two scopes and a delegation spanning several responsibilities.
Steps
Assign responsibilities, process notices, read each recipient inbox, fold same-scope repeats and end one assignment.
Expected
Recipients see their own assignment and delegation outcomes. Ending one scope leaves the other scope intact, and withdrawal removes the ended assignment from applicable unread results.
Data
A suite-owned workspace, named staff accounts and unique occurrence keys; external adapters record attempts without shared writes.