Skip to content

Module. 10 Test Questions.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
118 lines (68 loc) · 3.53 KB

Module. 10 Test Questions.md

File metadata and controls

118 lines (68 loc) · 3.53 KB

🧠 Brain Teasers & Diagnostic Challenges

Elevate your collaboration strategy with scenario-based reasoning and critical documentation thinking.

🔍 Teaser 1: The Time-Warped SME

You're documenting an internal API. Rajiv (Backend SME) gives you the endpoint logic, but a week later you notice the actual staging environment returns different fields than described. Rajiv insists the behavior is unchanged.

  • ❓ What verification steps should you follow?
  • 🧠 How do you communicate the discrepancy diplomatically?

🧩 Teaser 2: The Vague Validator

An SME says, “Users shouldn’t ever see this error, so no need to document it.” But in your testing, it appears under specific edge cases.

  • ❓ How do you challenge this assumption while maintaining trust?
  • 🔧 What’s your fallback strategy if the SME refuses to acknowledge the issue?

🔄 Teaser 3: The SME Proxy Problem

You're asked to document a payment gateway, but the SME is unavailable and you’re referred to a QA analyst who “might know a bit.”

  • ❓ How do you adapt your interview strategy for an SME proxy?
  • 🔍 What documentation methods can ensure you validate details despite second-hand information?

🧩 Teaser 4: The Contradicting SMEs

Lisa (Product) insists the onboarding flow should auto-save draft inputs. Anita (SRE) says saving to disk causes latency and shouldn't happen.

  • ❓ How do you break this deadlock?
  • 📘 What’s your process to document the logic without choosing sides?

🧪 Technical Review Test Assignments

Designed to simulate real-world scenarios with incomplete or conflicting SME input.

✍️ Assignment 1: Clarifying Vague SME Responses

“It just works after login.”

Task:

  • Write 3 technical follow-up questions that could help clarify what “just works” means.
  • Propose a structured paragraph that documents the behavior in the absence of SME input, clearly marking assumptions.

✅ Deliverable: 150–200 word paragraph + questions.

🎙 Assignment 2: SME Interview Simulation

Scenario: You conducted a Zoom interview with Yusuf (QA Analyst). He described a new test workflow in broad strokes.

Task:

  • Turn the 10-minute transcript into a clear, structured, 2-page user guide.
  • Identify missing information, flag it for review, and document your assumptions transparently.

✅ Deliverable: Markdown document + change log of what requires SME follow-up.

🧪 Assignment 3: Documentation Audit Exercise

Task:

  • You’re given a 1-page API guide that contains two critical errors and an undocumented edge case.
  • Identify the inconsistencies and draft a formal query email to the SME requesting clarification.

✅ Deliverable: Annotated API guide + email template.

🧠 Assignment 4: Creating an SME Review Checklist

Task: Design a reusable SME Review Checklist tailored to:

  • Frontend workflows
  • Backend APIs
  • SRE/system reliability docs

Include categories for: ☐ Terminology Accuracy ☐ Flow Consistency ☐ Logs/Error Message Mapping ☐ Test Environment Validation ☐ Risk or Limitation Disclosure

✅ Deliverable: Markdown checklist template.

🔧 Assignment 5: Conflict Reconciliation Log

Scenario: Two SMEs give conflicting definitions for the same parameter in your integration guide.

Task:

  • Document both views neutrally
  • Create a Google Doc-style conflict log
  • Draft a resolution request message for a joint meeting

✅ Deliverable: Conflict Log table + meeting summary prompt