Testing
Audience
Developers, QA engineers, support engineers, security engineers, solution architects, and implementation partners.
Reference Content
This page records source-verified technical behavior and boundaries for the workforce-scheduling capability.
Summary
No dedicated Attendance Service unit or integration test project and no frontend automated shift-management tests were found. The verified executable evidence consists of scripted smoke, parity, and cutover checks.
Existing scripted coverage
The smoke asset exercises direct and compatibility shift/weekly-off behavior, assignment creation and overlap rejection, effective-policy resolution, calculator influence, gateway ownership, backfill, parity, and cutover checks. Separate assets compare legacy and canonical reads and aggregate cutover signals.
Missing automated coverage
Highest-priority gaps are aggregate boundary tests, overnight duration, inclusive dates, concurrent overlap, default-policy transitions, tenant isolation, unauthenticated and underprivileged access, header trust, multi-save failure behavior, resolver batch selection, weekly-off fallback, payroll snapshot effects, leave divergence, and frontend validation.
Test strategy
Build a deterministic unit layer first, then database-backed repository/application tests with real query filters and constraints. Add transport security tests for both direct and compatibility surfaces, contract parity tests, and UI tests. Treat existing scripts as transition evidence, not a replacement for repeatable CI tests.
Source References
microservices/scripts/smoke-attendance.ps1microservices/scripts/compare-attendance-shift-parity.ps1microservices/scripts/attendance-shift-cutover-go-no-go.ps1microservices/src/attendance-service/Domain/Attendance/AttendanceCalculator.cs
Related Articles
See Also
Keywords
- Workforce scheduling
- Shift policy
- Attendance integration
Revision Information
- Status: Draft
- Last reviewed: 2026-07-20
- Next review: 2026-10-20