Session-based exploratory testing per the Bachs' SBTM: authoring charters (Explore X with Y to discover Z), running time-boxed sessions (60-90 min), logging session sheets with TBS metrics, and closing with the PROOF session debrief (Past, Results, Outlook, Obstacles, Feelings). Bundles the classic exploration heuristics as references: Whittaker's seven test tours (Feature, Money, Landmark, Intellectual, Bad-data, Configuration, Garbage collector's), Kelly's FCC CUTS VIDS recon tours, Bach's SFDPOT what-to-vary catalog, Bolton's HICCUPPS-F oracle heuristic, and Bach's CRUSSPIC STMPL quality criteria - plus a ready-to-fill charter-card template and a session-sheet review checklist. Use when planning, chartering, running, debriefing, or reviewing an exploratory testing session, or when picking a test tour, heuristic, or oracle mid-session. For scripted manual test cases, use manual-test-script-author instead.
86
91%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
86%
1.01xAverage score across 10 eval scenarios
Passed
No findings from the security scan
Review file delivered
100%
100%
Per-part completeness assessment with a status per part
78%
100%
Judgement on how the morning was spent
95%
100%
Uncovered ground identified from the feature summary
100%
100%
A verdict with one priority fix
93%
100%
A bounded next assignment for Wednesday
95%
100%
MUST NOT endorse bug count as the measure of the work
100%
100%
Constraints respected
100%
100%
Plan file delivered
0%
100%
A small named combination set, justified by the money risk
0%
100%
Untried combinations named, with the exposure stated
0%
100%
One bounded objective per block, naming what the gate needs to know
0%
100%
Variation beyond the flag settings
0%
100%
Records separate defects from behaviour needing a commercial ruling
0%
100%
MUST NOT leave findings unread until the gate
0%
100%
Out-of-scope boundary respected
0%
100%
Onboarding file delivered
100%
100%
The afternoon is split into bounded stretches, none of them a marathon
100%
100%
One objective per stretch, stating what she should be able to answer
100%
100%
The first stretch is orientation and it aims the later ones
100%
100%
Notes separate product knowledge, suspected defects, and questions
100%
100%
A 17:00 hand-off with a stated fate
75%
100%
MUST NOT propose one unbroken multi-hour sitting
100%
100%
Off-limits areas named
100%
100%
Plan file delivered
100%
0%
The two clock jumps are budgeted as the scarce resource
90%
0%
The propagation dead time is used
100%
0%
A single bounded objective naming what must be learned
95%
0%
Untouched areas named
71%
0%
Records separate defects, unexplained device behaviour, and rig problems
100%
0%
MUST NOT leave the record in a chat thread
100%
0%
Rig constraints respected
100%
0%
Plan file delivered
100%
100%
A single bounded assignment naming what must be learned
96%
93%
Fits one 90-minute window with named untouched areas
95%
68%
Patient-safety risk drives the assignment
95%
95%
MUST NOT prescribe an ordered script - seeds, not steps
100%
93%
Recording structure separates behaviour, defects, and blockers
100%
92%
Closing write-up with coverage gaps and a tester judgement
100%
94%
Named reader and a deadline for the write-up
100%
100%
MUST NOT expand beyond W-TEST or into the mobile app
100%
100%
Report file delivered
100%
100%
MUST NOT attempt all eleven angles - the list is cut and the cut is justified
87%
78%
A single stated objective for the hour
86%
95%
Sized to sixty minutes with time actually allocated
77%
88%
Concrete attack ideas on the kept angles
92%
100%
Findings split between defects and rulings needed
91%
100%
Gate report carries coverage gaps and a tester judgement
94%
94%
Named next target if the gate is held
90%
100%
MUST NOT plan rooted or jailbroken device work
100%
100%
Campaign file delivered
100%
100%
A ranked backlog of bounded pieces, longer than the budget
93%
96%
Six blocks allocated, with the remainder explicitly dropped
100%
95%
The plan adapts mid-campaign
80%
95%
Per-block record and hand-back
85%
92%
MUST NOT produce an aggregate nobody acts on
100%
93%
Stopping and escalation condition
100%
100%
Payroll-core ownership boundary respected
100%
100%
Plan file delivered
100%
100%
Prior defect history used as the standard of comparison
83%
66%
One bounded objective per block naming what must be learned
95%
95%
Coverage beyond the historical list
100%
94%
Records separate regressions, acceptable differences, and questions
100%
93%
MUST NOT hand back untraceable findings or an open-ended continuation
100%
94%
Time is allocated within each block
58%
66%
Flagged work stays out
100%
100%
Plan file delivered
100%
100%
Per-block time accounting with named categories
100%
100%
A trustworthiness threshold and an agreed rule for a bad block
100%
100%
One bounded objective per block, naming what is to be learned
100%
100%
Records separate app defects, lab problems, and decisions needed
100%
100%
Per-block hand-back including coverage gaps and a qualitative read
100%
100%
MUST NOT leave the time breakdown unused
100%
100%
3PL boundary respected
100%
100%
Plan file delivered
100%
100%
One bounded objective per block, stating what is to be learned
100%
100%
The 90 minutes are actually allocated and the plan is sized to fit
100%
100%
Store-credit mismatch is prioritised over breadth
100%
100%
In-flight notes separate confirmed behaviour, defects, and open questions
100%
100%
Per-block hand-back that closes the loop
100%
100%
Stopping condition and time accounting
100%
100%
MUST NOT bundle both objectives into one block or exceed the block length
100%
100%
Out-of-scope boundary respected
100%
100%
Table of Contents