ES-109 — Testing and Verification¶
You are here¶
ES-108 reviewed and integrated implementation changes into the shared baseline.
ES-109 verifies that the integrated baseline behaves correctly and that the evidence is strong enough to support release-readiness judgment.
This stage is not only about running tests. It is about producing reviewable evidence that requirements, guardrails, failure paths, AI boundaries, regression behavior, and known risks have been checked with appropriate discipline.
Why this stage exists¶
Testing often fails because teams test only what is easy to test.
Common failures include:
- happy-path tests only;
- no verification of access denial;
- no verification of evidence creation;
- no failure-path testing;
- no traceability from tests to requirements;
- no testing of AI review boundaries;
- no regression focus after integration;
- no record of what was not tested;
- test results that cannot support release decisions.
ES-109 prevents those failures by turning testing into verification evidence.
The engineering question¶
Does the integrated system satisfy its requirements and guardrails with enough verification evidence to support release-readiness judgment?
What you will produce¶
ES-109 produces project artifacts under:
docs/testing/
Expected artifacts:
test_strategy.md
test_plan.md
test_cases.md
verification_matrix.md
test_execution_record.md
defect_log.md
guardrail_verification.md
ai_verification_record.md
regression_check_record.md
testing_readiness_summary.md
Templates should be copied from:
template-library/testing/
Completed reference examples, when available, should be reviewed under:
examples/lmu-coicp/testing/
What good looks like¶
Good ES-109 evidence shows what was tested, why it was tested, which requirements and guardrails it verifies, what passed, what failed, what remains untested, what defects were found, what risks remain, and whether ES-110 can begin.
Verification evidence should support judgment, not create false certainty.
Relationship to ES-108¶
ES-108 reviews and integrates implementation.
ES-109 verifies the integrated baseline.
If ES-109 finds implementation defects, return to ES-107 and ES-108 for correction and reintegration.
If ES-109 finds testability defects in design, return to ES-105.
If ES-109 finds requirement ambiguity, return to ES-102.
Relationship to ES-110¶
ES-110 should not have to guess what was tested, what passed, what failed, which guardrails were verified, or what risks remain.
ES-109 gives release-readiness evaluation a defensible verification basis.
Lifecycle chain¶
ES-109 continues the ETIS lifecycle chain:
Question
↓
Evidence
↓
Decision
↓
Repository Artifact
↓
Next Stage
For ES-109, the question is whether the integrated system satisfies its requirements and guardrails. The evidence is the testing and verification package. The decision is whether verification evidence is sufficient for release-readiness evaluation. The repository artifact is stored under docs/testing/. The next stage is ES-110.
AI may help generate candidate test cases, identify missing edge cases, review traceability, summarize test results, and analyze defect patterns. AI must not certify verification. Engineers remain responsible for deciding whether testing evidence is sufficient.
Do not say “tested” when only the happy path was tested. Trustworthy systems require testing of denial paths, failure paths, evidence paths, and guardrail-sensitive behavior.
Testing is not proof that the system is perfect. Testing is evidence about what has been checked and what risk remains.