Add a Built-In Scope Checker Tool to Help Testers Confirm If Issues Are In Scope During Test Cycles
HimanshuW
Sometimes while testing, it’s unclear whether a particular issue is in scope or not. While the team chat is an option for clarification, responses aren’t always timely or accurate, as not all testers feel confident answering such queries.
This uncertainty can lead to:
Missed bugs due to hesitation.
Time wasted waiting for confirmation.
Potential out-of-scope reports being submitted.
Suggestion: Please consider adding a simple scope checker tool in the web or mobile app. It could allow 1–2 quick questions per tester per cycle where they can get scope validation from a reliable backend source or a predefined ruleset.
This tool would not replace reading test instructions (which should always come first), but it could serve as a backup layer of clarity — helping testers move with greater confidence and precision.
Where: Test IO web/mobile app → During test cycles
When: While unsure about a bug’s scope
What: No existing feature for quick scope verification
Note: This is a feature request — such a scope checker does not currently exist, to my knowledge.
S
Sablina
Hello! Thank you very much for your suggestion and for your active participation in improving our platform.
In fact, a similar mechanism already exists — it’s called ChatBob. While it may not fully match what you had in mind, ChatBob is a bot assistant designed to help answer questions during testing cycles. Please note that it is not enabled for all cycles, as its availability depends on the customer and their privacy requirements.
That said, the most reliable sources of information remain the official test description and the team leader’s responses in the cycle chat. Testers are expected to rely on these resources and make independent, well-considered decisions. The responsibility for evaluating whether a bug falls within scope, bug severity, type, and relevance lies entirely with the tester.
Introducing additional features that might shift this responsibility to an automated assistant could create unnecessary disputes and reduce accountability, which are both counterproductive to maintaining quality and fairness across the platform.
We truly value your input and encourage you to continue sharing your ideas. While not all suggestions can be implemented, every contribution helps us evaluate how to balance convenience with professional responsibility on the platform.
HimanshuW
Sablina
Thank you for the detailed explanation and for pointing out ChatBob. I understand now that while ChatBob can provide guidance, the ultimate responsibility for evaluating scope, severity, and relevance remains with the tester.
When I submitted this feedback, I was still relatively new to Test IO. Over time, I’ve gained a much clearer understanding of how things work and the importance of relying on official test descriptions and team leader guidance.
I appreciate the clarification and see the value in maintaining accountability and fairness across the platform. I’ll continue to leverage the available resources and keep sharing feedback as I come across opportunities for improvement.