A redesign of the exit criteria section from the UK government's own official Test Completion Report template — the standard document every DDTS project uses to sign off a test stage.
Test completion reporting exists to let a stakeholder make one decision quickly: is this ready to go live? A template that only asks for raw pass/fail rows — with no required verdict field — sets up exactly the kind of ambiguity that causes miscommunication at the highest-stakes moment of a project.
This isn't one team's bad habit. It's the structure the UK government's own standard template hands every contractor by default.
| Exit criterion | Met |
|---|---|
| All P1 defects closed | Y |
| All P2 defects closed or deferred | Y |
| 100% of test scripts executed | N |
| Requirements coverage ≥95% | Y |
| No open sev1/sev2 risks | Y |
The template's own instructions tell authors to "insert a graph or table" for test execution and requirements coverage with no guidance on synthesis — the same gap runs through the whole document, not just the exit criteria section.
"Conditional go" is the actual answer to the only question that matters — stated up front, not left for the reader to tally.
The one unmet criterion is visually distinct and carries its agreed action inline — no defect log lookup required.
Nothing about the underlying test result changed — only how quickly a reader can act on it.
Redesigning one completed report helps one project. Redesigning the template that every DDTS contractor is handed by default is the highest-leverage version of the same fix — it changes the starting point for every test stage sign-off that follows.
If you've got a QA report, test plan, or sign-off document where the underlying testing is solid but the reporting isn't landing, I'll take one section and redesign it — no cost, no obligation — the same way as above.