A redesign of the UAT results section from the UK government's official Test Completion Report template — the same document used in Case Study #2, this time its test-execution and coverage sections.
UAT sign-off is often the moment a non-technical stakeholder decides whether to accept a system. A template that says "insert a graph or table" and gives no further guidance leaves that decision-critical summary entirely to whoever happens to be writing the report — with no shared bar for what a healthy result should look like.
"Insert a graph or table to show test script execution... This should include all tests including test that were not executed, removed, deferred and reasoning."
"Insert a graph or table to show Requirements Coverage."
Case Study #2 covers this same template's exit criteria section — together they show the pattern runs through the whole document, not one isolated section.
"94% pass rate, ready for sign-off" is the actual reading a stakeholder needs, not a blank prompt to fill in.
Passed, failed, and deferred tests are shown as parts of a whole, removing the ambiguity of "insert a graph."
97% coverage means little without knowing what the remaining 3% is — so it's stated.
"Insert a graph or table" tells an author what medium to use, not what a good result looks like. Two teams following this template in good faith could produce reports of very different quality — the fix isn't more instructions, it's a worked example of the bar to hit.
If you've got a UAT summary, test report, or sign-off document where the results are solid but the write-up isn't landing, I'll take one section and redesign it — no cost, no obligation — the same way as above.