Test Coverage Analysis
Career Paths
How to interpret this table?
You may choose this advanced topic if you like doing the things listed under “they usually do”, and you are fine with not doing the things listed under “they usually do not do”.
Alternatively, you may choose it if you are interested in applying for the listed job roles and want to practice work that is close to those roles.
| Job title | They usually do | They usually do NOT do | Real-life examples |
|---|---|---|---|
| Software Engineer (testing-focused) | Measure test coverage meaningfully, improve tests where it matters, and use coverage data to guide decisions | Chase coverage numbers blindly, add meaningless tests, or inflate coverage with trivial code | Unit and integration testing in real-world codebases |
| Quality / Test Lead | Choose appropriate coverage metrics, interpret results critically, and ensure coverage improvements reflect real quality gains | Reward artificial coverage increases or enforce 100% coverage without context | Quality-driven test improvement initiatives |
Affected SDLC Phases
If a team chooses this advanced topic, the testing, implementation, and quality assurance phases are most strongly affected. Coverage data is used as a diagnostic tool, not a goal in itself. Decisions must be justified and verified through re-measurement.
Affected Tasks
Features are defined
Minimum Viable Product (MVP)
By the end of this task, your team has selected a specific type of test coverage to focus on and defined what parts of the system it applies to.
Technical Details
The team must choose exactly one primary coverage type and document it in README.md, for example:
- Statement / line coverage
- Branch coverage
- Condition coverage
- Path coverage (if supported)
The scope of coverage (modules, packages, or layers) must be defined upfront.
Quality
High-quality work shows a justified choice of coverage type aligned with the project’s risks and structure.
Features are sorted by priority
Minimum Viable Product (MVP)
Your team prioritizes coverage gaps based on risk.
Technical Details
Prioritization must consider:
- Critical code paths
- Error handling logic
- Complex or failure-prone areas
Low-risk or trivial code may be intentionally deprioritized.
Quality
High-quality prioritization focuses testing effort where defects would matter most.
Features' cost and price are estimated
Minimum Viable Product (MVP)
Your team estimates the effort required to improve coverage in selected areas.
Technical Details
Estimates must be based on actual coverage reports and identified gaps.
Quality
High-quality estimates are realistic and grounded in measurement data.
System is working
Minimum Viable Product (MVP)
By the end of this task, your team demonstrates measured and improved test coverage.
Technical Details
The demo must show:
- Initial coverage measurement
- Added or improved tests
- Re-measured coverage results
Coverage tools may include, for example:
- Python: coverage.py, pytest-cov
- Java: JaCoCo
Raw percentages alone are insufficient; interpretation must be shown.
Quality
High-quality demos clearly connect coverage improvements to meaningful tests, not superficial gains.
Bug fixing
Minimum Viable Product (MVP)
During development, your team fixes at least one defect or untested behavior revealed through coverage analysis.
Technical Details
The bug report must include:
- Coverage gap that exposed the issue
- The test added or improved
- Resulting behavior change
- Re-measured coverage
Tests that exist only to execute getters/setters or trivial code are not acceptable.
Quality
High-quality bug fixing shows that coverage analysis led to real defect prevention or detection.
User documentation
Minimum Viable Product (MVP)
User documentation is not required to include coverage information.
Technical Details
No additional requirements beyond standard task expectations.
Quality
High-quality submissions keep coverage metrics out of user-facing docs.
Developer documentation
Minimum Viable Product (MVP)
Developer documentation explains the coverage strategy and decisions.
Technical Details
Documentation must describe:
- Chosen coverage type and tools
- Areas intentionally excluded and why
- How coverage was improved and re-measured
Quality
High-quality documentation makes coverage decisions transparent and auditable.