CTFL-AT Practice Exam Questions with Answers Certified Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester Certification

As an agile tester, you should work together with the developer, suggesting reasons why the tests are failing. This is an example of the agile principle of collaboration and communication within the team, as well as the agile testing practice of early and frequent feedback. By working together with the developer, you can help to identify and resolve the root causes of the test failures, as well as share your testing knowledge and perspective. This can lead to faster and better quality delivery of the user story, as well as improved team relationships and trust.

Option A is not a good action, because reviewing and improving the design of the user story is not the tester’s responsibility, and it may not address the test failures. Option B is also not a good action, because creating bug reports for blocked tests is not an agile way of handling issues, and it may create unnecessary overhead and waste. Option D is not a good action, because it does not help to unblock the current user story, and it may distract you from the sprint goal and the team’s focus.

The Agile Manifesto is a declaration of four values and twelve principles that guide the Agile software development approach12. The four values of the Agile Manifesto are12:

Individuals and interactions over processes and tools

Working software over comprehensive documentation

Customer collaboration over contract negotiation

Responding to change over following a plan

These values emphasize the importance of human collaboration, working product, customer feedback, and adaptability over rigid processes, extensive documentation, fixed contracts, and predefined plans. The values do not imply that the items on the right are not important, but rather that the items on the left are more important and should be prioritized.

Therefore, the statement that is NOT a value from the Agile Manifesto is B, as it contradicts the first value of the Agile Manifesto. The correct statement should be “Individuals and interactions over processes and tools”. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Extension Syllabus1, page 10; ISTQB Agile Tester Sample Exam2, question 1.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

From theCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 1.3The Whole-Team Approach, it states:

"The whole-team approach involves all team members (including developers, testers, and business representatives) working together as a team, sharing responsibility for the quality of the product."

It also says:

"In Agile projects, the whole-team approach promotes collaboration and communication across roles to achieve common goals, including quality assurance."

Thus,Option Bis correct, as it captures thecollaborative nature and shared responsibilitythat the whole-team approach aims to foster.

Option Arefers toPlanning Poker or relative estimation, not directly the whole-team concept.

Option Cdescribes the"Three Cs" (Card, Conversation, Confirmation)model of user stories, not the whole-team approach specifically.

Option Dmisinterprets Agile; while team members are encouraged to becross-functional, deep expertise is still valued, and "generalist only" is not a requirement of the whole-team approach.

 The Agile processes promote early and frequent feedback from the customers, users, testers, developers, and other stakeholders involved in the project. This feedback helps to ensure that the product meets the expectations and needs of the customers and users, and that the development process is continuously improved and adapted to the changing requirements and environment. However, increasing the frequency of feedback and communication does not eliminate all communication problems, as there may still be issues such as misunderstandings, misinterpretations, conflicts, or cultural differences that need to be resolved. Therefore, the statement D is not true, as it implies that communication problems are completely avoided by the Agile processes. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus1, Section 1.2.1, page 9; ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Extension Sample Exam Questions2, Question 4, page 5.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

From theCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.2Release and Iteration Planning, testers actively contribute during release planning:

"During release planning, testers collaborate with the team to understand the scope of the release and help identify any high-level test considerations. They also participate in quality risk analysis and help in estimating test effort."

Furthermore, it is noted:

"Testers are involved in defining and refining user stories and acceptance criteria, and contribute to quality risk assessments."

Therefore,Option Cis accurate as it reflects the tester's involvement inprioritizing user storiesand conductingquality risk analysisduring release planning.

Option Ais incorrect because defining and redefining the product backlog is primarily the role of theProduct Owner, and the test approach isiteration-specific, not fixed for the full release.

Option Bis inaccurate — breaking down stories into tasks is generally part ofiteration (Sprint) planning, not release planning.

Option Dis incorrect —release plans can changein Agile to accommodate changing business needs.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

FromCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.3Behavior-Driven Development, and 3.2Test-Driven Development:

"TDD focuses on writing unit tests that guide the implementation of code."

"BDD focuses on writing scenarios that describe the behavior of the software, often using a language that stakeholders can understand."

Thus,Option Bis accurate — TDD targetscode implementation, BDD targetsbehavioral expectations.

Option Ais incorrect —TDD is at unit level, whileBDD is at the acceptance level.

Option Cis false —BDD is more readable and accessiblefor non-technical stakeholders.

Option Dconfuses BDD withuser story formats; BDD usesGiven-When-Then, not the "As a... I want..." template.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

From theCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.1User Stories and Acceptance Criteria, it states:

"Acceptance criteria are defined collaboratively and refined during the conversation to ensure mutual understanding. They may be added or updated as new insights emerge."

This supportsOption D, which reflects how acceptance criteria evolveduring conversations— a key component of the"Card, Conversation, Confirmation"model.

Option Ais incorrect — the user story istestable, especially with the acceptance criterion.

Option Bis false — the story provides clear user value (printed hard copy for daily records).

Option Cis misleading — the Given-When-Then formatsupportsdiscussions; it doesn’t replace them.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

FromCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.1:

"Acceptance criteria should be testable, meaning they should define expected behavior or measurable outcomes that can be verified."

Option Ais testable because it includesspecific, measurable conditions: response time, user load, and percentage of pages.

Option Bis vague aboutwhich vulnerabilitiesandhow errors are defined.

Option Cusessubjective language("clear and intuitive").

Option Dis vague about what "reasonable accuracy" means.

The best black box test design technique for verifying the accuracy of this user story is equivalence partitioning. Equivalence partitioning is a technique that divides the input domain of a system into classes or groups that are expected to behave similarly. By testing one value from each class, the tester can reduce the number of test cases while still achieving good coverage. In this case, the input domainof the system is the amount of income, which can be divided into classes based on the tax percentage applied to different income ranges. For example, if the tax percentage is 10% for income below 10,000, 20% for income between 10,000 and 20,000, and 30% for income above 20,000, then the equivalence classes are: low income (<10,000), medium income (10,000-20,000), and high income (>20,000). By testing one value from each class, such as 5,000, 15,000, and 25,000, the tester can verify that the system calculates the correct tax percentage for each income range. This technique is more efficient and effective than testing all possible values of income, or testing only one value of income, or testing the states of income entry, or testing the statements in income calculation. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus1, Section 2.3.1, page 19; ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Extension Sample Exam Questions2, Question 5, page 6.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

FromCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.4 and 2.5:

"Due to frequent changes and short iterations, testers must be flexible and responsive. However, keeping up with pace can be a challenge."

Thus,Option Dis correct —testers may strugglewith rapid changes and short feedback loops, which is a known challenge in Agile.

Option Ais false — testers still measurecoverage and report defects.

Option Bmisrepresents TDD —developerstypically write the unit tests in TDD.

Option Cis incorrect —quality is a shared responsibilityin Agile.

The whole-team approach is a principle of agile testing that involves everyone with different knowledge and skills to ensure project success. The whole-team approach means that the business representatives, testers, and developers work together in every step of the development process, from planning to delivery. The whole-team approach aims to enhance communication and collaboration within the team, leverage the various skill sets of the team members, and make quality everyone’s responsibility12. Therefore, the statement C is the most direct advantage of the whole-team approach, as it captures the essence of the principle and its benefits. The other statements are not directly related to the whole-team approach, or are incorrect. Statement A is about continuous integration, which is a practice of agile development that involves having at least once a day an automated build and test process that detects integration errors early and quickly. Continuous integration is not a direct consequence of the whole-team approach, although it may be facilitated by it13. Statement B is about avoiding requirements misunderstandings, which may be a benefit of the whole-team approach, but not the most direct one. The whole-team approach does not only focus on requirements, but also on design, implementation, testing, and delivery. Moreover, avoiding requirements misunderstandings may also depend on other factors, such as the quality of the user stories, the use of acceptance criteria, and the feedback from the customers and users14. Statement D is incorrect, as it contradicts the whole-team approach. The whole-team approach does not reduce the involvement of business representatives, but rather increases it. Business representatives are an integral part of the whole-team approach, as they provide the vision, the value, and the validation of the product. They collaborate with the testers and developers to define the features, prioritize the backlog, and verify the outcomes12. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus1, Section 1.2.1, page 9; What is Whole Team Approach in Agile Testing?2, Section What is Whole Team Approach?; Continuous Integration3, Section What is Continuous Integration?; Effective User Stories - 3C’s and INVEST Guide4, Section The 3 C’s (Card, Conversation, Confirmation) of User Stories.

A testable acceptance criterion is a condition that can be verified or measured objectively by the tester, customer, or stakeholder. It should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART). A testable acceptance criterion should also be written from the user’s perspective, achievable within the sprint, and written before development begins1.

Among the four options, only option C meets these criteria. It is specific (the response time to confirm a customer submission), measurable (must not exceed 5 seconds), achievable (within the technical and business constraints), relevant (to the user’s needs and expectations), and time-bound (must be met in every sprint). It is also written from the user’s perspective, testable (by measuring the response time), and written before development (as part of the user story definition).

Option A is not testable because it is vague and subjective. What does it mean to support business processes? How can this be verified or measured? Option B is also not testable because it is subjective and ambiguous. What does it mean to be easy to use? How can this be verified or measured? Option D is not testable because it is not written from the user’s perspective. It is an internal quality criterion for the testing team, not an acceptance criterion for the product or feature.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

FromCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.2Release and Iteration Planning, it describes Planning Poker as:

"Planning Poker involves group discussion, especially from the highest and lowest estimators, to ensure that different perspectives and assumptions are aligned, which leads to more accurate and shared understanding of the effort involved."

Thus,Option Cis correct — Team B usesdiscussion-based estimation, which is a corebenefitof Planning Poker.

Option Ais speculative — we cannot know the actual effort difference.

Option Bis incorrect — convergence without discussion may indicatelack of engagement or pressure to agree.

Option Dis false — Planning Poker isnot based on averaging, but onconsensus.

 A task management tool is a software application that helps agile teams plan, organize, and monitor their work. A task management tool typically allows the team to create, assign, prioritize, update, and track user stories, tests, and other tasks that are part of the agile project. A task management tool can also provide various views and reports to visualize the progress and status of the project, such as Kanban boards, burndown charts, velocity charts, etc. Some examples of task management tools are Jira, Trello, Asana, and Monday.com12345. References: ISTQB® Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus, Section 2.1.1, page 13; ASTQB Agile Tester Certification Resources, Section 2.1.1, page 13.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

FromCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.1Acceptance Criteria and Testability, acceptance tests must be directly related to thenew functionalitydescribed in the user story.

Option Dis correct — itvalidates the new featureof paying via smartcard credit, specificallyhandling edge cases(e.g., zero credit).

Option Ais incorrect —payment should failwith insufficient credit.

Option Bintroducesrequirements not mentionedin the story.

Option Ctestscredit card logic, not the new smartcard functionality.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

From theCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 5.1, it states:

"The team uses the retrospective to review how they worked during the iteration, including planning accuracy and team collaboration, and to identify actionable improvements."

Thus,Option Dis correct — retrospectives help reflect on iterationplanning accuracy, team dynamics, andefficiencyto improve future iterations.

Option Ais incorrect — retrospectives aim to focus on what the teamcan improve, not just on external hindrances.

Option Bis false — Agile retrospectivesrequire follow-up, often in the form ofaction itemstracked in the next iteration.

Option Cis incorrect —Product Ownerand possibly others may contribute, depending on team context.

 According to the ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, an agile task board is a visual tool that displays the status of the work items in an agile sprint. The task board typically shows the user stories, tasks, and their progress from “to do” to “done”. The task board helps the agile team to monitor and coordinate their work, and to communicate with stakeholders. Therefore, the examples that represent activities that would likely be managed on an agile task board for the third sprint are those that are related to the user stories, tasks, and their progress in the current sprint. Option A is the correct answer, as it contains two examples of such activities: running an acceptance test for a user story, and automating regression tests. These are both tasks that are part of the testing process in the current sprint, and their status can be tracked on the task board. Option B is not a correct answer, as it contains two examples of activities that are not related to the current sprint: designing the features planned for the next sprint, and participating in training in preparation for the fourth sprint. These are both activities that are part of the planning or learning process for the future sprints, and they are not managed on the task board. Option C is also not a correct answer, as it contains two examples of activities that are not related to the current sprint: participating in training in preparation for the fourth sprint, and producing a daily progress report for the agile team members. These are both activities that are part of the learning or reporting process, and they are not managed on the task board. Option D is also not a correct answer, as it contains two examples of activities that are not related to the current sprint: designing the features planned for the next sprint, and producing a daily progress report for the agile team members. These are both activities that are part of the planning or reporting process, and they are not managed on the taskboard. References: ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 2.1.1, page 14; ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 2.1.2, page 15; ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 2.2.1, page 16; ISTQB Tester Foundation Level Agile Tester syllabus, section 2.2.2, page 17.

The 3C concept of user stories consists of three elements: card, conversation, and confirmation12. The card is a written description of the user story that captures the essence of the feature or functionality from the user’s perspective. The conversation is a dialogue between the product owner and the development team to clarify the details, assumptions, and expectations of the user story. The confirmation is a set of criteria or tests that verify that the user story is implemented correctly and meets the user’s needs12. Therefore, by applying the 3C concept, the correct statement is A, as the conversation should include the acceptance criteria discussion. This will help the team to understand the scope, priority, and value of the user story, as well as the conditions of satisfaction that the product owner expects12. The other statements are incorrect, as they violate the 3C concept. Statement B is wrong, as the card should contain the user story, not the requirements. The user story is a brief and informal way of expressing the user’s goal and benefit, while the requirements are more detailed and specific descriptions of how the software should work. The requirements can be added later as part of the conversation or confirmation12. Statement C is wrong, as the product owner has written a user story, but confirmation is still needed. The confirmation is a vital part of the 3C concept, as it ensures that the user story is testable, measurable, and verifiable. The confirmation also helps to avoid ambiguity, misunderstanding, or disagreement between the product owner and the development team12. Statement D is wrong, as the conversation is required and the team should not start developing without it. The conversation is an essential part of the 3C concept, as it allows the team to ask questions, share ideas, and collaborate with the product owner to refine the user story and reach a shared understanding. The conversation also helps to identify the dependencies, risks, and assumptions that may affect the implementation of the user story12. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Agile Tester Syllabus1, Section 2.2.1, page 16-17; Effective User Stories - 3C’s and INVEST Guide2, Section The 3 C’s (Card, Conversation, Confirmation) of User Stories.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

FromCTFL-AT Syllabus v4.0, Section 1.2Fundamentals of Agile Software Development, it states:

"Kanban is a lean approach that uses visualization (typically via a task board) to manage work in progress and improve workflow. Unlike Scrum, iterations in Kanban are optional."

Thus,Option C (Kanban)is correct. It emphasizesvisualizationand doesnot require fixed-length iterations.

Option A (Scrum)is iteration-based.

Option B (Continuous integration)is a practice, not a development approach.

Option D (Slack)is a communication tool, not a methodology.