SAP QA, release, and transformation teams that need a smaller defensible test scope and evidence connecting every case to the change.
How to combine test generation, impact selection, execution receipts, and coverage gaps without assuming that generated cases or a green external job prove complete business validation.
Decision context
Test automation becomes expensive when teams automate a large static regression pack but cannot explain which cases matter for a particular change. The opposite failure is worse: selecting too little because dependency, requirement, data, or process evidence was missing.
Adranum uses observed dependencies, findings, requirements, process variants, implementation files, and program mode to select impacted cases. It creates acceptance, regression, semantic, reconciliation, and mode-specific tests with traceable reasons for inclusion.
Execution belongs at the customer boundary. The signed runner verifies the exact package hash, installation receipt, compile state, runtime state, per-case results, and reconciliation output. Coverage gaps remain explicit and can block release under policy.
What the workflow must cover
- Impact-based selection. Relate changed components to callers, interfaces, requirements, process activities, data objects, and prior tests. Include the selection reason with each case.
- Generated test assets. Create ABAP Unit, Gherkin, acceptance, regression, semantic, and reconciliation assets bound to the implementation manifest.
- Customer-run execution. Validate package identity before installation and return signed compile, runtime, case, and reconciliation outcomes.
- Coverage-gap control. Show requirements, components, variants, and failure modes that lack a test. Policy can prevent approval while critical gaps remain.
Implementation workflow
Start with a bounded customer scenario and explicit acceptance criteria. Preserve native SAP permissions and accountable review while the software creates a repeatable evidence chain.
- Import requirements and existing test evidence.
- Map the proposed change and its dependencies.
- Select and generate impacted cases.
- Review gaps and bind the test set to the package hash.
- Execute customer-locally and attach every result to the release decision.
Evidence to require
A transformation claim should resolve to observable artifacts, decisions, and execution receipts. Ask for the following evidence in a representative evaluation:
- Change-to-test reason
- Requirement coverage
- Component coverage
- Package and case hashes
- Installation receipt
- Compile and runtime results
- Reconciliation results
- Known untested boundaries
Boundaries and non-claims
Adranum separates analysis, proposal, human review, package creation, customer-local validation, and production execution. A later state never rewrites the evidence that supported an earlier decision.
- Generated tests require accountable customer review.
- Adranum does not claim complete coverage when source, process, or requirement evidence is absent.
- The product complements rather than replaces native SAP and specialist automation tools.
Buyer checklist
- Why was each test selected?
- Which requirements and components have no case?
- Can execution prove it used the approved package?
- Are retries idempotent and recorded?
- Can a failed reconciliation block release?