transaction-qa-evidence

Mastercard QA Add-On

🌐 Live site: https://isaac-maya.github.io/transaction-qa-evidence/

A compact transaction-QA evidence sample for the Mastercard Mexico QA Analyst conversation. The pack is small on purpose: validation rigor, traceability, and manager-readable defect framing — not domain claims.

What It Demonstrates In 30 Seconds

• The most interesting QA call in this sample is not the gateway timeout itself; it is that the money fields remain consistent while the operational handoff fails. Catching that distinction is the QA discipline a payments team actually needs.
• The matrix evaluates six transaction-QA dimensions and produces an explicit go / no-go recommendation, not a green-or-red verdict.
• The failure trace, classification, and manager summary all reference the same transaction ID so the artifact reads as one piece of evidence rather than three loose documents.

Pack Contents

• qa_matrix.md: six QA dimensions evaluated against synthetic transaction TXN-2026-0412-8841, with risk and result per dimension and a regression-test design section.
• sample_failure_trace.md: the raw trace, expected-behavior contract, and QA classification table for the same transaction.
• outreach_note.md: short sharing note for the Mastercard Mexico QA Analyst conversation.

Why It Fits Mastercard Mexico QA Analyst

The role centers on validation rigor, transaction quality, defect reporting, and stakeholder-readable QA evidence. This pack hits each of those without claiming insider payments knowledge:

• Validation rigor: six dimensions evaluated individually rather than a single pass/fail line.
• Transaction quality: financial consistency separated from operational consistency — both checked, both reported.
• Defect reporting: classification table with severity, reproducibility, blast radius, and release recommendation.
• Stakeholder readability: the manager summary names the specific operational issue (missing owner on retry handoff) rather than burying it under a generic “transaction failed” label.

Honest Scope

The numbers and trace are synthetic. The pack is not a payments-domain claim; it is a QA discipline claim made on a synthetic but realistic payments context. The strongest evidence in the artifact is the operational-handoff insight — a QA analyst noticing that money consistency does not mean workflow consistency.

Outreach Hook

A compact transaction-QA evidence sample where the lead finding is operational, not financial: the money fields stayed consistent, but the failed capture entered retry_pending without an owner — that is the real defect a QA team should catch.