Curious: Is there a better way to capture steps during manual testing?

Reading this from the side of the handoff. I’m a backend dev, so usually I’m one receiving these artifacts, not making them.

@oxygenaddict split between the notes you keep for yourself and what actually goes into the report is a good one.
And leaving aside the eternal frontend vs backend fight about where the bug really leaves :slight_smile: the “too thin vs too heavy” thing matches what I see. For me the - the missing part is usually not the steps. It is the time. Screenshots and list of clicks tell me what you did, that forces me repeat your steps.
Honestly the most useful thing I ever get is three lines:

  • timestamp+tz
  • request/trace/correlation id(s)
  • environment
    Turns an hour of “can’t reproduce” into the log query. That’s it. Most of the time I do not need to replay.

Does that match your side? when something comeback as “can’t reproduce”, what do the devs usually end up asking you for?