Most test reports overwhelm stakeholders with unnecessary complexity, making it hard to see what truly matters. Here’s how to create reports with clear, actionable insights that highlight what’s working, what’s broken, and what needs to happen next.
By Testpad
March 4, 2025
Share this article
est reports can make things too complicated. They focus on metrics and statistics that don’t actually help stakeholders to understand if the software is ready to ship. It’s easy for readers to drown in the details, but stakeholders are busy and it’s important that test reports make it quick and easy to see what works and what doesn’t. Here’s how to make that happen.
It’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking that lots of charts, graphs and statistics make a ‘good’ test report. But unless they’re helping readers to get a clear handle on the status of your project, it’s not actually offering any value – and could end up creating confusion rather than clarity.
Test reporting, after all, is supposed to tell us about the state of the product. A report that shows the product is 80% passing doesn’t tell you anything about the state of your product – it doesn’t tell you what is passing or (perhaps more importantly) what isn’t passing.
That’s why it’s so important to step away from lengthy documentation and graphs and instead embrace clear, actionable insights. Effective reporting should clearly show what’s broken as well as what’s been confirmed as working. This gives stakeholders concrete visibility of testing coverage that they simply can’t get from charts and abstract metrics.
What, then, should a test report include? Well, there are endless things you could include but in our view, the key is to keep it simple. Rather than just documenting everything, that means focusing on:
Remember, if stakeholders can’t quickly understand the status of testing, the report isn’t doing its job. So while it’s important to structure the report clearly to make it easier to understand, the devil’s in the detail.
You could consider including the following sections in your report to make it more useful and practical:
This should be a high-level overview of what’s been tested, and why it matters. It’s tempting to introduce charts and graphs here, but there’s no need. Keep it brief and focused on key outcomes, rather than getting bogged down in the numbers that don’t tell stakeholders what they need to know.
There’s nothing wrong with bug reporting – it’s just important that it’s not simply a list of bugs without any further context. It’s best to list the bugs alongside their impact, priority level, and the action that needs to be taken.
A key part of the report is showing both what’s been tested and what hasn’t. You should list out the functional areas of the software that’s been tested, and those which haven’t, as well as the type of testing. This is important to help stakeholders understand how complete the testing is, and whether there are any gaps in what’s been tested.
Of the features that have been tested, you should show what passed (known as verified functionality) and what failed.
But, crucially, instead of just showing what has or hasn’t been tested, you should also highlight key actions. This is where the test details come in. If a feature hasn’t passed, for example, why hasn’t it passed? And what needs to be done to make sure it does pass next time? These types of details are essential to include, as they highlight what the next steps should be.
So, should a test report be the final report? In a word: no. Modern testing demands real-time insights, and static, end-of-cycle reports simply can't keep up with today's development pace.
Your reporting approach should reflect this, bringing in elements of live reporting (this could be dashboards or automated updates for example), to make sure that everyone is kept up to date on project progress, in real time.
Tools like JIRA, TestRail, Testpad and even shared spreadsheets offer real-time visibility into testing progress, with the ability to track testing as it happens. This means:
Live reporting is particularly useful in certain situations, such as:
That’s not to say that there isn’t a place for final reports – they can also serve a purpose. They can act as an important part of the audit trail for compliance requirements, and can be a place to document lessons learned for future projects.
So by all means, create a final report for formal documentation needs. But in day-to-day test reporting, it’s important to move away from static reports that become outdated quickly.
Another important reason to include live reporting is that it helps to build stakeholder confidence. When stakeholders can see testing progress in real-time, they're not left wondering what's happening behind the scenes.
Clear, consistent updates show that testing is thorough and thoughtful, not just a checkbox exercise. Stakeholders are more likely to trust both the testing process and the final results when they can see:
This can be especially beneficial if things go wrong. If stakeholders are already getting regular updates, it means that issues won’t come out of the blue – and they’re also more likely to understand the steps that need to be taken to resolve the problem.
Live updates can be incredibly helpful for building stakeholder trust and confidence – but these updates need to be effortless to generate, or they won't happen consistently. And that could lead to even more stakeholder frustration.
So what do you need to create a simple, effective test report – and how can you go about it?
It’s a good idea to ask yourself some key questions:
These three questions can give you the foundations you need to build your report. Whether you use a traditional test management tool, collaborative spreadsheets, simple dashboarding tools, or JIRA, making sure to always keep these questions in mind will help you to build a clear report that keeps your stakeholders informed with the information they need, when they need it.
We’re biased, but we think Testpad does it pretty well. In Testpad, reports present the full list of test prompts, with results shown in a grid of checks (green) and crosses (red) against each prompt. It might sound like a lot of information to wade through, but it’s surprisingly quick and intuitive to scan. That means that readers can immediately see what’s working as well as what’s not.
The report also includes all comments and issue numbers that have been captured during testing, meaning that the essential context and evidence is right there. There’s no need to cross-reference separate bug tracking systems – everything you need to understand and act on test results is all there in one place.
Test prompts are also structured in an organized hierarchy. That gives the report a natural structure, making it immediately obvious how thoroughly different areas of the product have been tested. It means stakeholders won’t get lost in an unstructured list, or be left to interpret abstract metrics – the information is all there upfront, with additional background detail and actions to take if they want to understand further.
And with these three simple features, you’ll have a clear test report that’s a living, breathing document, and can be easily understood by anyone – whatever their job role.
If you liked this article, consider sharing
EDITORIALS
Software testing is about discovery. It involves exploring software to understand its quality and giving stakeholders the information they need to make better decisions. But testing can veer off course.
EDITORIALS
Don’t overcomplicate reporting test results. While it might seem simple to present metrics and statistics in charts and graphs, they don’t actually tell you what you really need to know about what’s working and what isn’t.
EDITORIALS
Most teams wait too long to hire testers, only to watch customers discover bugs that seemed obvious in hindsight. Adding just one tester earlier than you think could be the difference between a smooth launch and watching your users trust crumble.