Testing Your Review Matrix
Before the review matrix goes live on a project, verify that rules assign the correct reviewers for your full range of expected documents. A misconfigured matrix — assigning the wrong reviewers or missing an assignment entirely — creates incorrect approval records that are difficult to correct after the fact.
Using the Test tool
The Review Matrix tab includes a built-in Test tool that simulates which reviewers would be assigned for a specific document scenario.
- Go to Review Matrix in your project.
- Click Test Matrix (top-right).
- In the test panel, enter the document attributes:
| Field | What to enter |
|---|---|
| Discipline | The discipline code (e.g. STR, MEP, ARC) |
| Document type | The document type code (e.g. drawing, specification) |
| Zone | The zone code (e.g. Zone-A, Zone-B) |
- Click Run Test.
The test result shows:
- Which rules matched (rule name, match criteria)
- The merged list of reviewers assigned
- The final approval requirement mode (after conflict resolution)
- The effective SLA (after conflict resolution)
- Rules that did not match (and why — which criterion was not met)
What to test
Work through a matrix for your project by testing the most common and most critical document combinations:
Recommended test cases
| Scenario | Why to test |
|---|---|
| Structural drawing, Zone-A | Most common combination — verify correct structural leads assigned |
| MEP drawing, each zone | Check zone-specific rules are firing correctly per zone |
| Specification for each discipline | Specs may have different reviewers than drawings |
| Document with no matching rule | Confirm the fallback behaviour (open assignment or template default) |
| Cross-discipline document (e.g. coordination drawings) | Verify both discipline rules fire and merge correctly |
| High-priority document | If you have priority-based rules, confirm they trigger |
Testing catch-all rules
If you have catch-all rules (Discipline = Any, Type = Any), test them against specific disciplines to confirm they don't unintentionally override specific rules or add unexpected reviewers.
Interpreting test results
✅ Correct assignment
The test shows the expected reviewer(s) with the expected approval mode and SLA. The rule combination is working correctly.
⚠️ Too many reviewers
The test shows more reviewers than expected — likely a catch-all rule is adding extras. Narrow the catch-all rule's criteria, or add an exclusion condition.
⚠️ Wrong approval mode
The merged approval mode is more or less restrictive than intended. Check whether two conflicting rules are both matching and review the Conflict Resolution merge rules.
❌ No reviewers assigned
No rules matched the test combination. You need to create a rule covering that combination, or verify that the document will fall back to open assignment (which may be acceptable).
When to re-test
Re-run tests whenever:
- You add or modify a rule
- A new discipline, zone, or document type is added to the project
- Project membership changes and reviewers are updated in existing rules (the matrix uses members, not roles, so membership changes can affect assignments)
Validating with a real workflow
After testing with the tool, run a real workflow instance on a test document to confirm the full experience:
- Create a test document in the register.
- Start a workflow instance against it using the review template.
- Confirm the step assignments match what the test tool predicted.
- Cancel the test instance.
This end-to-end check catches edge cases the test tool may not simulate (e.g. template-level overrides that interact with matrix rules).
What's next
- Creating Rules — add or update rules based on test findings
- Conflict Resolution — understand how overlapping rules merge
- Review Matrix Overview — back to the review matrix section