This project documents a manual API testing effort performed using Postman against the JSONPlaceholder public API.
The goal was to validate core API behavior, response status codes, data structures, and error handling for common GET and POST operations.
Testing was conducted from a Quality Assurance perspective, focusing on both positive and negative scenarios rather than backend implementation details.
- Validate successful data retrieval using GET endpoints
- Validate resource creation behavior using POST endpoints
- Verify correct status codes for valid and invalid requests
- Confirm response body structure and required fields
- Observe API behavior for invalid or unexpected input
- Base URL: https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com
- Endpoints Tested:
GET /postsGET /posts/{id}POST /posts
JSONPlaceholder is a mock API designed for learning and testing purposes. It simulates API behavior but does not persist data or enforce strict input validation.
- Status code validation (200, 201, 404)
- Response body structure validation
- Positive and negative API scenarios
- Handling of invalid endpoints and non-existent resources
- Authentication and authorization testing
- Data persistence verification
- Performance or load testing
- Security testing
- Functional API Testing
- Positive Testing
- Negative Testing
- Error Handling Validation
- Tool: Postman (Desktop)
- Platform: API (No UI)
- Operating System: Windows
This repository contains the following artifacts:
-
Manual API Test Report (PDF)
- Test cases
- Execution results
- Coverage summary
-
Postman Collection
- Saved API requests used during testing
π Files included:
JSONPlaceholder API β Manual API Testing Project.pdfJSONPlaceholder_API_Testing.postman_collection.json
No functional defects were identified during execution of the test cases.
Invalid request scenarios were handled consistently with the expected behavior of the JSONPlaceholder mock API.
Because JSONPlaceholder is a mock API, POST requests accept missing fields and invalid data types without validation.
This behavior was documented and treated as expected for the purposes of this project.
In a real production API, stricter input validation would typically be expected.
Jordyn McIntire Entry-Level QA Engineer GitHub: https://github.com/McIntire22