Inputting invalid index outputs ‘format errorʼ instead of specifying reason for invalidity

[jyztintan]

When an invalid (negative) index is entered, the application displays a generic error message "wrong format" without specifying that the index is invalid. This lack of specificity can lead to user confusion, as they are not guided on how to correct their entry.

Rationale: Non-specific error messages can lead to increased user frustration and time wasted on trial and error, significantly impacting user experience and efficiency.

[nus-pe-script]

Team's Response

We agree that your approach is valid, but we believe that our approach is equally valid. Hence, we would put this as NotInScope.

In addition, your example has more than one error in the command - negative index and missing fields. We choose to prioritize raising the fact that fields are missing because a. we believe this is a more significant error and b. with missing fields the user may not know the command format, so showing them the entire command format would be beneficial.

We understand that we can choose to raise negative index as an error first, in this case but we believe our approach is better due to the above reasons. Hence, NotInScope.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.NotInScope]

• [ ] I disagree

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

---

## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.Low`] Originally [`severity.Medium`] - [ ] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** [replace this with your explanation]

---