Ursa Major Solar has a lookup relationship between a custom `Galaxy_` object and a custom `Star_` object. An app builder wants to create a roll-up summary field that counts the total number of `Star_` records related to each `Galaxy_` record. How would the current configuration impact the ability to achieve the desired result?
Answer : B
A roll-up summary field requires a master-detail relationship. Since Galaxy__c and Star__c currently have a lookup relationship, the app builder cannot create a standard roll-up summary field to count related Star__c records. The lookup must be converted to master-detail first, with Galaxy__c as the master and Star__c as the detail. Salesforce Trailhead confirms that roll-up summary fields display values on the master record based on directly related detail records in a master-detail relationship.
===========
Universal Containers has deployed custom tabs to production via change sets, without including the profile settings or permission sets. What is the setting for the visibility of custom tabs?
Answer : A
The correct answer is A.
When custom tabs are deployed through change sets without profile settings or permission sets, the deployed custom tabs are hidden by default for all users. Salesforce Help states that deployed custom tabs are hidden by default unless the change set also includes profiles that set the tab visibility.
Tab visibility is controlled through profile or permission set tab settings such as Default On, Default Off, and Tab Hidden.
Why others are incorrect: B and C are incorrect because the tabs are not automatically default off or default on for all users. D is incorrect because the custom tabs are deployed; they are just not visible until access is configured.
===========
A custom field on an account is used to track finance information about a customer. Only members of the finance team have access to this field However, the business wants to allow one customer service agent, who is assigned the Customer Service profile, read-only access to this field for special Circumstances. What is the recommended solution to grant the customer service agent access to the field?
Answer : B
The correct answer is B.
This is a one-user exception. Salesforce recommends using permission sets to extend access without changing the user's base profile. A permission set can grant read-only field access through field-level security to just the selected customer service agent. Salesforce documentation explains that permission sets extend user access, and field permissions control whether users can view or edit individual fields.
Why others are incorrect: A creates a new profile for one user, which is not the recommended scalable solution. C is not accurate because field-level security is assigned through profiles or permission sets, not directly to one user from the field alone. D would give all users with the Customer Service profile read-only access, not only the single agent.
===========
An app builder needs to create new automation on an object. Which best practice should the app builder follow when building out automation?
Answer : D
This question is testing the classic Salesforce Process Builder automation best practice, not a generic Flow-only rule. Salesforce's official process design guidance states that an org should have only one record-change process per object. The reason is simple: every time a record is created or updated, Salesforce evaluates the record-change processes for that object. If an object has multiple record-change processes, the automation becomes harder to predict, harder to troubleshoot, and more likely to hit governor limits. Salesforce specifically explains that consolidating automation into one record-change process gives admins a single view of all criteria and actions for that object, reduces duplicated automation overhead, and allows the app builder to control the order of criteria evaluation.
A is not the best exam answer here. In modern Flow architecture, ''one Flow per object'' is often discussed as a design pattern, but it is not the exact best-practice wording being tested by this Platform App Builder-style question. Salesforce Flow design is more nuanced today because record-triggered flows can vary by trigger timing and event. B is wrong because validation rules should be separated by validation requirement, not forced into one rule per object. C is wrong because invocable processes are reusable modular processes, not the main record-change automation container.
An app builder is loading data into Salesforce. To link the new records back to the legacy system, a field will be used to track the legacy ID on the Account object. For future data loads this ID will be used when upsetting records. Which two field attributes should be selected? Choose 2 answers
Answer : B, C
The correct answers are B. External ID and C. Unique.
The legacy ID field should be marked as External ID because Salesforce can use an external ID field to match records during import, integration, and upsert operations. Salesforce documentation confirms that external IDs can be used to create or update records through upsert.
The field should also be marked Unique so Salesforce prevents duplicate legacy ID values. Salesforce custom field attribute documentation states that the Unique option prevents duplicate field values.
Why others are incorrect: A is incorrect because encrypted text is not the right choice for a matching legacy ID used in upserts. D is not the best answer because making the field required does not enable upsert matching or prevent duplicate external IDs.
===========
Cloud Kicks (CK) wants to set up a custom child object to track gift cards issued to a customer. A key requirement is to track the total number of gift cards opened and gift cards issued on an Account. CK wants to permanently ensure the gift cards are unable to be moved across any other Account once it is created. On the gift card object, which field type should be created to support this requirement?
Answer : B
The correct answer is B. Master-detail relationship.
Cloud Kicks needs two things: count Gift Card records on the Account and prevent Gift Cards from being moved to another Account after creation. A master-detail relationship supports both requirements.
First, master-detail enables a roll-up summary field on Account to count related Gift Card records. Salesforce documentation confirms that roll-up summaries work from detail records up to the master record.
Second, master-detail relationships prevent reparenting by default. Salesforce documentation states that records cannot be reparented in master-detail relationships by default, although admins can allow reparenting if they choose.
A is incorrect because a lookup relationship does not support standard roll-up summary fields and does not permanently lock the parent Account by default. C is incorrect because roll-up summary is a field on the parent Account, not the relationship field type on Gift Card. D is incorrect because a formula cannot count related child records or enforce parent locking.
Universal Containers has several new fields they've requested for the Opportunity Product object. What should an app builder be able to configure using a formula field?
Answer : A
The correct answer is A. A hyperlink to the parent Account of the parent Opportunity.
A formula field can use cross-object references to parent records, and Salesforce states that cross-object formulas can reference fields from objects up to 10 relationships away. Since Opportunity Product relates to Opportunity, and Opportunity relates to Account, a formula on Opportunity Product can reference the parent Opportunity's Account.
Salesforce also supports the HYPERLINK() formula function, which creates a clickable link from specified link text to a specified URL. So a formula field can be configured to create a hyperlink to the Account record related to the parent Opportunity.
B is incorrect because formula field data types do not include Rich Text Area as a formula return type. C is incorrect because Salesforce restricts formulas from using long text area, encrypted, or Description fields. D is not the best verified answer because large cross-object concatenations can run into formula relationship, size, or complexity limits, while the clearly supported Platform App Builder use case here is the cross-object HYPERLINK formula.
===========