Platform-App-Builder Salesforce Certified Platform App Builder (Plat-Admn-202) Free Practice Exam Questions (2026 Updated)

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.

===========

The correct answers are B. Assign the page to a combination of apps and profiles, C. Make the page the default homepage for specific apps, and E. Make the page the org default.

When activating Lightning pages, Salesforce supports assigning a page as an org default, assigning it to specific Lightning apps, and assigning it to combinations such as app and profile. Salesforce Trailhead also confirms that Lightning record page activation supports org default, app default, and app/record type/profile assignments.

A is incorrect because Lightning page activation uses profiles, not permission sets, for this assignment model.

D is incorrect because Lightning pages are not activated by role as a standard activation option.

===========

The correct answer is D.

Salesforce allows converting a master-detail relationship to a lookup relationship only when there are no roll-up summary fields on the master object that summarize the detail records. Salesforce documentation states that after a roll-up summary field exists on an object, the object’s master-detail relationship can’t be converted into a lookup relationship.

In this case, if Account has roll-up summary fields based on related Park records, Salesforce blocks the conversion.

A is incorrect because a flow using Account does not normally prevent converting the relationship. B is incorrect because formulas on Park referencing Account are not the primary restriction. C is incorrect because custom objects do not need at least one master-detail relationship for reporting.

===========

The correct answer is C.

A junction object is commonly created with two master-detail relationships. Salesforce documentation states that sharing access to a junction object record is determined by the user’s access to both associated master records and the sharing setting on the relationship fields.

Here, Account Interest is the junction object between Account and Interest. If users do not have read access to the Interest object, they cannot view the Interest records. Because access to the junction object depends on access to both master records, they also cannot view the associated Account Interest records.

Why not others:

A is wrong because lack of read access to Interest does not give read-only access automatically.

B is wrong because the user can still view the Account if they have Account access.

D is wrong because junction object access is not simply “show junction but hide Interest details.”

===========

The correct answers are A. Create owner-based sharing rules that give Read access to the master objects and C. Set Sharing Settings to Read Only on both Master-Detail relationship fields.

A junction object is normally created with two master-detail relationships to represent a many-to-many relationship. Salesforce documentation states that sharing access to a junction object record is determined by the user’s access to both associated master records and the Sharing Setting option on the master-detail relationship fields.

Because the master objects, Seminars and Attendees, have private organization-wide defaults, selected users need record access to those master records. Owner-based sharing rules can grant the selected group Read access to the master object records. Salesforce also documents that organization-wide defaults define baseline record access, and sharing rules are used to extend access when defaults are private or restricted.

The Read Only sharing setting on the master-detail relationship allows users with at least read access to the master records to work with related detail records, assuming they also have the required object permissions on the junction object.

B is incorrect because lookup filters restrict selectable related records; they do not grant record access.

D is incorrect because junction object records in master-detail relationships inherit sharing from the master records. Sharing is not handled directly through an owner-based sharing rule on the junction object.

==========

The primary object of a custom report type is a fundamental design choice and cannot be changed after the report type is saved. Salesforce explicitly states in both the Enhanced and Legacy Custom Report Type Builder documentation that after saving a custom report type, the selected primary object cannot be changed. The primary object determines the base set of records represented by the report type and controls how additional related objects can subsequently be included. Consequently, the app builder must choose the Job Application object deliberately before saving the report type. Deployment does not permanently prevent a custom report type from being deleted, and the other options do not describe the core configuration limitation being tested. Therefore, B is the documented Platform App Builder consideration.

================

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.

The five permissions common to the entire department should be bundled into a permission set group. Salesforce defines permission set groups as a mechanism for combining multiple permission sets around a job persona or role, simplifying assignment and ongoing maintenance. Users assigned to the group receive the combined permissions from its component permission sets. Higher-level staff can then receive the same permission set group plus additional individual permission sets that represent their extra responsibilities. This avoids repeatedly assigning the same five permission sets one-by-one and supports least-privilege access. Data Import Wizard is not the standard administration mechanism for permission-set assignments, and Data Loader is unnecessary for the described configuration. The Manage Assignments approach with a permission set group plus individual exceptions provides the cleanest scalable permissions model.

================

The correct answers are A. Public Groups, D. Roles and Subordinates, and E. Users.

For a custom object with Private sharing, manual sharing is used to open access to selected records on a case-by-case basis. Salesforce manual sharing allows individual records to be shared with users, public groups, and roles. Salesforce Classic manual sharing also lets the user select the type of group, user, role, or territory to add.

B. Private Groups is not the standard Platform App Builder answer here.

C. Permission Set Groups is incorrect because permission set groups grant permissions, not manual record-level sharing.

A permission set is the appropriate way to selectively grant the Salary record type to the hiring manager and VP of HR while other HR users retain ordinary access to applicant records. Salesforce explicitly supports assigning custom record types through permission sets. The base profile can provide the common Applicant object permissions and Hourly record type, while the additional permission set expands Salary record-type availability only for authorized users. This separates record creation capability from record-level visibility. Changing organization-wide defaults would unnecessarily affect who can view applicant records and does not control record-type selection. Simply making Hourly the default also does not prevent users from choosing another record type if they have access to it. Object-level Create permission cannot distinguish between two record types of the same object. Therefore, D provides the required granular access.

================

The correct answer is A.

UC has three Lead sources: web, trade shows, and partners. Some Lead information is common to all, while other fields are unique to each source. The best configuration is to use Lead record types with separate page layouts so each type of Lead shows the fields relevant to that process. Salesforce documentation states that record types allow different business processes, picklist values, and page layouts for different users or record categories.

B is not ideal because it leaves irrelevant fields visible and relies on users to collapse sections. C unnecessarily creates a different Lead object for the partner community. D is incorrect because separate custom objects would fragment Lead management and prevent standard Lead functionality from being used consistently.

===========

The correct answers are C. My Domain must be deployed and D. The component is tagged for record pages instead of home pages.

Salesforce custom Lightning components must be properly configured before they appear in Lightning App Builder. Salesforce Trailhead explains that custom components configured for Lightning App Builder appear in the Lightning Components pane, and the component bundle must be compatible with Lightning App Builder and Lightning pages.

C is correct because Salesforce requires My Domain for adding custom Lightning components in Lightning Experience/App Builder scenarios. Salesforce Help notes that users cannot add a custom Lightning component without enabling and deploying My Domain.

D is correct because Lightning components must be exposed for the correct page type. A component exposed only for record pages will not appear for a Lightning Home page. Salesforce Developer documentation states that lightning__HomePage enables a component to be used on a Home page, while record-page-only configuration is separate.

Why others are incorrect:

A is incorrect because a custom tab is not required to add components to a Lightning Home page.

B is incorrect because “developer permission” is not the normal reason a downloaded component cannot be added to a Lightning Home page.

===========

The correct answer is B. Flow.

The requirement is to show the number of open Cases for both the Account and the Parent Account. This is not a simple native roll-up summary scenario because standard roll-up summary fields are mainly for master-detail relationships, while lookup relationships do not support standard roll-up summary fields.

Salesforce specifically documents Flow examples where a flow looks up the parent account, checks how many open cases it has, and evaluates that count. Salesforce also has guidance for creating roll-up-style summaries using Flow, including a use case to count Cases related to an Account.

Why others are incorrect:

A. Approval Process is for approvals, not counting open Cases.

C. Custom object is unnecessary.

D. Roll-up summary is not the best fit for counting Cases across Account and Parent Account relationships.

===========

The correct answer is A. Make the Opportunity Type a required field on the initial Opportunity page layout and use automation to update the record type based on the Opportunity Type.

The requirement has two phases: first, show users only the fields needed to create the Opportunity; after save, show the full record page based on the Opportunity type. This can be handled by using a required Opportunity Type field first, then automation can update the Opportunity record type. Salesforce page layouts can be assigned by profile and record type, which allows different Opportunity types to show different layouts after the record type is set.

B is incomplete because it only mentions page layouts based on profile, not dynamically changing the layout based on Opportunity Type after creation. C is incorrect because sharing rules control record access, not field display. D relies on users manually expanding sections and does not meet the streamlined requirement.

The correct answers are B. Set organization-wide default to Private, D. Disable Grant Access Using Hierarchies, and E. Create a criteria-based Sharing Rule for the HR Department.

Set the Review object’s OWD to Private so review records are not visible to all employees by default. Organization-wide defaults define the baseline record access users have to records they do not own.

Disable Grant Access Using Hierarchies because this is a custom object and the requirement says only HR and the submitting employee should see the review. Salesforce allows this setting to be disabled for custom objects so managers higher in the role hierarchy do not automatically inherit access.

Create a criteria-based sharing rule for the HR department so HR can see the Review records even though the default access is private. Salesforce sharing rules are used to grant wider access beyond OWD.

Why others are incorrect:

A is not needed and a Master-Detail relationship to User is not the right access-control design.

C is incorrect because removing Review Read permission from non-HR users would also prevent the submitting employee from viewing their own submitted review.

===========

The correct answer is B. Quick action.

Sales reps need to create Opportunity records directly from an Account, with several fields prepopulated. This is an object-specific Quick Action use case. Salesforce states that object-specific actions let users create or update records in the context of a particular object. Salesforce also supports predefined field values for quick actions, which can prepopulate fields and make record creation faster.

Default action is not the correct feature name for this requirement. Custom button and custom link are older navigation-style tools and are not the best Lightning/mobile-friendly option for creating related records with predefined values.

===========

The correct answers are A. Processes that update record owners do not transfer child records and C. Processes will fail on records owned by inactive users.

When Process Builder updates a record owner, Salesforce does not automatically transfer associated child records such as related Contacts or other child records. Salesforce documentation says processes that update owners do not automatically transfer associated items, so separate update actions are required for each related record type.

Also, Salesforce documentation states that processes can’t update records owned by inactive users. If records are still owned by inactive users, automation that tries to update them can fail.

B is not the correct consideration here.

D is not the best answer because the issue described is about ownership-based access to Accounts and Contacts, not simply whether a process version is active.

===========

For an Accounts with Opportunities parent-child report type, Salesforce ' s current documentation confirms that the default report record count is based on the child Opportunity rows , not the number of unique parent Accounts. For example, if one Account has five Opportunities, Salesforce returns five report rows and a record count of five even though only one Account is represented. This occurs because the report output is driven by the child records. Therefore, D most precisely describes the current Salesforce behavior. Option A would incorrectly count unique Accounts, while B suggests both parent and child objects are separately included in the total.

================

A Screen element creates a transaction boundary. In the original design, the Opportunity is created before the second Screen, so that record is committed when the flow reaches the Opportunity Product Screen. If subsequent Opportunity Product creation fails, a Roll Back Records element can roll back only pending changes in the current transaction; it cannot undo the already committed Opportunity from the previous transaction. The solution is therefore to collect both sets of user input first, then create the Opportunity and Opportunity Product in the same transaction after the second Screen. A fault connector from Create Opportunity Product to Roll Back Records then cancels all pending record changes in that transaction. Salesforce explicitly documents using Roll Back Records on a Screen Flow fault path to cancel all pending changes