Pass the Salesforce Revenue Cloud Consultant AP-223 Questions and answers with ExamsMirror

The user story states that sales users should inherit previously negotiated pricing when quoting for existing customers.

In Salesforce CPQ, the object that stores account-specific negotiated prices is:

Contracted Pricing (SBQQ__ContractedPrice__c)

This object overrides standard list prices during quoting based on:

Account

Product

Pricebook

Contract linkage

Therefore, in addition to migrating Accounts, Contracts, and Quotes, the missing legacy pricing data must be loaded into Contracted Pricing.

User Story“As a pricing manager, bulk discounts must include previously purchased quantities for pricing calculations on the quote to reward loyal customers.”

This refers to historical purchases influencing tiered or volume discounts.

In Salesforce CPQ, the only native feature that supports “include prior purchases when calculating discount tiers” is:

✔ Discount Schedules with Cross Orders enabledThis setting tells CPQ to:

Look at existing subscriptions, assets, orders, and previous quote lines

Aggregate prior quantities

Apply tiered volume discount based on the total owned quantity + new quantity

But for Cross Orders functionality to work…

✔ Historical Subscriptions / Assets must existSo you must migrate historical:

Contracts

Subscriptions

Assets (if asset-based ordering)

Without that data, CPQ cannot aggregate historical quantities.

Correct answer: B and E✔ B — Populate Contracts, Subscriptions, and Assets with historical dataCPQ needs these to calculate previously purchased quantities.

✔ E — Discount Schedules with Cross Orders checkedThis is the actual feature that uses prior purchased amounts to determine discount tiers.

Why the other options are not correct:Option

Why Incorrect

A — Custom Action

Unnecessary. CPQ has native Cross Orders behavior.

C — Summary Variable

Summary variables do not summarize external historical purchases.

D — Migrate Orders & Invoices

Not required for CPQ pricing. Only Subscriptions/Assets matter.

Before a scoping session, the consultant should understand:

A – Sample proposals → reveals quoting format, pricing models, product structure.

B – Product brochures → clarifies offerings, catalog categories, bundles.

D – Approval matrix → shows governance controls required in CPQ.

Incorrect:

C Salesforce release notes are irrelevant to understanding customer requirements.

E Financial statements do not contribute to CPQ/Billing scoping.

Correct answers: A, B, D.

Requirement:

Product may be taxable or tax-exempt depending on a custom field (Industry).

In Salesforce Billing:

Tax rules determine whether a product line is taxable or exempt.

Tax rules can be driven by custom logic using:

Custom fields

Flow

Apex

Determination scripts

Therefore:

✔ C. Use automation to set the Tax Rule based on the custom field.Why not the others?Option

Why Incorrect

A. Tax Treatment

Outputs tax result, but the rule determining taxability is the Tax Rule, not Tax Treatment.

B. Billing Rule

Controls invoice schedule, NOT taxability.

D. Revenue Recognition Rule

Controls revenue, not tax.

Thus C is the only valid solution.

In Salesforce CPQ + Billing (Revenue Cloud), heavy use of cross-object formula fields can create serious performance, calculation, and reliability issues. Salesforce product documentation and CPQ study guides highlight several risks related to:

Quote calculation engine performance

SOQL query depth

Runtime evaluation limits

Data availability timing during synchronous calculations

Below is the breakdown of the options:

✅ A. Formula field data is not always available during CPQ quote calculationCorrect.

Salesforce CPQ reads values at calculation time, but cross-object formula fields may:

Not resolve in time if they depend on parent records updated within the same transaction

Return stale values because formula evaluation is not recalculated in real time mid-calculation

Fail during QCP or price rule evaluation due to record access/state issues

This is a known risk documented in CPQ technical architecture guidance.

❌ B. Formula fields have unlimited access to object many relationships away which makes it vulnerable to data changes.Incorrect.

Formula fields do NOT have unlimited access. They are limited to 10 relationship levels.

While data changes on parent objects can affect formula results, this is not a primary risk emphasized in Revenue Cloud implementation guidance.

Therefore, not one of the three correct risks.

✅ C. They are computationally expensive.Correct.

Formula fields—especially cross-object ones—are recalculated at runtime every time:

The referenced record is queried

CPQ calculator reads them during price rule evaluation

Billing processes (Invoice Run, Usage Rating, etc.) reference them

This can significantly slow down:

Quote calculations

Order/Invoice generation

Any multi-object SOQL-heavy logic

This is a well-known performance risk.

✅ D. They can easily exceed limits if not carefully designed and testedCorrect.

Cross-object formulas contribute to:

SOQL query depth limits

CPU time limits

Formula size complexity

Relationship depth limits

In CPQ/Billing, where Quote and Quote Line processing already push platform limits, too many formula fields can cause:

Calculation failures

Invoice/Order creation errors

Apex limit exceptions

Salesforce documentation warns against heavy formula usage for precisely these scalability concerns.

❌ E. Formula fields are editable, after calculation a user/process can overwrite the valueIncorrect.

Formula fields are never editable by users or automation.

Their values are dynamically calculated from their formula expressions.

Therefore, this option is not a valid risk.

The requirement:

Sales reps want to view net totals per product family at the quote level.

The admin created 3 price rules with summary variables → each rule sums net totals for a product family and writes to a quote field.

However, while this works, it is NOT optimal for performance.

Salesforce CPQ documentation clearly identifies Summary Variables + Price Rules as one of the most CPU-intensive parts of the Quote Calculator, especially when multiple rules are evaluated on large quotes.

✔ Why C is the correct answerUsing Quote Line Groups provides built-in auto-summary fields, including:

Group Total

Group Discount

Group Net Total

Group List Total

etc.

And importantly:

CPQ allows summary rollups from groups to quote-level fields automatically without running price rules.

Zero price rule executions → lower CPU usage

Faster calculation because summary variables do not have to iterate across all quote lines

Native functionality is always more performant than custom rules

Cleaner design: assign each product family to its own Quote Line Group

Benefits:This matches Salesforce CPQ’s recommended best practice:

Use Quote Line Groups for logical grouping and auto-summaries instead of summary-variable-based price rules whenever possible.

The customer asks for customization because of a legacy system process.

Salesforce methodology says:

First validate whether the requirement is truly necessary in Salesforce or whether the legacy process should be transformed.

Therefore, the first step is:

✔ A — Ask follow-up questions to ensure the legacy process has business justificationYou must determine:

Why the process exists today

Whether it is needed in the new system

Whether CPQ or Billing already support the requirement natively

Whether it introduces unnecessary technical debt

Only after justification should you:

Consider customization

Estimate hours

Add developers or change orders

Thus, A is the correct first step.

ARR__c exists on Quote Line (SBQQ__QuoteLine__c) and must appear on:

Opportunity Line Item for pipeline reporting

Salesforce CPQ automatically syncs Quote → Opportunity Line Item when:

The field exists on both objects

The Field API Name and Field Type match

This requires zero automation, no flow, no price rules.