Free Practice Questions for MuleSoft MCPA-Level-1 Exam

Explanation

Correct Answer: Build several Bounded Context Data Models that align with coherent parts of the business processes and the definitions of associated business entities.

*****************************************

>> The options w.r.t building API data models using XML schema/ Agile API-centric practices are irrelevant to the scenario given in the question. So these two are INVALID.

>> Building EDM (Enterprise Data Model) is not feasible or right fit for this scenario as the teams and LOBs work in silo and they all have different initiatives, budget etc.. Building EDM needs intensive coordination among all the team which evidently seems not possible in this scenario.

So, the right fit for this scenario is to build several Bounded Context Data Models that align with coherent parts of the business processes and the definitions of associated business entities.

Explanation

Correct Answer: The credentials provided by the IdP for identity management

*****************************************

Explanation

Correct Answer: A CloudHub worker fails with an out-of-memory exception.

*****************************************

>> An AWS Region itself going down will definitely result in an outage as it does not matter how many workers are assigned to the Mule App as all of those in that region will go down. This is a complete downtime and outage.

>> Extended outage of API manager during initial deployment of API implementation will of course cause issues in proper application startup itself as the API Autodiscovery might fail or API policy templates and polices may not be downloaded to embed at the time of applicaiton startup etc... there are many reasons that could cause issues.

>> A network outage onpremises would of course cause the Order Management System not accessible and it does not matter how many workers are assigned to the app they all will fail and cause outage for sure.

The only option that does NOT result in a service outage is if a cloudhub worker fails with an out-of-memory exception. Even if a worker fails and goes down, there are still other workers to handle the requests and keep the API UP and Running. So, this is the right answer.

When a Basic Authentication policy is applied to an API on CloudHub but clients can still access the API without authentication, the likely cause is a missing Autodiscovery element. Here’s how this affects API security:

Autodiscovery in MuleSoft:

The Autodiscovery element is essential for linking an API implementation deployed in CloudHub with its API instance defined in API Manager. This connection allows the policies applied in API Manager, such as Basic Authentication, to be enforced on the deployed API.

Why Option B is Correct:

Without Autodiscovery, the deployed application does not "know" about the policies configured in API Manager, resulting in unrestricted access. Adding Autodiscovery enables the API to enforce the policies correctly.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

Option A (incorrect Exchange version) would not cause bypassing of security policies.

Option C (missing client applications) does not impact authentication policy enforcement.

Option D (worker restart) is irrelevant to policy enforcement.

ReferencesRefer to MuleSoft documentation on Autodiscovery configuration and linking API Manager policies for additional information on setting up secure API policies​.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Create a bounded-context model for the system layer to closely match the backend data model, and add an anti-corruption layer to let the different bounded contexts cooperate across the system and process layers

*****************************************

>> Canonical models are not an option here as the organization has already put in efforts and created bounded-context models for Experience and Process APIs.

>> Anti-corruption layers for ALL APIs is unnecessary and invalid because it is mentioned that experience and process APIs share same bounded-context model. It is just the System layer APIs that need to choose their approach now.

>> So, having an anti-corruption layer just between the process and system layers will work well. Also to speed up the approach, system APIs can mimic the backend system data model.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Model all API resources and methods to closely mimic the operations of the backend system.

*****************************************

>> There are NO fixed and straight best practices while opting data models for APIs. They are completly contextual and depends on number of factors. Based upon those factors, an enterprise can choose if they have to go with Enterprise Canonical Data Model or Bounded Context Model etc.

>> One should NEVER expose the technical details of API implementation to their API clients. Only the API interface/ RAML is exposed to API clients.

>> It is true that the RAML definitions of APIs should be as detailed as possible and should reflect most of the documentation. However, just that is NOT enough to call your API as best documented API. There should be even more documentation on Anypoint Exchange with API Notebooks etc. to make and create a developer friendly API and repository..

>> The best practice always when creating System APIs is to create their API interfaces by modeling their resources and methods to closely reflect the operations and functionalities of that backend system.

Understanding Coarse-Grained vs. Fine-Grained API Design:

A coarse-grained design consolidates multiple operations within a single API, leading to fewer APIs but with more complex implementations. Conversely, a fine-grained design breaks down functionalities into smaller, more specific APIs, resulting in simpler implementations but a larger number of APIs.

Evaluating the Options:

Option A (Correct Answer): With a coarse-grained design, each API handles more functionalities, increasing the complexity of each API implementation as it needs to manage more use cases and logic.

Option B: A coarse-grained design typically reduces the number of APIs, so fewer discoverable assets are available.

Option C: Fewer APIs generally mean fewer connections between them in the application network.

Option D: Network infrastructure usage may actually decrease with fewer APIs, as there are fewer calls between APIs.

Conclusion:

Option A is the correct answer, as the complexity of each API implementation increases in a coarse-grained design due to the consolidation of multiple functionalities into single APIs.

Refer to MuleSoft’s documentation on API design principles and best practices for coarse-grained vs. fine-grained API implementation.

Explanation

Correct Answer:

1. App Developers owns and focuses on Experience Layer APIs

2. LOB IT owns and focuses on Process Layer APIs

3. Central IT owns and focuses on System Layer APIs

References:

https://blogs.mulesoft.com/biz/api/experience-api-ownership/

https://blogs.mulesoft.com/biz/api/process-api-ownership/

https://blogs.mulesoft.com/biz/api/system-api-ownership/

Explanation

Correct Answer: Guarding against Denial of Service attacks

*****************************************

>> Backend system overloading can be handled by enforcing "Spike Control Policy"

>> Logging HTTP requests and responses can be done by enforcing "Message Logging Policy"

>> Credentials can be tamper-proofed using "Security" and "Compliance" Policies

However, unfortunately, there is no proper way currently on Anypoint Platform to guard against DOS attacks.

To achieve the goal of exposing financial data to a new mobile application while following MuleSoft’s best practices, the company should follow an API-led connectivity approach. This approach ensures minimal disruption to existing clients, maximizes reusability, and respects the separation of concerns across API layers.

Explanation of Solution:

Experience APIs for Client-Specific Requirements:

Create two new Experience APIs (EAPI-1 and EAPI-2) for the mobile application, tailored to meet the specific data and format requirements of the mobile application. These APIs encapsulate the client-specific needs and provide a custom interface without impacting other clients.

Process API Layer for Data Transformation:

By adding Mobile PAPI-2, we allow the mobile application to access the required subset of data, formatted according to the mobile application’s requirements. This approach ensures that data transformation and aggregation are handled in the Process layer, maintaining consistency and reusability across different applications.

Reuse of System APIs:

Both the new Mobile PAPI-2 and existing PAPI-1 access data from System APIs (SAPI-1 and SAPI-2), which continue to expose data from each legacy system in a consistent, reusable manner. This avoids duplicating logic and ensures that data access remains centralized and manageable.

Why Option A is Correct:

Option A aligns with MuleSoft’s best practices by isolating client-specific requirements in the Experience layer, utilizing Process APIs for data orchestration and transformation, and maintaining reusable System APIs for backend access.

This approach also ensures that the current API clients are not impacted, as new clients (e.g., the mobile app) interact with newly defined Experience APIs without modifying the existing API setup.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

Option B: This option seems similar but lacks clarity on the separation of mobile-specific requirements and does not explicitly mention data transformation, which is essential in this scenario.

Option C: Creating a single mobile Experience API that exposes a subset of PAPI endpoints directly adds unnecessary complexity and may violate the separation of concerns, as transformation logic should not be in the Experience layer.

Option D: Deploying a new PAPI and using an API Proxy to redirect existing endpoints would add unnecessary complexity, disrupt the current API clients, and increase maintenance efforts.

ReferencesFor additional guidance, refer to MuleSoft documentation on API-led connectivity best practices and best practices for structuring Experience, Process, and System APIs​​.