Summary
The requirement involves creating a legally binding signature process for a pre-built document. This goes beyond simply generating a PDF or sending an email. It requires managing a DocuSign envelope, which is the container for the document, recipient roles, signing order, and tracking the entire signature lifecycle. The correct action must handle the specific DocuSign template, pre-fill its fields with quote data, and orchestrate the multi-recipient signing workflow.

Correct Option

A. DocuSign Envelope Action
This is the correct and comprehensive solution. The DocuSign Envelope Action is specifically designed for this purpose. It allows the OmniScript to create a DocuSign envelope using a pre-defined template. The action can map data from the OmniScript (the quote details) into the template's pre-fill fields and then send it to one or more recipients in a specified sequence for electronic signature, fully automating the required workflow.

Incorrect Option

B. PDF Action
The PDF Action only converts an OmniScript into a static PDF document. It does not integrate with DocuSign to manage recipients, send documents for signature, or track the signing status. It simply creates a file, which would then require a separate, manual process to be sent through DocuSign.

C. DocuSign Signature Action
This action type is used for embedding a simple, ad-hoc signature capture directly within the OmniScript interface. It is not designed for sending a pre-filled DocuSign template to multiple external recipients via email for a formal signature process. It lacks the envelope and template management capabilities required here.

D. Email Action
The Email Action can only send standard emails. It cannot pre-fill a DocuSign template, create a legally binding signature envelope, manage multiple signers, or track the signature process. It is used for communication, not for executing a structured e-signature workflow.

Reference
Salesforce OmniStudio Developer Guide: DocuSign Envelope Action

Summary
The card layout displays a single Account with multiple related Contacts. Each card combines the parent Account data with one of its child Contacts. The correct JSON structure must represent this one-to-many relationship in a way that the card layout can iterate over. The standard pattern is an array of objects, where each object contains both the parent record fields and the fields for a single child record.

Correct Option

C. Option C
This is the correct structure for a card layout with a one-to-many relationship. It presents an array of two objects. Each object contains:

The parent Account data (Name: "Acme", Phone: "2221546450")

The specific child Contact data for one record (e.g., ContactName: "Eduard Stancs", ContactCellPhone: "(212) 154-8562")

This format allows the card layout to create one card for each element in the outer array, with each card displaying the repeating Account information alongside a unique Contact.

Incorrect Option

A. Option A
This structure is invalid and illogical. It places the single Account object inside the same structure as the multiple Contact objects. A card layout using this would be unable to correctly associate one Account with multiple Contacts for iterative display, as the Account is not a peer to the Contacts in the array.

B. Option B
This structure is invalid JSON (mismatched brackets) and conceptually flawed. It tries to put the AccountPhone and AccountName at the same level as the Contact array, but not as a structured object. More importantly, it does not provide a clear, iterable array where each element contains the combined Account and Contact data needed to render individual cards.

Reference
Salesforce OmniStudio Developer Guide: FlexCard Data Sources

Summary
The issue is that the Customer node in the JSON structure is an array (indicated by the square brackets []), not a single object. To access a field from a specific record within an array, you must specify the index of that record using the pipe and index syntax |index. Array indices start at 0, so the first element in the array is at index 0. The correct merge field syntax in an OmniScript Text Block uses percent signs %%...%%.

Correct Option

C. To %%Details:Customer|0:ID%%
This is the correct merge field syntax. Details:Customer|0:ID breaks down as follows:

Details: The parent node.

Customer: The array node.

|0: The index specifier, targeting the first element in the Customer array.

ID: The target field within that specific array element.

Using %%...%% is the correct syntax for merge fields in an OmniScript Text Block.

Incorrect Option

A. To %sDetails: Customer|0: ID$
This uses incorrect delimiters. The correct delimiters for a merge field in an OmniScript Text Block are percent signs %%...%%, not a mix of %s and $.

B. To %Details: Customer|1: ID%
While the syntax |1 is valid for accessing the second element in an array (since indices start at 0), the provided JSON structure shows only one object in the Customer array. Therefore, index 1 is out of bounds, and no data would be found.

D. To %Details: Customer|n: ID%
Using |n is not valid syntax. The index must be a specific numerical value (e.g., 0, 1, 2) to pinpoint a single element within the array. The placeholder n will not resolve and will cause the merge field to fail.

Reference
Salesforce OmniStudio Developer Guide: Merge Fields

Summary
To pass all records from a parent FlexCard to a child FlexCard, the developer must reference the correct data context node from the parent's data source. The parent FlexCard's query typically returns a collection of records, which is stored in a default node. The child component needs access to this entire collection to display it in its own DataTable.

Correct Option

B. {Records}
This is the correct node to use. In a parent FlexCard, the {Records} node represents the root array of records returned by the card's DataRaptor or query. By setting this as the source in the parent's action configuration, the entire collection of records is passed to the child card. The child card can then bind its DataTable directly to the received parameter, which will now contain the full set of data.

Incorrect Option

A. {Records[0]}
This syntax refers only to the first record ([0]) within the {Records} array. Passing this would send a single object representing the first record to the child card, not the entire collection. The child's DataTable would not have the full list of records to display.

C. {Params.records}
The Params namespace is used within a child component to access data passed into it. In the parent card's configuration, you reference your own local data context ({Records}), not a Params object. Using {Params.records} in the parent would imply the parent is expecting to receive data, which is the reverse of the intended data flow.

D. {recordId}
This node typically contains a single record ID string, used for filtering or as a context identifier. It does not contain the collection of records needed to populate a DataTable in the child card. Passing {recordId} would only send a single ID value.

Reference
Salesforce OmniStudio Developer Guide: Configure Actions for a FlexCard

Explanation

This question tests your understanding of the critical difference between versioning and cloning an OmniStudio component, specifically a FlexCard. The decision hinges on whether you want to replace the existing component or create a new, parallel one.

Let's clarify the concepts:
Versioning: Creating a new version of an existing FlexCard. When this new version is activated, it replaces the old version everywhere it is used. Any Layout or App Page that references the FlexCard will automatically start using the newly activated version. This is used for updates, bug fixes, and improvements to the same component.

Cloning: Creating a completely new, separate FlexCard with a different name. The original FlexCard remains untouched and unchanged. This is used when you need a different variation of a card to be used in a new context, alongside the original.

Now, let's analyze the options:

A. The new version of the FlexCard will be used in a new Console, and the current version of the FlexCard should remain unchanged.
This scenario describes a need for cloning. Since the current version must remain unchanged, you cannot replace it with a new version. You need a separate, independent card.

B. Another team member is developing new actions, fields, and styling for the current version of the FlexCard.
This describes a development workflow. The act of creating a new version for development is standard, but the reason for the final activation would be to deploy those changes to all users, which aligns with versioning. However, the core reason in the question is about the deployment outcome, and this option doesn't explicitly state that outcome. Option D is a more direct and definitive reason.

C. The new and current versions will be displayed together on the same target.
This is a definitive reason for cloning. If both the old and new designs need to exist simultaneously on the same page or layout, they must be two separate, uniquely named components. Versioning would replace the old one, making this impossible.

D. All instances of the FlexCard must be updated with the changes.
This is the correct and primary reason for choosing versioning. If the goal is to universally update the card—for example, to change a field label for all users in all contexts where the card is used—then you must create a new version. Activating this new version will push the label change to "all instances of the FlexCard" automatically.

Summary / Reference
The decision-making process is straightforward:
- Use Versioning when you are making a change that should apply globally to every place the component is used. You are maintaining a single source of truth.
- Use Cloning when you need to create a new, independent variant of the component that will exist alongside the original.

Therefore, the factor that leads a developer to version a FlexCard is the requirement that all existing instances must receive the update.