We Didn’t Need More Tests-We Needed Better Boundaries
Article summary
Our coverage was high. Bugs still shipped. We had unit tests, integration tests, and even a few end-to-end suites. But production issues kept happening. Not because we didn’t test-but because our tests weren’t scoped to the right boundaries. It wasn’t a coverage problem. It was a boundary problem. What Went Wrong with Our Testing Approach At first glance, our test coverage looked solid. But: Our unit tests mocked too much and trusted too little Our integration tests crossed too many layers and blurred ownership Our end-to-end tests passed while services silently broke inside We had tests. But we didn’t have trust. The real issue: we hadn’t defined clear boundaries between components, domains, and responsibilities. So our tests didn’t know what to protect-or what to assume. What We Did Differently 1.
Read Full Article on MediumPractical takeaway
The main idea behind We Didn’t Need More Tests-We Needed Better Boundaries is to help teams move from broad theory to clear, repeatable decision making. When teams apply this thinking, they reduce ambiguity and focus on improvements that deliver measurable momentum.
Example scenario
Imagine a team facing competing priorities. By applying the ideas in We Didn’t Need More Tests-We Needed Better Boundaries, they can map dependencies, identify risks and choose the next move that produces progress without destabilizing their system.
Common mistakes to avoid
- Trying to redesign everything instead of taking small steps.
- Ignoring real constraints like incentives, ownership or legacy systems.
- Creating documents that do not lead to any change in code or decisions.
How to apply this in real work
Start by identifying where We Didn’t Need More Tests-We Needed Better Boundaries already shows up in your architecture or delivery flow. Then pick one area where clarity would reduce friction. Apply the idea, measure its effect and share the learning.
Signs you are doing it correctly
- Teams make decisions faster and with fewer disagreements.
- Architectural conversations become clearer and less abstract.
- Changes land safely with fewer surprises or rework cycles.