Back to Blog
PlaybookQa & Middleware

What It Really Takes to Own QA for 1500+ APIs

Most people think API testing is about tools. It's not. It's about architecture, risk, and people.

12 min read
Dec 4, 2024

People often think API testing is a tooling problem.

Install SOATest or Postman, automate some flows, run regression, done.

That mindset works when you have 10 APIs.

It completely collapses when you own 1500+ middleware services powering every non-financial transaction across a Tier-1 bank.

At that scale, QA is no longer about scripts.

It becomes a discipline of architecture, visibility, dependencies, risk scoring, governance, and communication across dozens of teams.

Here's what it actually takes.

1

The First Hard Problem: Nobody Really Knows What Exists

When I took ownership of the Shared Services middleware QA function, we didn't have a single authoritative map of:

Which APIs existed?

Who owned them?

What systems they touched?

What data they required?

Their dependency chain?

Their real business impact?

A bank is like an iceberg.

The APIs you see are a fraction of what's underneath.

So I started with a full API census.

We built a centralized inventory of every middleware API:

Functional description

Request/response schema

Downstream services

Upstream triggers

Authentication type

Risk classification

Business usage frequency

Environment availability

Logging/monitoring readiness

Test coverage status (automated/manual)

Responsible development team

LOB owner

This wasn't documentation.

This was architecture-level visibility.

The immediate value?

For the first time, the bank had a single source of truth for every API dependency touching non-financial workflows.

2

Categorizing APIs by What Actually Matters

Most QA teams categorize APIs by business domain.

That's not enough at middleware scale.

I introduced a categorization framework based on how APIs behave, not just what they do:

1

High-risk transactional APIs

These impact customer trust if they fail.

Examples:

Login validation
Session refresh
Profile updates
Customer lookup

Failure impact: Critical

2

High-dependency orchestration APIs

These trigger long, multi-system chains.

Examples:

Account linking
Address validations
Notification triggers
Security challenges

Failure impact: Cascading outages

3

Static or reference-data APIs

Lower risk, but essential for upstream stability.

Examples:

Config lookups
Branch metadata
Product catalog

Failure impact: Localized

4

Vendor-integrated APIs

External SLA requirements + integration risk.

Examples:

Credit agency lookups
External identity checks

Failure impact: Unpredictable

This categorization changed everything:

  • We stopped treating all APIs the same
  • Regression became risk-based instead of brute force
  • Coverage dashboards actually meant something
  • Automation aligned with business impact
  • Architecture teams used the data for dependency planning

It made QA a strategic function, not a testing checkbox.

3

The Difference Between "Coverage" and "Useful Coverage"

One of the biggest traps in QA at scale is chasing meaningless coverage numbers.

You can have:

  • 90% automation
  • 1000 test cases
  • 20 test suites

…and still not be covering what matters.

So I built a 'Useful Coverage Model' with three pillars:

1. Business Critical Path Coverage

What workflows generate customer-visible risk?

2. Integration Stability Coverage

Which API chains break most often? Which dependencies are fragile?

3. Architecture-Based Coverage

What patterns exist in our system design? Where do failures recur?

This turns QA into a diagnostic function.

We stopped celebrating test count and started focusing on system survivability.

4

Regression Testing at Scale Is NOT About Test Cases — It's About Dependencies

Most people think regression is a giant test suite.

At scale, regression is actually:

Dependency mapping

Data planning

Environment stability

Contract validation

Schema drift detection

Versioning governance

Let me break this down:

1. Contract Validation

Every API has:

  • request schema
  • response schema
  • status codes
  • error models

We implemented automated schema diffing to detect when a team made an unannounced change.

2. Version Drift Tracking

A new version of an API shouldn't break 15 downstream consumers.

We built:

  • "blast radius" prediction
  • consumer impact lists
  • version adoption dashboards

3. Data Orchestration

Middleware QA is impossible without stable data.

We automated:

  • data seeding
  • cleanup
  • environment resets

This alone removed 30–40% of false failures.

4. Dependency Testing

Most outages come from chains, not endpoints.

So we built multi-hop test flows:

API A → API B → API C → downstream service

This caught issues weeks before they reached prod.

5

Keeping Multiple LOBs and Vendors Aligned on Quality

Middleware sits in the middle of everything.

Which means you work with:

Digital Banking

Contact Centre

Fraud

Security

Retail Banking

Enterprise Architecture

3rd-party vendors

Everyone has deadlines. Everyone has a priority. Everyone believes their API is critical.

So I built a Quality Alignment Operating Rhythm:

Weekly:

  • LOB syncs
  • Vendor test progress
  • Risk updates
  • Release readiness alignment

Monthly:

  • Metrics review with leadership
  • Automation ROI review
  • Incident analysis

Quarterly:

  • Release forecasting
  • Capacity and resource planning
  • Architecture-QA alignment

This created predictability, something large organizations desperately need.

6

Dashboards & Metrics That Executives Actually Use

Executives don't want:

  • Test case counts
  • Pass/fail percentages
  • Number of scripts automated

They want visibility into risk.

So I built dashboards that answer questions leadership cares about:

1
Release Readiness Radar

What's blocking the release?

2
System Stability Index

Which APIs are breaking the ecosystem?

3
Automation Maturity Heatmap

Where should we invest next?

4
Dependency Risk Score

Which chains are fragile?

5
SLA Reliability

How stable are vendor APIs?

6
Production Insight Loop

What incidents happened in prod? How do we back-propagate them into test plans?

This transformed QA from reactive to a source of real-time truth for decision-makers.

7

The Real Outcome: A Middleware Platform the Bank Can Trust

Owning QA for 1500+ APIs isn't about testing.

It's about:

  • understanding architecture
  • governing quality for the entire ecosystem
  • leading people across organizations
  • aligning executives around risk
  • building automation that actually prevents outages

What we ultimately delivered was:

A predictable, stable, accountable middleware layer.

And in a bank, that's the difference between:

  • ✔ reliable customer experiences
  • ✔ calm releases
  • ✔ low incident volume
  • ✔ high delivery velocity

…and the opposite.

Final Thoughts

Most people underestimate how much middleware QA shapes the entire bank.

But when your APIs power every customer login, balance inquiry, account update, help desk workflow, and profile verification…

QA becomes an engineering leadership function.

Not a testing function.

This is what it really takes to operate at that level.

Enjoyed This Article?

I write about building reliable systems, leading teams, and shipping products that matter.