QA Automation Engineer | Developer Background (.NET, Swift) | API & Mobile Test Automation
I used to celebrate when test coverage hit 80%. It looked great in reports. But then I realized most of those tests didn’t mean anything. They didn’t catch real bugs. They just repeated logic. A good test doesn’t mirror code — it explains why the code exists. Now I write fewer tests, but each one tells a story. “When this feature fails, what value is at risk?” That question changed how I think about testing. I used to see QA as a final step — something that happens after coding. Now I see it differently. QA isn’t a phase. It’s a perspective. It’s about designing for quality from the very first line of code. When you start thinking like a tester, you ask better questions: What could go wrong here? How will this behave under stress? What happens if the user does the unexpected? That’s when testing becomes learning, not checking. Because quality starts in the mind — not in the test suite. What makes a test valuable for you? #softwaretesting #qa #qualityengineering
I have over 1000 testcases for release regression in about 2 weeks. The QA team covers the testcases but the outcome is quite different. Almost all new bugs logged are not from the testcases. Test coverage is one thing. Find real bug is another thing.
Automation needs to cover the critical path and ensure that BAU is maintained. Less common scenarios should also be covered, edge cases are a nice to have. Pre-release test cases should guarantee that Support won't be inundated with calls from users suddenly unable to perform their usual tasks. New feature tests come second to that IMO.
I think I've said this elsewhere, but a valuable test to me is one that helps prevent users from experiencing bugs and other issues that make them not want to use the site/app. Or bigger issues (like being able to inject code into the app (or click on something) and gain access to things the user shouldn't) For me though, QA tests should go beyond just the code and includes experiences. For example, putting the delete button and save button next to each other with 1px spacing and no "Are you sure?" prompt won't create a bug, but users will still be frustrated if they end up deleting their work instead of saving it. Or (not saying that I just saw this happen, just saying)... if the delete, save, and create new document buttons are all on top of each other...
100%. It’s not about testing more. it’s about testing with intention. A good test for me should protect value, not just inflate coverage numbers.
Wrong question to ask. Ask instead what is the reason they exist. Test cases serve a purpose and their value is a result of that purpose. If you can justify a meaningful purpose for a test case to exist its value is derived from that purpise.
Test automation trainer and consultant | I teach teams how to be successful with test automation
3wA good test, for me, means that it gives valuable feedback, fast. One aspect of a test being valuable is, as you said, communicating what is being tested and how that relates to risk. Another aspect is the reliability of the feedback. Does my test verify something useful? Can it detect a change in the behaviour of my product? And then there’s ’fast’. That, too, has multiple dimensions, execution time being just one of them.