Disjointed Workflows and Tool Sprawl

In many organizations, the API development workflow is highly fragmented. Point solutions handle individual lifecycle stages in isolation, forcing developers to act as the integrators of an unwieldy toolchain. Consider a typical scenario: one tool for API design, another for documentation, a separate CI/CD system for deployment, a ticketing system for access requests, and so on.

This patchwork approach leads to several pain points:
Manual handoffs: Every stage change (design to development, development to testing, testing to deployment) involves manual steps or ticket queues introducing delays and opportunities for error as teams wait on each other.

Tool sprawl: It’s not uncommon for a developer to juggle a dozen or more tools just to get an API from idea to production. In fact, developers manage about 14 different tools on average (2024 State of Developer Experience Report). This proliferation means constant context switching and learning curves, leaving less time for actual coding.

Inconsistent processes and documentation: With no single source of truth, standards and info get lost. One team documents an API in a wiki, another in a portal, others not at all. Governance policies (like security checks or style guidelines) might be applied unevenly or ad hoc. Developers waste effort hunting down information or reproducing work due to missing or outdated docs.

These fragmented workflows create friction at every step. Integrations between tools (if they exist) are brittle. Meanwhile, governance is inconsistent – some APIs slip through without proper reviews or compliance checks because there isn’t a unified way to enforce standards.