Fragmented API Tooling: Current Drawbacks

Many enterprises have adopted APIs in a piecemeal fashion, using disjointed tools and ad-hoc processes across the API lifecycle. This fragmented approach brings several drawbacks:

Siloed Tools & Inconsistent Workflows: Different teams use different API design editors, gateways, testing suites, and documentation standards. These isolated tools don’t talk to each other, resulting in overlapping capabilities and duplicate licenses that drive up costs. A lack of an integrated pipeline means hand-offs and translations between tools at each stage, introducing delays and errors

Manual Policy Enforcement: Without a unified platform, governance is manual and error-prone. Architects might publish design guidelines or security checklists, but ensuring every team follows them is difficult without automation. Policies for versioning, security (e.g. OAuth scopes), or data privacy may be applied inconsistently, if at all. Compliance with regulations like GDPR or SOX becomes a matter of constant review and firefighting rather than a built-in behavior.

Duplicated and Shadow APIs: In a fragmented environment, it’s easy for different groups to unknowingly build redundant APIs that serve similar functions. Lack of a central catalog or oversight means developers reinvent the wheel instead of reusing existing services. Over time, the organization accumulates shadow APIs – undocumented or unapproved endpoints that slip outside official processes. These shadows and duplicates not only waste effort, but also expand the attack surface and complicate maintenance.