My tests could fail. They still could not tell me I was wrong.

<p>Every importer has one moment where it tells you it is done.</p> <p>Here is that moment, at the end of a file import into a twenty year old accounting product:<br /> </p> <div

<p>Built a .NET invoicing library with Claude Code over about a week. Zero dependencies, VAT and GST arithmetic, JSON and CSV export, the usual. By the third phase I had 202 tests

<p>Your AI system isn't going to crash. It's going to drift.</p> <p>A recommendation engine making 1.4 model calls instead of 1. A retrieval pipeline fetching 5 chunks instead of

<p>An AI coding agent implements a feature, generates tests, runs them, and opens a pull request with a green build.</p> <p>That looks like independent verification. It often is

<h2> The Asymmetry of Change: Why Your Tests Are Looking the Wrong Way </h2> <p>A passing build is often treated as a certificate of correctness. In reality, it's a narrow

<p>A review pass on our credit calculator flagged something that should have been impossible: a<br /> finding tagged HIGH, on a panel with a full test suite, where every

<p>One of our rounds posted its receipt — the commit message and pull-request body that say what the round did, with the readings it took. <strong>Every figure in it was

<p>Last month I asked a senior candidate the same question I ask everyone. "Tell me about a flaky test you fixed and how you fixed it."</p> <p>She paused and said, "I just added a