Good. You have noticed that test cases are not a unit of confidence.
A team can have 5,000 beautifully numbered tests and still know very little about whether the important parts of the product work. Counting them tells you roughly how many rows exist in a tool. If you want us to review whether the coverage actually means anything, we can. Before that, ask the team to stop showing you volume and show you risk.
Find out what the cases are covering
You may discover that hundreds of tests are minor field validation, layout variations and happy-path permutations while the areas that can lose money or data have a handful of checks. This happens because easy tests are easy to write, easy to automate and excellent for making dashboards look busy.
Ask which customer journeys matter most, which failures would be hardest to recover from and where the architecture is most fragile. Then ask how those risks are tested. If nobody can answer without exporting a spreadsheet, the number of test cases is not your main problem.
Look for thinking, not inventory
A strong tester should be able to explain why they chose particular coverage, where they deliberately went deeper and what they decided not to test. They should know what still worries them. The real question may be whether we are testing the wrong things, not whether the test-case count is high enough.
A weak process produces the opposite: every requirement maps to a test case, all cases are executed, 96% pass, and nobody can explain whether the four percent that failed matters.
Delete tests that have stopped earning their keep
Old test cases accumulate because deletion feels risky. Nobody wants to be the person who removes Test Case 1847 and then sees a defect in that area three months later. So the pack grows forever and eventually consumes so much time that the team rushes the parts that deserve thought.
Review the pack. Keep what detects useful failures or protects important journeys. Consolidate repetitive checks. Remove things that no longer represent how the product works. A regression suite is not a museum.
Ask what the suite has actually caught recently
A useful reality check is to look at the last few releases and ask which regression tests genuinely caught something important. You may find a small group repeatedly earns its keep while thousands of other cases have passed quietly for years.
That does not mean deleting anything that has not failed recently. Some controls protect stable but critical behaviour. It does mean the suite should be reviewed as an investment. If nobody can explain why a test still exists beyond ‘we have always run it’, that is a conversation worth having.
If you want us to review the test inventory against the actual product risks, get onto us. We can tell you where the coverage looks strong, where it is decorative and what we would stop spending time on.