Software integration and data-workflow planning before development

Create one integration record per dependency

Choose the communication pattern from the requirement

Microsoft's integration guidance distinguishes direct APIs, asynchronous messaging/events, batch exchange and orchestration. It also recommends understanding data-flow direction, volume and format rather than treating every connection as the same problem.

A synchronous call can be appropriate when an immediate response is required, while asynchronous or batch patterns can decouple systems when latency, resilience or volume requirements make a direct dependency undesirable. The trade-off belongs in the scope record.

Model dependency failure before launch

Microsoft's Well-Architected reliability guidance recommends identifying internal and external dependencies in critical flows and evaluating failure modes. That means defining what the system does when identity, payments, messaging, accounting, CRM or another dependency becomes slow, unavailable or inconsistent.

The acceptance plan should cover timeouts, retries, duplicate events/requests, partial success, queued work, reconciliation and operational alerts in proportion to the business risk.

Treat integration authorization as product scope

OWASP's API Security guidance highlights broken object/function authorization and unsafe API consumption as recurring risks. Integration discovery should therefore include which identities can invoke which actions, what records can be accessed, how tokens/secrets are stored, and how third-party responses are validated rather than assuming a successful connection is a secure connection.