GraphQL's most underrated property is that it enforces governance by default — you cannot ship a GraphQL API without first defining a single, typed, introspectable schema. REST, by contrast, imposes no such requirement: endpoints can be added ad hoc, field naming can be inconsistent, and schema documentation is always optional and external. This means REST governance must be actively imposed from the outside (via OpenAPI, linting, and organizational will), while GraphQL front-loads that discipline as a prerequisite. The author isn't arguing GraphQL is superior overall — REST remains the right choice for cache-heavy or hypermedia-shaped APIs — but notes that organizations struggling with schema sprawl may find GraphQL's forced discipline more valuable than any query-flexibility benefit.
