Who Keeps a Test Useful After the System Changes?

A test can show that a workflow works today. Its longer-term value depends on whether it still checks the right thing after the system, its inputs, or its dependencies change.

That creates a quiet ownership question: when a test starts passing for the wrong reason—or failing because the intended behavior has changed—who notices and decides what to update? Leaving it untouched can create false confidence; changing it without a clear reason can erase a useful safeguard.

What would make a test suite worth maintaining in your team: a named owner, a review triggered by specific changes, or evidence that each check catches a meaningful failure?