diff --git a/tests/e2e/CI_COVERAGE_BASELINE.md b/tests/e2e/CI_COVERAGE_BASELINE.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..81904ff20d3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/e2e/CI_COVERAGE_BASELINE.md
@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+# CI vs e2e coverage baseline
+
+Measured 2026-07-06 on `litellm_internal_staging`. Purpose: a standing comparison
+between the legacy CI test volume and the live e2e suite, so decisions about
+where new tests go (and which CI suites are not earning their runtime) are made
+against numbers instead of memory. Re-measure by re-running the counts below
+after major suite changes and update this file in the same PR
+
+Counting method: e2e counts are collected tests (`uv run pytest tests/e2e/<dir>
+--collect-only -q`, includes parametrization). CI counts are `def test_`
+functions per directory (`grep -rcE "^\s*(async )?def test_"`), attributed to
+the feature whose code they exercise. UI counts are `it(`/`test(` blocks in
+`ui/litellm-dashboard`
+
+## Headline
+
+Roughly 29,400 backend CI test functions plus 4,100 UI test blocks, against 163
+collected e2e tests in 10 active suites (about 0.5%). 7 of 18 features had zero
+dedicated e2e coverage at measurement time
+
+## Why CI volume was not catching production breakage
+
+The 2026-07-06 stage run failed 46 tests and errored 17 more while every legacy
+CI suite was green. The causes were, in order of blast radius: a harness routing
+bug sending `/model/new` to the data plane (404, took down all runtime model
+registration), a missing `Gateway.create_model` method (AttributeError at
+fixture setup, all batch tests), and an exhausted provider account. None of
+these are visible to mocked unit suites: they live in deployment topology,
+integration wiring, and account state. That is the gap this e2e suite exists to
+close, and the class of test worth adding here rather than to CI
+
+## Per-feature counts (e2e ascending, at measurement time)
+
+| Feature | e2e tests | CI unit tests | CI directories attributed |
+|---|---:|---:|---|
+| Guardrails and policy engine | 0 | ~2,337 | `test_litellm/proxy/guardrails`, `guardrails_tests`, `proxy/policy_engine` |
+| Key/team/user/org management | 0 (now 8, PR #32300) | ~1,727 | `proxy/management_endpoints`, `management_helpers`, `proxy_admin_ui_tests`, root key/team/user/org tests |
+| MCP gateway | 0 | ~1,654 | `proxy/_experimental/mcp_server`, `mcp_tests`, `experimental_mcp_client` |
+| Caching | 0 | ~363 | `test_litellm/caching`, `local_testing` cache tests |
+| Vector stores / RAG | 0 | ~206 | `proxy/vector_store_endpoints`, `search_tests`, `vector_store_tests`, `rag_endpoints` |
+| Model management | 0 (now 4, PR #32272) | ~101 | `test_model_management_endpoints.py`, `store_model_in_db_tests`, root `test_models.py` |
+| UI dashboard | 0 in harness (56 playwright separate) | ~4,096 | `ui/litellm-dashboard` src/tests + `e2e_tests` |
+| Responses API and /v1/messages | 2 | ~481 | `test_litellm/responses`, `llm_responses_api_testing`, anthropic endpoint dirs |
+| Logging integrations | 3 | ~2,168 | `test_litellm/integrations`, `logging_callback_tests`, `otel_tests` |
+| Auth / access control | 3 | ~783 | `proxy/auth`, `proxy_security_tests` |
+| Media (images/audio/OCR/video) | 3 | ~261 | `image_gen_tests`, `audio_tests`, `ocr_tests`, `test_litellm/ocr`, video dirs |
+| Embeddings and rerank | 7 | ~42 | `local_testing` embedding tests |
+| Pass-through endpoints | 7 | ~590 | `proxy/pass_through_endpoints`, `pass_through_unit_tests`, `pass_through_tests` |
+| Router (fallbacks/limits/strategies) | 9 | ~1,276 | `router_strategy`, `router_unit_tests`, root `test_router*`, `router_utils` |
+| Realtime | 10 | ~37 | `test_litellm/realtime_api`, `proxy/realtime_endpoints` |
+| LLM translation / provider adapters | ~12 | ~9,373 | `test_litellm/llms`, `tests/llm_translation`, `litellm_core_utils` |
+| Batches and files | 17 | ~254 | `test_litellm/batches`, `proxy/batches_endpoints`, `openai_files_endpoint`, `batches_tests` |
+| Spend tracking and budgets | 71 | ~354 | `proxy/spend_tracking`, `spend_tracking_tests`, budget/rate-limiter hooks |
+
+## What the CI trees cannot express (do not port these)
+
+Most of the legacy volume asserts implementation internals that have no
+observable HTTP contract: SQL string construction, payload sanitizer edge
+cases, mocked provider adapters, settings CRUD against mocked DB clients. Six
+of seven files in `test_litellm/proxy/spend_tracking` use mocks. Porting these
+to e2e adds cost and flake without new signal; the e2e suite's job is the
+contracts mocks structurally cannot verify: deployment topology, cross-plane
+routing, DB and cache behavior under real writes, provider account state,
+enforcement timing (auth-cache TTL, data-plane sync), and spend arithmetic on
+real responses
+
+## Standing priorities derived from this baseline
+
+Zero-e2e features that need stage configuration before they are testable:
+guardrails (live guardrail provider), MCP gateway (MCP servers). Testable
+without config changes: caching. Cross-cutting suites planned from this
+baseline: config/UI parity (drift between stage and what production and the
+dashboard expect), then golden user journeys (multi-feature production
+narratives). A deliberately rejected idea, for the record: a scripted fake
+upstream for provider failure simulation was considered and declined 2026-07-06