Fixed-scope build with a senior engineer leading. The most common engagement.
- Senior engineer on code
- Fixed scope + quote
- 4–8 weeks to ship
- 30-day support
AI-native engineers using Claude Code, Cursor, MCP, and the modern AI dev toolchain to ship 5–10x faster — while still writing the architecture, tests, and observability that production needs.
The good version: senior engineers using AI tools (Claude Code, Cursor, Aider) to ship working software at 5–10x normal velocity. The architecture is intentional. The code is tested. The product ships in weeks instead of months.
The bad version: someone who’s never written production code prompting their way through an AI tool, generating reams of plausible-looking code that falls apart on first contact with real users. That’s prompt-cowboying, and it ships nothing.
We’re senior engineers first, vibe coders second. We know what production code looks like — we’ve shipped six products of our own. AI tools are the multiplier on top.
That means: 4-week projects in 1 week. ERP modules in days instead of weeks. Custom integrations in hours instead of days. Same architecture, same tests, same observability. Just faster.
We work primarily in Claude Code — Anthropic's CLI agent — for fast, multi-file, architecture-aware development. With proper review loops.
Cursor for in-editor work, Aider for surgical refactors. Right tool per task.
We wire Claude into your project's actual state — repo, docs, tickets, design — via MCP. The agent sees what we see.
Type-system migrations, schema changes, framework upgrades — projects that used to take a week ship in a day.
We make architecture decisions ourselves. The AI accelerates execution, it doesn't decide on the database.
Tests are still tests. Type checks still type-check. We don't skip the boring parts just because we move fast.
Vercel, Railway, Modal — shipped with proper CI/CD, monitoring, and rollback. Speed doesn't mean shipping fragile.
Codebase stays readable. Anyone can take over. We don't generate code only AI can maintain.
AI tools are great for some shapes of work and bad for others. We tell you which is which.
30 minutes. What you're trying to ship, the constraints, the timeline.
We come back with scope, fixed quote, and timeline. No deck.
Week 1 we're embedded. Slack, weekly cadence, continuous deployment.
Working build in 4–8 weeks for most engagements.
Optional retainer after launch. Same team. Same Slack channel.
We don't sell hours. We sell shipped work. The two shapes we offer:
Fixed-scope build with a senior engineer leading. The most common engagement.
Embedded part-time in your team. For ongoing work or longer roadmaps.
If you need senior tech leadership across the whole engineering function — not just one role.
If a marketplace developer at $80/hour fits your need better than us, we'll honestly tell you.
Mostly yes. The interesting version is senior engineers using AI tools to compress build time without sacrificing quality. That's what we do. We just call it vibe coding because that's what people search for.
Yes — that's a hard requirement for us. Code goes through our review the same way it would if a human wrote it. If we wouldn't ship it, we don't ship it.
5–10x on greenfield projects. 2–3x on existing codebases with complexity. Some tasks are barely faster (anything requiring deep human judgment or sensitive design).
Claude Code (Anthropic CLI agent), Cursor (in-editor AI), Aider (surgical refactors), MCP servers for project context. Stack changes as the tools evolve.
Yes — that's a common ask. We can run team workshops on Claude Code, Cursor workflows, and MCP setup. Usually a 1-week engagement.
No. We do refactors, migrations, and feature additions on existing codebases too — usually 2–3x faster than traditional development. Speed gain is bigger on greenfield.
Tell us what you're building or trying to figure out. We'll come back with what we'd do, how long it takes, and what it costs. No deck, no sales call.