How much is your MVP, really?Get an estimate
2MUCHCOFFEEGet a quote

Production AI we shipped,
not demos

RAG systems, AI agents, and custom integrations, grounded and evaluated. The model is the commodity. Senior engineering judgment is the product.

Book a 30-min review

AI services

Four ways to work with us on AI, from a single integration to a dedicated team of engineers.

The AI that doesn't hallucinate, hardened for production

Grounded answers, an evaluation harness that catches regressions, and observability in production. When an AI-built app has to be real before money or scale hits it, we run three rescue lanes.

Money correctness

The vibe-coded app that double-charged everyone. Ledgers, idempotency, reconciliation, and the invariants the AI skipped.

Workflow migration

When the no-code agent hits its ceiling, we re-platform it onto typed, durable, testable code with explicit state.

Personalization

Make the AI-built MVP production-real: grounding, guardrails, and the correctness layer it shipped without.

Founding engineers, not contractors

Our people have been the core technical team, not a body shop. We embed as founding engineers and fractional CTOs.

External CTO and core build

Our team has held External CTO roles at multiple startups, the CTO seat on an AI EdTech speech-to-text platform, and lead engineer on a stealth GPU startup rebuilt after a vibe-coded MVP.

Senior engineers behind the AI

Real, senior, and accountable, not a faceless bench. That EdTech speech-to-text platform alone took four, one each on the CTO seat, the WhisperX pipeline, the pgvector RAG, and the UX.

We build AI-native ourselves

Every engineer ships through Claude Code (how we build with Cursor and Claude Code). The proof is committed in this site's public repo: AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, and llms.txt are right there in git. We sell what we live.

AI-native vs AI-powered: tell them apart

The real question is not whether a developer uses AI, but how they structure the work around it.

TraditionalAI-poweredAI-native
PlanningDeveloper plans the work manually.AI helps break down the task.AI explores the problem and helps shape the plan.
CodingDeveloper writes the code.AI generates snippets and assists with coding.AI implements features from specs, context, and constraints.
ContextContext lives mostly in the developer’s head.Context is given to AI when needed.Context and project rules are prepared for AI to use continuously.
TestingDeveloper writes and runs tests.AI helps generate and fix tests.Testing and evaluation are built into the development loop.
DebuggingDeveloper finds and fixes issues manually.AI helps investigate and suggest fixes.AI investigates, reproduces, and iterates on fixes.
ReviewDeveloper reviews their own work.Developer reviews AI-generated output.Automated checks + AI + human review work together.
WorkflowBuild → test → fixBuild faster → test → fixDelegate → evaluate → refine → ship
Developer roleBuilderAI-assisted builderOrchestrator
AI-native

AI explores the problem and helps shape the plan.

Traditional

Developer plans the work manually.

AI-powered

AI helps break down the task.

Read the full breakdown: AI-native vs AI-powered developers

Spec-driven, not vibe-coded

AI-native is a workflow, not a plugin. Most of what we ship is now written with AI in the loop, mostly Cursor and Anthropic’s models, and what changed is the shape of the work rather than only its speed. This is the loop that keeps what we ship reviewed and production-solid instead of fragile, and the same one that built the site you are reading.

  1. Interrogate the idea, not the code

    Every build opens with a relentless design interview. We pull the decisions out one at a time: what the thing is for, what it must not do, and what happens at the edges. The output is a written spec with the architecture calls recorded as decision records. Most projects fail in the gap between what someone asked for and what they meant, and this is where we close it.

  2. The spec becomes tasks and tests

    That spec is decomposed into discrete tasks, each carrying its own acceptance test, so what done means is settled before a line is written. Integration tests are declared up front and run against real infrastructure instead of mocks. This is the step that makes AI output reviewable: a model given a vague instruction returns plausible code, which is the expensive kind of wrong.

  3. Agents build in small passes

    Claude Code and Codex implement in parallel, each in its own branch, against those written tasks rather than a loose ticket. Code lands in increments, each one against its tests. Large one-shot generations are how teams end up with a codebase nobody understands, including the people who shipped it.

  4. Reviewed twice, and verified past the spec

    No agent-written diff reaches your product unreviewed. A senior engineer runs it through correctness and security review, alongside a model, before it merges. Then we drive the real product the way a user would, across light and dark, desktop and phone, because a green test suite is only ever as complete as the spec behind it.

  5. A person owns the calls that matter

    Architecture, security boundaries, data models, and anything touching money or patient data are decided and signed off by an engineer. The tooling drafts, refactors, writes migrations and fills in tests. It does not get the final say, and that line does not move.

See how our code review works.

What we build with AI

Production systems, not demos. Each of these is grounded, evaluated, and shipped, with public proof where we have it. The model is the commodity; the engineering around it is the product.

Engagement models

Three ways to bring us in. Pick the one that fits your stage, you can change it as your roadmap changes.

  • Dedicated developer

    One senior AI engineer, full-time on your product and managed by you, in your standups, your board, and your repository.

    • Full-time on one product
    • Works in your tools and process
    • Design, QA and code review behind them
    • Monthly rate, scale up or down

    Best fit for an ongoing roadmap with a steady flow of work.

  • Dedicated team

    A cross-functional pod that owns the AI feature end to end: engineering, evals, and QA, without you growing headcount.

    • Engineers, design and QA in one pod
    • Owns delivery end to end
    • Ramps up without new hires
    • Grows and shrinks with the roadmap

    Best fit for a product that needs more than one pair of hands.

  • Project-based

    A scoped RAG system, agent, or integration, delivered against a fixed plan, price, and timeline agreed before work starts.

    • Scope agreed up front
    • Fixed plan, price and timeline
    • Delivered end to end
    • Handover with the repo and docs

    Best fit for a defined AI feature with a clear finish line.

Questions

What AI has 2muchcoffee actually shipped?

Production retrieval and agent systems: a public hybrid-RAG teardown on Qdrant, public multi-agent repos, the AI coach inside the consumer-scale Stepler app, and a production WhisperX speech-to-text platform for EdTech.

AI-native or AI-powered, what’s the difference?

AI-powered teams use the tools ad hoc. AI-native teams restructure the work around AI, with specs, evals, and review. The difference shows up in production, not in a demo.

What does spec-driven AI development actually mean?

Spec-driven AI development means the specification comes first and the code answers to it. We run a design interview, write a spec where every user story carries its acceptance test, and record the architecture decisions, then Claude Code and Codex build against that spec while a senior engineer reviews every merge. The agents do the typing; the spec and the review hold the quality line.

Can you rescue an AI-built MVP before it breaks?

Yes. We harden AI-built apps for production: money correctness, migration off no-code, and the grounding and guardrails the prototype skipped.

How do you stop the model from hallucinating?

Grounding and evaluation. We constrain answers to retrieved, cited context and run an evaluation harness with golden sets, so a change that increases hallucination shows up before your users find it.

Do you build AI from scratch or add it to an existing product?

Both. We build AI products from the ground up, and we add AI to an existing product through our integration services.

What does an AI MVP cost?

A focused AI-native MVP starts from around $7k. What moves the number is scope, the integrations, and your compliance bar, so every build is scoped before we quote rather than sold at a fixed price. Our estimator gives you an honest range in about two minutes.

Contact our team

Do you have an idea for your next project? Not sure what tech stack or business model to choose? Share your thoughts and our team will assist you in any inquiry.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>