Case Studies

Architecture, constraints, and execution decisions.

Each case study focuses on why the work mattered and how technical choices were made under real constraints.

myassist

MyAssist: Live Operational Window, Not a Sync Engine

Designed as a provider-canonical control layer that reasons across systems without data mirroring.

Problem
Most personal productivity tooling drifts from source systems and becomes fragile when data ownership is unclear.
Why It Matters
Operational assistants fail when their model of reality is stale. Daily execution depends on trustworthy context.
Product Scope
Unified assistant over Gmail, Google Calendar, and Todoist with OAuth integrations, contextual reasoning, and explicit action confirmation.

Architecture Decisions

  • Provider systems remain canonical for mail, calendar, and tasks.
  • App stores only connection state, preferences, app memory, and lightweight metadata.
  • Live on-demand reads power daily context; writes go directly to provider APIs.
  • Assistant mode supports local model path with deterministic fallback behavior.

Constraints

  • Needed to preserve UX reliability without introducing a heavy sync infrastructure.
  • Had to keep architecture ready for hosted runtime without rewriting boundaries.
  • Required strict separation from historical orchestration artifacts (dormant n8n flows).

Implementation Choices

  • Normalized daily context contract (`live`, `mock`, `cache`) with explicit source signaling.
  • Cross-system action services with idempotent metadata for safe repeated requests.
  • Schema segregation into `myassist.*` on shared Supabase for platform consistency.

Technical Credibility Signals

  • Provider-canonical model documented and enforced.
  • Hosted-mode verification and schema-segregation readiness artifacts.
  • Fallback strategy designed for continuity when local model runtime is unavailable.

Current maturity level: Strategic near-term launch path with production-ready boundaries.

kinetix

Kinetix: Biomechanics-Driven Coaching Across Watch, Phone, and Web

Built as a cross-platform running system where data integrity and interpretable performance scoring matter more than novelty.

Problem
Most running tools optimize for passive tracking, not actionable coaching tied to form quality and execution context.
Why It Matters
Useful performance tooling must connect metrics, model outputs, and user feedback loops in real time.
Product Scope
watchOS tracking runtime, iOS management and voice coaching hub, and web/PWA analysis path.

Architecture Decisions

  • Platform-specific AI paths: on-device constraints on watch, cloud coaching on iPhone, local model fallback on web.
  • KPS invariants defined as non-negotiable contract for score interpretation.
  • Watch/iPhone connectivity treated as a first-class reliability concern.

Constraints

  • Real-time sensor handling under battery and background execution limits.
  • Strict watch installation and bundle-ID coupling requirements.
  • Need for stable behavior with or without optional AI runtime availability.

Implementation Choices

  • Hybrid intelligence stack blending rule-based biomechanics and adaptive model paths.
  • Preset and battery profile system to balance precision with battery longevity.
  • Crash recovery and persistence behavior designed into workout runtime.

Technical Credibility Signals

  • Cross-platform architecture with explicit feature partitioning by device capability.
  • Documented invariant contracts for KPS behavior.
  • Operational troubleshooting playbooks for connectivity and installation stability.

Current maturity level: Advanced product prototype with strong systems-level depth.

bookiji

Bookiji: Deterministic Scheduling Spine for a Larger Marketplace Vision

Built the scheduling core as a governance-first system before expanding toward universal booking.

Problem
Booking products break trust when state transitions, payments, and availability rules are inconsistent under real-world load.
Why It Matters
Scheduling is a high-consequence workflow where ambiguity causes revenue loss and operational friction.
Product Scope
Provider-first scheduling SaaS with onboarding, availability management, booking lifecycle, and payments infrastructure.

Architecture Decisions

  • Schema-qualified multi-product database spine (`platform`, `bookiji`, `kinetix`, `chess`).
  • Deterministic booking logic separated from advisory AI behavior.
  • Migration sequencing and verification treated as release-critical discipline.
  • Observability and SLO-oriented operations integrated into delivery process.

Constraints

  • Needed compatibility migration path from `public` to schema-isolated model.
  • Required deterministic behavior under auth, RLS, and concurrency pressure.
  • Had to support phased roadmap without destabilizing scheduling core.

Implementation Choices

  • Adopted `BOOKIJI_TABLES`-style schema constants to eliminate unqualified table access.
  • Enforced migration order with explicit pre-drop verification checklist.
  • Introduced idempotency and fallback patterns in calendar and webhook-adjacent flows.

Technical Credibility Signals

  • Documented spine migrations with strict ordering and verification discipline.
  • Deterministic state machine and governance rules codified in architecture docs.
  • Production-oriented observability/SLO process artifacts.

Current maturity level: Production scheduling foundation with roadmap-ready architecture.