No-Code AI App Builder

• Cursor
• v0 by Vercel
• GitHub Copilot

• Supabase
• PlanetScale
• Firebase

• Bonsai
• Wave
• HoneyBook

I am a no-code/AI-assisted app builder who uses Cursor, v0, Supabase, and Vercel to deliver web apps fast. A client has described the following project to me:

[PASTE CLIENT DESCRIPTION HERE]

Please help me:
1. Break this into a concrete feature list (must-haves vs. nice-to-haves)
2. Identify the 3 most likely scope-creep traps hidden in this description
3. Write a fixed-price proposal with three tiers: MVP ($X), Standard ($X), Premium ($X) — suggest realistic price ranges for a solo operator delivering in 2-4 weeks
4. Draft a one-paragraph 'What's NOT included' section I can paste directly into the contract
5. List 5 clarifying questions I must ask before I start building

Be direct. Flag anything that sounds simple but is actually complex to build with AI-assisted tools.

Review requirements: Separate supplied facts from assumptions. Do not invent market data, customer results, testimonials, or source citations. Flag missing information and suggest a small validation test. Mark numerical examples as scenarios. Keep the final decision with me.

I am building a [TYPE OF APP — e.g. 'multi-tenant SaaS for gym owners'] using Supabase (PostgreSQL), Next.js, and Vercel. Here is my confirmed feature list:

[PASTE FEATURE LIST]

Please:
1. Design a normalized PostgreSQL schema with table names, columns, data types, and foreign keys — output as SQL CREATE TABLE statements I can run directly in Supabase
2. Write Row Level Security (RLS) policies for each table that enforce [describe access rules, e.g. 'users can only see their own org's data']
3. Flag any features that will require Supabase Edge Functions or external APIs rather than simple CRUD
4. Suggest which columns need indexes for likely query patterns
5. Give me a 'gotchas' list — things that look easy in Supabase but will bite me at scale

Output clean, copy-paste-ready SQL. No explanations inside the SQL blocks.

Review requirements: Separate supplied facts from assumptions. Do not invent market data, customer results, testimonials, or source citations. Flag missing information and suggest a small validation test. Mark numerical examples as scenarios. Keep the final decision with me.

I just finished building a web app for a client. Here are the details:

- App name: [NAME]
- What it does: [ONE SENTENCE]
- Tech stack: Next.js, Supabase, Vercel
- Key features the client will use daily: [LIST 3-5 FEATURES]
- Admin tasks the client needs to do themselves: [LIST e.g. 'add new users, export CSV reports']

Please write:
1. A 'Getting Started' guide (max 400 words, plain English, no jargon) the client can hand to their own team
2. A 'Maintenance Responsibilities' section that clearly separates what I'm responsible for vs. what they own
3. A 'What to Do If Something Breaks' decision tree with 3 levels: fix-it-yourself, contact me, emergency
4. A retainer offer paragraph I can include that upsells 4 hours/month of support at $[MY RATE]/hr

Tone: warm, clear, non-condescending. Assume the client is smart but not technical.

Review requirements: Separate supplied facts from assumptions. Do not invent market data, customer results, testimonials, or source citations. Flag missing information and suggest a small validation test. Mark numerical examples as scenarios. Keep the final decision with me.

I am using v0 by Vercel to generate React/Next.js components and the following component is not working correctly. Here is the component code:

[PASTE FULL COMPONENT CODE]

Here is what it is supposed to do:
[DESCRIBE EXPECTED BEHAVIOR]

Here is what it is actually doing:
[DESCRIBE THE BUG — include any console errors]

My stack: Next.js 14 App Router, TypeScript, Tailwind CSS, Supabase JS client v2.

Please:
1. Identify the root cause of the bug
2. Provide the corrected component code — full file, not a diff
3. Explain in 2-3 sentences what was wrong so I can avoid this pattern in future v0 prompts
4. Flag any other issues in the code that aren't causing the current bug but will cause problems later

Do not simplify the component. Keep all existing functionality intact.

Review requirements: Separate supplied facts from assumptions. Do not invent market data, customer results, testimonials, or source citations. Flag missing information and suggest a small validation test. Mark numerical examples as scenarios. Keep the final decision with me.

During scoping, explicitly ask: 'Does anything need to update live without a page refresh?' and 'Do you need to pay out to third parties?' and 'Does this need to work as a native app in the App Store?' If yes to any, reprice or decline.

Use a one-page contract minimum: fixed scope, maximum two rounds of revisions, IP transfers only on final payment, and a clause that additional features are billed at your hourly rate. Free templates at Bonsai or AND.CO are fine starting points — review with an attorney once.

For every component or function AI generates, read it line by line and be able to explain what it does. If you can't, ask the AI to explain it to you before moving on. Maintain a personal 'patterns' doc of the code structures you use repeatedly.

Frame it as 'this is what protects both of us.' Serious clients pay it. Tire-kickers disappear.

Set up each client with their own Vercel and Supabase accounts from day one. Use their credentials, not yours. You can still be the admin — just not the account owner.