Same licenses, same models - and productivity swings anywhere from 0.3× to 3× depending on who's typing. That's how agents work, not a broken tool. I'll show you why it happens - and how a 20-to-100+ developer team gets to 30-40% faster delivery without anyone faking it.
Code review is a mess. PRs land with silly bugs the team misses because nobody can tell when the LLM is hallucinating. Your senior spends 2× as much time on review than before Claude Code - and he's grumpy about it.
You bought enterprise licenses. Tokens are burning. But you can't draw a line between that spend and any actual business outcome - and nobody on the team has a clean answer for the board.
The classic mid → senior ladder stops making sense overnight. A junior wired up with Claude Code ships code that looks senior - until review hits and they can't explain a single line of it. You don't know what "mid" means anymore.
A month in, the Ebbinghaus curve does its thing - and your past trainings already proved this is a real risk. You're bracing for the usual: three weeks of hype, then silence.
Most teams turn Claude Code on and wait for a miracle. The miracle does not show up. My approach is different - we redesign the whole SDLC from the ground up, so AI isn't bolted on as an afterthought but used deliberately at every stage.
I talk to the agent about how to size up an idea and write the user stories. PRDs go out in a standardized shape - Claude Code can read them better than most PMs, but only if you feed it the right context. From there, a fixed template breaks the work into tasks. The payoff: fewer hallucinations from the model, and a lot less cognitive load on you.
task: refactor auth flow
context: src/auth/**, .env.example
constraints: keep API stable, no breaking changesPlan → code → tests → verification. Each layer (backend, frontend, database) gets its own guidelines. Formatting and code-quality checks are enforced through linters, hooks, and pipelines. To keep the agent's context in sync with current package versions, I plug in an MCP for library docs (context7) - the agent has no access to the latest documentation by default, that's just how LLM training works.
skills:
- backend-fastapi
- frontend-vue
- db-migration-reviewer
hooks:
pre-commit: ruff + eslintA code-review checklist built for AI and tuned to your organization's standards. The LLM does a first pass, the senior digs into whatever looks off. Every decision leaves a trace - you get an audit log of what AI flagged and why.
review-checklist:
- security: SQL injection, XSS
- performance: N+1 queries
- style: matches .editorconfigPre-deploy AI smoke check - is the migration reversible? Are env vars set? Any breaking API changes? Deterministic tests cover the code logic. The agent runs the checklist and reports back. Anything red? Deploy to higher environments gets blocked.
deploy-gate:
- migration reversible? YES
- env vars complete? YES
- api breaking? NO
→ deploy approvedWhen each path makes sense - and when you'll burn 6 months for nothing.
| Path | When it makes sense | Cost |
|---|---|---|
| YouTube / tutorials | You're checking whether this is a good fit. Taking the first steps. You have plenty of discipline to filter the signal from the noise yourself. | $ |
| Online courses (Udemy, Coursera) | A small, motivated team. Tight budget. Early-stage projects that happen to line up with the course curriculum. | $ - $$ |
| Social media, dev communities | You have time to learn from others at your own pace - no deadline pressure. | $ |
| Consultant or freelancer | You've got one specific problem. You need someone to come in and fix it. No real knowledge transfer, no fundamentals built into the team. | $ - $$$ |
| DemystifAI training (live, 2-3 days + masterminds) | A 20+ developer team with paid licenses and zero ROI to show for it. You need consistent know-how across the team, real standards, and a plan for those pre-paid API credits that are about to expire. | $$$ |
When it makes sense: You're checking whether this is a good fit. Taking the first steps. You have plenty of discipline to filter the signal from the noise yourself.
Cost: $
When it makes sense: A small, motivated team. Tight budget. Early-stage projects that happen to line up with the course curriculum.
Cost: $ - $$
When it makes sense: You have time to learn from others at your own pace - no deadline pressure.
Cost: $
When it makes sense: You've got one specific problem. You need someone to come in and fix it. No real knowledge transfer, no fundamentals built into the team.
Cost: $ - $$$
When it makes sense: A 20+ developer team with paid licenses and zero ROI to show for it. You need consistent know-how across the team, real standards, and a plan for those pre-paid API credits that are about to expire.
Cost: $$$
Grab a short call. In 30 minutes we'll pinpoint what's not working and map out the next steps.
Book a call →Juniors and seniors finally speak the same AI dialect. Code quality goes back to being consistent across the team.
The LLM does a first pass, the senior verifies, and the audit log catches every AI decision. You always know what, when, and why.
You know how to measure what a new feature costs in tokens. SOTA vs open-source, prompt caching, context management - none of those buzzwords surprise you anymore.
A new "mid"/"senior" ladder that actually means something again. Juniors build on fundamentals instead of copy-pasting AI output.
Systematic practice and spaced repetition give you 2-3× higher retention than a one-off workshop. The knowledge actually stays in the team.
In the package
Training program
3 variants, 12 modules, or a program built specifically for you. See what your team understands and can actually do after each - then pick the variant that matches your goals.
Foundations: the team understands LLM limits, prompts deliberately, and configures the environment safely.
Standard: Foundations plus shared standards.
Full + masterminds: the full program with hooks and MCP.
The team understands LLMs and stops working in the dark
The team speaks one AI dialect: docs, review, workflow
The team scales AI across the SDLC and sets standards that last
For software houses and bigger dev teams - see the upside you're leaving on the table when the team teaches itself AI in the dark, instead of going through a structured workshop and leveling up properly.
Value you're leaving on the table:
vs the cost of the workshop + ongoing team support - I'll walk you through the numbers on the call.
Let's chat for 30 minutes →
Claude Code Trainer & Hands-on Practitioner
13 years in the industry - most of it in data science. 750+ hours in Claude Code, since back when something broke every week (and I mean every week). Production AI/ML I've shipped: fraud detection, customer segmentation, proposal generators, startup prototypes. I'm not a trainer-of-trainers. I teach what I actually do at the keyboard every day.
I understand LLM architecture not from articles - from banging my head against it during real implementations. That's why I can explain to your seniors why Claude Code occasionally "hallucinates" and, more importantly, how to write code that keeps that risk on a leash.
Substack DemystifAI - three years of poking at large language models: token economics, agents, AI in the code-generation loop. GitHub claude_code_common_base - my own Claude Code template, with hooks, subagents, MCPs. Audit the code before you book the call. Seriously.
6 years at Citi (Warsaw, London, Jakarta) taught me how big orgs actually work: compliance, governance, procurement, NDA, GDPR. I know what derails an adoption in a software house - and it's never "just the technology". It's people. It needs a shift in how the team thinks. I'll help you with both.
See my GitHub →True - you can find most of the answers on YouTube. But the real problem in a team is different: how do you get the whole team aligned on AI in the first place?
From what I've seen - people learn at different speeds, with different motivations, and very different skill at digging up quality material online. The workshop gives you one shared vocabulary, one set of standards, and a structured handoff of filtered, battle-tested knowledge.
Do the math: 1 dev × 80 hours of YouTube × their hourly rate. That's the real cost of learning from YouTube.
From my experience - you need to practice a skill before you will be able to pick up the pace of delivery. I can prepare a dedicated format for your specific needs, however your team will still need to dedicate time to learn. Without commitment, it won't work.
1) "Speed-run" - 2 days. Light on exercises, heavy on concepts. A structured download so the team can hit the ground running.
2) "Deep dive" - 3-4 days. Lots of hands-on, heavy on practice. Yes, that's potentially 4 days of dev downtime. In exchange: shared vocabulary, drilled-in concepts, and a team ready to ship 30-40% faster.
On top of that - biweekly masterminds, 90 minutes each. Shorter than your weekly retro - and it doesn't break flow.
The AI-SDLC methodology is language-agnostic. I do the live exercises in Python and JavaScript (that's my stack), but the principles - token prediction, context management, MCP, hooks, subagents - work exactly the same in .NET, Go, and Rust. Tell me your stack on the 30-minute call and I'll spin up a demo repo in your technology.
Three things:
1) Biweekly masterminds for 2 months (or longer, if you want). Talking through the material on a regular cadence - and solving your actual problems live - bumps retention way above what a one-off workshop delivers.
2) We rebuild how you work, not just swap a tool. The fundamentals of working with models are the focus - the whole process changes. Tools come and go. Fundamentals stick around longer. Turning Claude Code on isn't enough - you need to know how to use it deliberately.
3) The materials, skills, and agents stay in your repo. The knowledge doesn't walk out the door when someone leaves.
Depends on the format, the add-ons, and the size of your team. Let's take 30 minutes - completely commitment-free. If you like what you hear, I'll put together a proposal and send it over.
No strings attached. In a short conversation I'll pull out the 3 biggest blockers your team is facing - concrete stuff, not generic advice.
A short discovery call - we figure out if the training fits, and you get a few useful pointers either way.
Fair enough. Leave your email and I'll add you to the list I send extra Claude Code and AI materials to - practical, tested on real projects. No spam, one-click unsubscribe.
No spam. Your address stays with me - details in the privacy policy.
People who vouch for me
Voices from the workshops
Direct feedback from the training sessions