DEV Community: Rahul

What I Learned From Scoping MVPs Before Writing Code

Rahul — Fri, 28 Aug 2026 14:17:45 +0000

What I Learned From Scoping MVPs Before Writing Code

One of the easiest ways to make an MVP more expensive is to start coding before the product is properly scoped.

I've worked on startup products where the technical implementation itself wasn't the hardest part.

The harder part was figuring out exactly what should be built.

A founder might say:

"We need a dashboard, authentication, payments, notifications, an admin panel, and an AI feature."

That sounds like a reasonable MVP.

But each of those words hides dozens of decisions.

What does the dashboard actually show?

Who can access it?

What happens when a payment fails?

Which notifications are actually required?

What does the admin need to control?

What does the AI feature actually do?

Until those questions are answered, an estimate is mostly a guess.

Over time, I've started treating MVP scoping as a separate engineering activity rather than something that happens automatically before development.

Here are the things I now try to clarify before writing the first line of code.

Start With the Problem

The first question shouldn't be:

"What features do you want?"

It should be:

"What problem are we trying to solve?"

A feature list describes the solution someone has imagined.

The problem explains why the solution needs to exist.

For example:

"We need an AI-powered dashboard."

isn't very useful as a starting point.

Something more useful would be:

"Restaurant owners currently spend several hours each week manually calculating ingredient costs and want to identify recipes with declining margins."

Now there is a problem to solve.

That distinction matters because once the problem is clear, some proposed features may turn out to be unnecessary.

Define the Target User

An MVP becomes difficult to scope when "the user" means everyone.

Ask:

Who is the first user?

What are they trying to accomplish?

What information do they have?

What action do we want them to take?

What happens before and after that action?

For an early product, narrowing the initial user group can dramatically simplify the application.

You don't necessarily need to support every possible user type on day one.

Define the Core Workflow

This is probably the most useful exercise I've found.

Forget the feature list temporarily.

Write down the main workflow.

For example:

User signs up → Creates a project → Adds information → Generates a result → Reviews the result → Takes action.

Then ask:

"What is the smallest version of this workflow that proves the product is useful?"

Imagine you're building a fitness app.

You might initially imagine:

User accounts, personalized workouts, exercise tracking, progress charts, push notifications, voice coaching, social sharing, leaderboards, wearable integrations, and AI coaching.

But the core workflow might actually be:

User signs up → Gets today's workout → Completes the workout → Records the results.

That may be enough to test whether users actually want the product.

The other features aren't necessarily bad ideas. They just don't need to be part of the first version.

This is where MVP scoping becomes useful. You're not trying to build the smallest app possible. You're trying to build the smallest version that can answer your most important product question.

Separate "Must Have" From "Nice to Have"

Almost every startup idea has more features than the first version needs.

I like putting features into three categories.

Must Have:

Without these, the core product doesn't work.

For the fitness example:

User registration
Personalized workout
Workout screen
Exercise tracking
Saving workout results

Useful:

These improve the experience but aren't necessary to validate the core idea.

Progress charts
Workout history
Push notifications
Voice coaching
Exercise videos

Later:

These can wait until there is evidence that users actually need them.

Social sharing
Leaderboards
Wearable integrations
Community features
Advanced analytics

"Later" doesn't mean these features are bad.

It simply means they don't need to be built to test the core product.

Explicitly Define What Is Out of Scope

This is one of the most overlooked parts of an MVP specification.

Most teams document what they're building.

Fewer document what they're deliberately not building.

That's a mistake.

An out-of-scope list protects the MVP from quietly growing during development.

For example:

Included:

Email/password authentication
Stripe subscription
One user role
Core dashboard
CSV export

Not included:

Social login
Team accounts
Advanced permissions
Mobile application
Custom reporting

This doesn't mean those features will never exist.

It means they aren't part of this version.

Define Success Before Development

An MVP isn't successful simply because it launches.

You should decide what you're trying to learn.

For example:

Can users complete the core workflow?

Will users return?

Will users pay?

Can users accomplish the task without assistance?

Does the product solve the original problem?

A technical milestone such as "the application is deployed" isn't necessarily a product validation milestone.

The purpose of an MVP is to reduce uncertainty.

Turn Features Into Acceptance Criteria

Another lesson I've learned is that feature names are often too vague for development.

Consider:

"Add user authentication."

What does that mean?

Does it include registration?

Logout?

Password reset?

Email verification?

Session management?

Protected routes?

Account deletion?

Instead, define what must be true for the feature to be considered complete.

For example:

A user can register with an email and password.

A registered user can log in.

Unauthenticated users cannot access the dashboard.

A user can log out.

A user can reset their password.

Now the developer has something testable.

Identify Integrations Early

Third-party integrations can significantly affect an MVP's scope.

Examples include:

Stripe
Google OAuth
OpenAI
Twilio
SendGrid
Firebase
AWS
Analytics platforms

Don't simply write:

"Integrate Stripe."

Determine what the product actually needs.

Does it require subscriptions?

One-time payments?

Invoices?

Coupons?

Webhooks?

Refunds?

Customer portal?

The earlier these requirements are understood, the more realistic the development estimate becomes.

Don't Estimate Too Early

This sounds counterintuitive because founders often want a price immediately.

But an estimate before scope is understood creates false precision.

If someone asks:

"How much will this MVP cost?"

before the core workflow, integrations, user roles, and acceptance criteria are defined, there are too many unknowns.

A better process is:

Problem → Target user → Core workflow → Scope → Technical requirements → Acceptance criteria → Estimate.

The estimate becomes a consequence of the scope rather than a guess made before the scope exists.

Write the MVP Specification Before Coding

Eventually, I want the important decisions captured in one place.

It doesn't have to be a 50-page product requirements document.

A useful MVP specification can be relatively simple:

Problem
Target user
Core workflow
In-scope features
Out-of-scope features
Success criteria
Acceptance criteria
Integrations
Technical constraints

The goal isn't documentation for its own sake.

The goal is to make ambiguity visible before ambiguity becomes engineering work.

A Simple MVP Scoping Test

Before development starts, I ask:

"Can another developer read the specification and understand what needs to be built without having a one-hour meeting with the founder?"

If the answer is no, the scope probably isn't finished.

There will always be unknowns.

That's normal.

The goal isn't to predict every detail.

It's to remove the expensive unknowns before development begins.

I Built a Small Tool for This

After repeatedly using this kind of process, I turned the basic structure into a free MVP Scope Builder.

It walks through the core questions around the problem, target user, core workflow, what's in scope, what's out of scope, success criteria, acceptance criteria, and integrations.

It then generates a structured MVP specification that you can copy or download as Markdown.

You can try it here:

https://www.rahulsinghnegi.com/resources/mvp-scope-template

Final Thought

The most expensive part of an MVP isn't always the code.

Sometimes it's the ambiguity before the code.

A vague requirement can become a development task.

A development task can become a feature.

A feature can become several edge cases.

And suddenly something that sounded like a small MVP has turned into a much larger product.

Good scoping doesn't eliminate uncertainty.

It makes the important uncertainty visible early enough to do something about it.

That's why I've become much more deliberate about defining the problem, core workflow, scope, acceptance criteria, and success criteria before development starts.

The objective isn't to create a perfect specification.

It's to create enough clarity that the team can build the smallest useful version of the product with confidence.

How I Built and Launched a SaaS MVP in 6 Weeks (Complete Breakdown)

Rahul — Sat, 18 Jul 2026 10:50:48 +0000

Building a SaaS MVP doesn't have to cost six figures or take a year to launch.

Recently, I built and launched PeptiSync, a HealthTech SaaS platform, in just six weeks. The project included a web application, Android and iOS apps, authentication, subscription management, payment integration, and a production deployment.

In this article, I'll break down the architecture, technology choices, timeline, estimated budget, and the biggest lessons I learned while taking an idea from concept to launch.

The Project

PeptiSync is a HealthTech SaaS platform that helps users manage peptide therapy by tracking protocols, comparing vendors, managing subscriptions, and monitoring their progress from a single dashboard across web and mobile.

The MVP included:

Responsive web application
Android application
iOS application
User authentication
Subscription management
Stripe integration
Admin functionality
SEO optimization
Production deployment

Week 1–2: Building the Foundation

Estimated Cost: ~$3,500

The first two weeks were dedicated to making the right architectural decisions instead of rushing into features.

The technology stack included:

Next.js
TypeScript
Flutter
Firebase Authentication
Firestore
Stripe

Some of the key technical decisions were:

Building the web and mobile applications in parallel
Using shared data models where possible
Leveraging Firestore for real-time synchronization
Keeping the project structure clean from the beginning
Prioritizing scalability without overengineering

Getting these decisions right early made the remaining weeks significantly smoother.

Week 3–4: Building the Core Features

Estimated Cost: ~$6,000

This is when the product started becoming a real application instead of a prototype.

Core features included:

Google Authentication
User dashboard
Vendor management
Price comparison
Subscription plans
Stripe payments
Responsive layouts
Mobile applications

One lesson I've learned from building SaaS products is simple:

Build the feature that proves value first.

Everything else can come later.

For PeptiSync, helping users compare vendors and manage their subscriptions was the core value proposition. Everything else supported that goal.

Week 5–6: Polish & Launch

Estimated Cost: ~$4,500

The final stage focused on preparing the application for production.

This included:

UI refinement
Performance optimization
SEO implementation
Structured data
XML sitemap
Testing
CI/CD pipeline
Production deployment

These tasks often receive less attention during planning, but they're what transform an MVP into a product that users can actually trust.

Architecture

Web (Next.js)
        │
Firebase Authentication
        │
    Firestore
        │
 Stripe Payments
        │
 Android & iOS (Flutter)

The architecture was intentionally kept simple. Every technology was chosen because it reduced development time while still providing a solid foundation for future growth.

Why Firebase?

For an MVP, Firebase provided everything needed to move quickly:

Authentication
Firestore database
Real-time synchronization
File Storage
Security Rules
Analytics

Without maintaining a traditional backend, development could stay focused on solving user problems instead of infrastructure management.

While every project has different scaling requirements, Firebase proved to be an excellent choice for getting the MVP into users' hands quickly.

Estimated Budget Breakdown

Item	Estimated Cost
Development	$11,000
Stripe setup & testing	$500
Firebase	$600
Domain & infrastructure	$200
Developer accounts	$200
Design assets	$500
Legal documents	$1,000
Tools & subscriptions	$1,000
Total	~$15,000

What I'd Do Differently

1. Set Up Stripe Earlier

Integrating payments earlier changes how you prioritize features.

When users can pay earlier, it becomes much easier to identify which features actually support the business.

2. Write More Automated Tests

Writing more tests during the early stages would have reduced debugging time later in the project.

It's much cheaper to prevent bugs than fix them in production.

3. Cut More Features

One mistake many founders make is trying to build Version 3 before Version 1 has launched.

Shipping a focused MVP is almost always better than delaying launch to add "just one more feature."

Biggest Takeaway

Building a successful SaaS MVP isn't about choosing the newest framework or creating the most complicated architecture.

It's about making smart technical decisions, controlling scope, solving a real problem, and shipping.

PeptiSync reinforced that lesson for me.

Every feature, every technology choice, and every week of development should move the product closer to delivering value—not just adding complexity.

Thanks for reading!

If you're building a SaaS product and want to discuss architecture, MVP planning, or technical strategy, feel free to connect.

🌐 Portfolio: https://www.rahulsinghnegi.com

💻 GitHub: https://github.com/rahulsinghnegiii

I'm always happy to chat with founders who are building their next product.

I stopped building “perfect” apps — and things started working

Rahul — Wed, 29 Apr 2026 10:41:36 +0000

I used to build things the “right” way.

Clean architecture. Scalable backend. Perfect structure.

And still:

projects took too long
clients lost patience
nothing got validated

So I changed how I work.

What I do now

Start with one core action

What is the one thing the user must do?

Everything else is secondary.

Build fast, not perfect

Early stage products don’t need perfect systems.

They need something real that people can use.

Focus on feedback, not architecture

Instead of “is this scalable?”

I ask:
Can we test this with users this week?

Keep it clean, but don’t overbuild

Still modular. Still readable.

Just not over-engineered.

The result

faster launches
better client outcomes
less wasted work

What I work on

SaaS MVPs
mobile apps
improving slow or poorly built websites
performance and SEO fixes

If you're building something, aim to launch first. Then improve.

https://rahulcodes-three.vercel.app