01
Production Readiness Review
Fixed scope, fixed price. Ends in a verdict: rebuild or remediate.
C33 Consulting · Berlin
You built something real with AI. The next decisions are the expensive kind.
I read systems that founders built themselves with coding agents, and I tell them what they are actually holding. One person, fixed scope, in writing.
The entry point
Fixed scope · fixed price
Rebuild, or fix it?
The Production Readiness Review is an independent read of the system your agents built: what is sound, what is load-bearing guesswork, and which decisions cannot be walked back. It ends in a verdict and a ranked risk register with file paths attached, delivered as a document you own. The report is the product, not the pitch.
Read what the review covers →Continuity
Four shapes, in the order they usually arrive.
02
Build engagement
The remediation carried out, scoped from the register the review produced.
03
Standing technical seat
Advisory or fractional CTO. Architecture decisions stay with someone accountable for them.
04
Equity-inclusive arrangement
Where the work becomes long-run, part of the compensation moves to the cap table.
Nothing has to be bought out between shapes. Each step ends cleanly and the next starts from what the last one produced.
Evidence
175K→750K lines under my read, one platform
705 deploys through the period
20 risks registered and ranked
8 closed, each with its PR number
Rising Seer
I held the technical seat while the platform went from 175K to 750K lines and shipped 705 deploys. The twenty-item risk register came out of reading it, not out of a template; eight items are closed, each citing the pull request that did it. That is the same instrument the review produces, run on a system I did not write.
Before that
- 01 Vice President, Deutsche Bank — governance, risk, and the cost of irreversible decisions.
- 02 Hotel general manager — a P&L, a payroll, and no engineering department to hide behind.
- 03 A platform of 100+ microservices, built and operated — where I learned what fails at scale.
Who this is for
It fits when
You built the system yourself, with agents, and it works.
It doesn't when
You want a second opinion to overrule an engineer you already trust.
It fits when
Someone is paying for it, or has signed to.
It doesn't when
There are no users and no launch date.
It fits when
You cannot evaluate a technical hire, and hiring one is the next decision.
It doesn't when
You need bodies by the day rather than a judgment.
It fits when
The next move is expensive and hard to reverse.
It doesn't when
You want a remediation quote before anyone has read the code.
Nothing built yet, and the first architecture decision is the one you are afraid of? That is a different engagement, and it starts with judgment rather than a review.
Greenfield engagements →
Crosby Thirty-Three GmbH · Berlin · Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 288227 B
contact@crosby33.com ·
Legal Notice ·
Privacy
Last updated