the people getting insane results with AI aren't smarter than you (or maybe they are but thats not the point). last week I watched someone burn 6 hours fighting with claude code. by the end they blamed the model. said AI is overhyped. said the outputs were garbage.
the problem wasn't claude code. it was what they fed it.
Ive shipped dozens of AI systems this past year. the difference between people who get 10x results and people who quit frustrated comes down to one thing: the quality of what goes in determines the quality of what comes out.
that's it. that's the whole secret.
the models are freakishly good now. if you're getting slop, it's not the tool.
stop describing products. start describing features.
this is where everyone goes wrong.
you sit down and type "build me an app that does X." claude code doesn't know what you mean. it fills in the blanks with assumptions. those assumptions are wrong.
here's the shift: stop thinking about the final product. start thinking about the pieces.
every product is a collection of features. break it down.
want a scheduling tool? what are the actual pieces?
feature 1: user uploads something
feature 2: system analyzes it
feature 3: interface displays options
feature 4: action gets triggered
now you have something concrete.
build feature 1. test it. does it work? move to feature 2. test it. does it work? keep going.
this is how you avoid building a house on a broken foundation. each piece gets validated before you stack the next one.
people shipping real products think in features. people stuck in tutorial hell think in products.
make claude code interview you
instead of telling it what you want, flip the script. make it ask you questions until it understands exactly what you're building.
here's the prompt:
"i want to build [thing]. interview me about every detail. ask me about technical decisions. ask me about design choices. ask me about edge cases. use the ask user question tool. don't stop until you understand exactly what i want."
what happens next will annoy you.
the questions keep coming. round after round.
when i built my last lead routing system, claude code asked me:
what triggers the workflow? form submission or webhook?
what data needs to be extracted from each lead?
how should leads be scored? what criteria?
what happens when a lead scores below threshold?
what's the notification method? slack? email? both?
what's the response time requirement?
how should handoffs be logged?
these are questions you probably haven't thought about. that's the point.
answer everything. if you don't know something, open a separate chat and ask. paste the question in, get an answer, paste it back.
this process is tedious. it's supposed to be.
by the end, you have a document describing exactly what you're building. not vibes. not "something like notion but for dogs." actual specifics.
i spent 45 minutes on one of these interview sessions last month. saved me 14+ hours of debugging because i caught edge cases before writing a single line.
most people skip this. they use the default plan mode, get two questions, and start building. then wonder why they're fixing things for days.
build slow before you build fast
everyone wants automation. set it and forget it. AI working while you sleep.
here's the truth: if you haven't built something manually first, automation will destroy you.
not because automation is bad. because you don't know what you're automating yet.
when you build piece by piece, you learn the rhythm. you see where things break. you develop a sense for what good looks like versus what's technically functional but garbage.
skip this and you'll automate a broken process. you won't realize it's broken until you've wasted days and tokens.
i see people who've never shipped a single working app trying to run automated loops. it's like buying a self-driving car before you know how to steer.
get your reps in first. build feature by feature. test each one. deploy something real. once you've done that a few times, then automate.
the people flexing automated workflows earned the right to automate by building manually first.
watch your context window
you start a session. things are going great. output is sharp. you're making progress.
then the quality drops. responses get worse. claude code starts forgetting things you told it an hour ago.
what happened? you overloaded the context.
think of it like a class where the professor keeps dumping information on you. at some point you're overwhelmed and start forgetting the earlier stuff.
once you've used about half the context window, start a fresh session.
but how does the new session know what you've done?
documentation.
every feature you build gets logged. every decision recorded. the new session reads this file and picks up where you left off.
keep a progress file. update it after each feature. when you start fresh, claude code has everything it needs to continue.
stop obsessing over tools
everyone's talking about MCPs, skills, plugins, custom markdown files.
these things are fine. but i guarantee they're not why your product isn't working.
your plan is why your product isn't working.
a perfect tool setup with a garbage plan produces garbage. a basic setup with a great plan produces something real.
invest your energy in the input. the tooling is secondary.
taste is the real gap
building things is getting easier. anyone with internet has access to tools that didn't exist two years ago. the barrier to creating something functional is basically zero.
so why isn't everyone shipping?
the gap isn't technical. it's taste.
taste means knowing what to build. knowing what makes your thing different from the 50 clones that exist. knowing when something feels right versus when it's technically correct but forgettable.
i saw someone build a running app that generates routes based on your emotions. stressed? angry? calm? the app reads how you're feeling and creates a path that matches.
that's not a technical achievement. a thousand people could build the mechanics.
the difference is someone sat down and thought: what would make this interesting? what hasn't been done? they sketched it out. thought about the colors for different moods. considered the animations. made intentional choices at every step.
that's taste. claude code doesn't give you that.
AI amplifies whatever you put into it. vague thinking produces vague outputs. intentional thinking produces intentional outputs.
the tldr
think in features, not products
make claude code interview you before building
earn the right to automate by building manually first
the people winning right now figured this out months ago.
the people who figure it out today still have time.
I put together a one-pager with my exact claude code setup.
the interview prompt. the progress file template. the feature testing checklist. everything i covered here in a copy-paste format.
RT + comment "Claude Code" and i'll send it over.
if you want more breakdowns like this:
Youtube (launching soon): https://www.youtube.com/@damianplayer deep dives and tutorials)
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/damianplayer/ (daily posts on AI and business)
