Watch judgment applied to real work.
Learn which questions expose weak assumptions across product, UX, frontend, backend, AI, Test/QA, deployment, and ownership.
YakData Forward · FDE Production Reviews
Build something that can survive production review.
The free FDE Lab shows the standard. Production Reviews applies it to your work.
Bring a real system, a production-shaped portfolio project, or one consequential engineering decision into weekly live review. We test the work across the whole operating path, not only the code or model you happen to be looking at that week.
Enrollment is not open yet. Join the interest list for details when the next quarterly review period opens.
$1,500Per quarter
Weekly liveReview cadence
7 gatesDecision through ownership
Field LibraryIncluded while active
01 · Why production review
You can be locally right and still be building the wrong system.
Production failures often live at the boundaries: a good model with weak acceptance logic, clean backend code with a broken human workflow, sound architecture with no recovery path, or a useful prototype nobody can own. The review is designed to find the weak decision, wherever it sits.
Use the same standard on your system.
Work at your own pace. You do not have to follow the seven public episodes on a shared schedule.
Bring the decision that could change what you build next.
Use a sanitized artifact and one focused question when experienced external scrutiny is worth more than another hour of staring at the same problem.
Free FDE LabHere is exactly how I judge production work.
→
FDE Production ReviewsNow put your version of the work in front of that judgment.
02 · Seven production review gates
Enter where your work is. Review the decision that matters now.
The seven gates mirror the public FDE Lab production path. They are not a waterfall and you do not have to start at Gate 1. A review can move backward or forward when the evidence exposes a dependency elsewhere.
Decision + Scope Review
Bring: decision map, problem definition, scope boundary, acceptance criteria, or owner map.
We test: whether the problem deserves a system, who owns the consequence, what Version 1 excludes, and what evidence would justify continuing.
Requirements Review
Bring: rules, evidence schema, context inputs, workflow states, requirements, or acceptance cases.
We test: whether expert judgment is explicit enough for software and Test/QA to verify without inventing missing meaning.
Architecture Review
Bring: system architecture, API/data contracts, model boundary, persistence plan, deployment boundary, or dependency graph.
We test: whether product, workflow, data, models, controls, security, observability, and role responsibilities form one coherent operating plan.
Vertical Slice Review
Bring: the smallest end-to-end path, integration artifact, API/UI contract, or first complete transaction.
We test: whether one real case crosses every critical layer and what integration evidence says should change before the backlog expands.
AI Evaluation Review
Bring: benchmark, labeled examples, failure matrix, model comparison, telemetry, or human-override design.
We test: false positives, false negatives, missing context, malformed output, latency, cost, confidence behavior, and where human judgment remains required.
Production Readiness Review
Bring: readiness checklist, release plan, regression evidence, observability, recovery path, security/access approach, or acceptance evidence.
We test: whether the working slice can be operated, monitored, recovered, versioned, and released under explicit evidence rather than demo optimism.
Deployment + Ownership Review
Bring: runbook, handoff package, operating workflow, ownership matrix, monitoring plan, extension design, or improvement backlog.
We test: whether someone else can operate, recover, extend, evaluate, and improve the capability without the original builder standing beside it.
What would I find if I reviewed your version of this?That question is the bridge from every free FDE Lab episode into the matching Production Review gate.
03 · How a review works
One artifact. One decision. A review that ends with an action.
The goal is not to generate a pile of comments. It is to improve the next consequential decision in the build.
- 01Submit a sanitized artifactArchitecture, requirement, workflow, test result, evaluation, release plan, handoff material, or another concrete piece of the system.
- 02Name the decision“Review my project” is too broad. “Do these acceptance criteria actually constrain the model behavior we care about?” is reviewable.
- 03Review the system, not just the artifactWe test assumptions, follow dependencies across role lanes, and move to the actual weak point when it is somewhere else.
- 04Leave with the next actionBuild, test, redesign, narrow, remediate, release, defer, transfer, or stop. The review ends with a decision.
One bounded artifact, enough context to understand it, and the decision you need to make.
Assumptions, acceptance logic, evidence, dependencies, failure behavior, operating constraints, and ownership.
A clearer decision, specific issues to address, evidence to gather, and a next action you can execute.
04 · Production Review Record
Keep a record of what was challenged and what changed.
When you bring work through Production Reviews, maintain a concise record of what was reviewed, what changed, what evidence remains open, and what decision came next.
Reviewed does not mean passed. A review record is evidence of the work and scrutiny applied. It is not an endorsement that every system decision is correct.
Production Review Record
Review gateArchitecture Review
ArtifactSystem architecture + API contract
DecisionWhere should deterministic control end and model inference begin?
Review findingsAssumptions, risks, changes requested
Evidence / next actionWhat must be tested or changed next
StatusReviewed · not an endorsement
05 · One offer, three ways to use it
Same seven review gates. Different job to be done.
There are no separate student, professional, or manager tiers. FDE Production Reviews is one $1,500/quarter offer with FDE Field Library access included.
Build evidence that you understand the whole production job.
Use a serious portfolio or production-shaped project to practice decisions across PM, UX, frontend, backend, AI, Test/QA, deployment, and ownership. The objective is work you can explain, defend, and improve under scrutiny.
Best next step: bring the artifact where you are least certain your reasoning will survive review.Preselect aspiring / transitioning FDE →Get another experienced set of eyes on the system you are already building.
Bring active architecture, integration, evaluation, workflow, or production-readiness decisions when the cost of a weak assumption is rising. You remain responsible for implementation and the production decision.
Best next step: review the decision that could materially change what you build next.Preselect working engineer / builder →Give an engineer external production scrutiny around real work.
Use the reviews as professional development tied to systems your team is actually responsible for, using sanitized material where required. The engineer does the work; the review strengthens the judgment applied to it.
Best next step: fund one quarter and evaluate the quality of decisions and artifacts that come back to the team.Preselect manager / employer →“I’d like approval for one quarter of YakData FDE Production Reviews. I’ll apply the FDE Lab production method directly to our work and can bring current architecture, evaluation, workflow, or deployment decisions for weekly live review. FDE Field Library access is included.”
Need YakData to own private definition or delivery? Production Reviews is not a substitute for a client engagement. Work With YakData →
06 · Boundaries
Professional review, not outsourced delivery.
Production Reviews is designed to strengthen your judgment and decisions. Private implementation and delivery remain a separate YakData engagement.
No shared build scheduleEnter at the gate your work is in. You do not have to keep pace with the public series or other members.
No guaranteed personal slot every sessionMembers can attend each scheduled review; submissions are reviewed as the live queue and relevance allow.
No confidential company materialUse sanitized artifacts. Do not submit credentials, customer records, regulated data, proprietary source code, private forecasts, or trade secrets.
No staff augmentationIf the work requires private system access, organization-specific delivery ownership, or hands-on implementation, that belongs in a YakData engagement.
No automatic “pass”The point is rigorous scrutiny. A reviewed artifact can still need substantial redesign, evidence, testing, narrowing, or a stop decision.
07 · Production Reviews interest
What would you put under review?
This is an interest list, not enrollment. Join it to receive details when the next quarterly review period opens.
Interest received.Enrollment details will be sent to the address you provided when the next review period opens.
Need private delivery instead? Work With YakData →