Work, with the numbers left in

Every competitor we studied shows logos and adjectives. These two write ups carry the metric before, the metric after, how long it took and the decision we got wrong. If a number is missing it is because the client will not let us publish it, and we say so.

01 / Agentic SaaS, agency tooling

CampaignSwift, an agentic platform made safe to retry

Brief Agents plan, chase approvals, triage the inbox and publish across seven networks, proposing every action for a human to confirm. Retries had to survive an outage without posting twice.

Approach Publishing moved to an idempotent queue keyed on account and scheduled slot, so a retry after an outage cannot double post. Agent runs became durable steps with a confirmation gate and a per client credit cap.

Got wrong We metered AI credits per agent run before we understood how agencies batch work at month end. Two customers got a surprising bill and we rewrote the cap to be per client, per month.

8.4s

p95 publish, from 74s

41%

Lower cost per agent run

11 wks

Two engineers

02 / AI video, SaaS launches

ShipMotion, a render queue that stopped timing out

Brief One brief becomes five launch videos, sized for Twitter, LinkedIn, Product Hunt and Story. Long 1080p renders were timing out, and a retry started the whole job again.

Approach Split rendering into one job per scene, keyed so a finished scene is never rendered twice. A retry now resumes instead of restarting, and queue depth went on a dashboard the team actually watches.

Got wrong Two weeks went on encoder settings before profiling showed the time was in scene composition, not encoding. The same lesson as the last project, which is why measuring is stage one now.

42s

p95 render, from 3m 40s

61%

Lower render cost per video

7 wks

One engineer

Two studies is what a studio this size can produce honestly in a year of client work. If you want to talk to either client, ask on the call and we will introduce you. That offer is the whole reason to read this page rather than a portfolio grid. The engagements behind both started as pilots, described on the hire ReactJS developers India page, and the second one became the Node engagement it is now.

Two consequences worth stating plainly. We have fewer case studies than firms who publish everything. And some clients will not let us publish figures at all, in which case we say the figure exists and is confidential rather than swapping it for an adjective.

1. 01

   Ask for the client

   A vendor confident in the work will connect you with someone who lived it. Ask that person what went wrong, not whether they were happy.

2. 02

   Ask for the commits

   By the end of a paid pilot we can show you the shape of our work in a repository you already own. A vendor refusing all code visibility is telling you something.

3. 03

   Ask about the estimate

   Did it land on time is a weak question. By how much did the first estimate miss, and what caused it, gets either a real answer or an evasive one.

4. 04

   Ask who is still there

   The team that did the work two years ago may have left. Ask whether the named engineer on your project was on the case study you were shown.

If the answers are thin, that is data. If they are good, you have narrowed a shortlist in an hour, which is better value than another discovery call. When you want to test us specifically, the two week paid pilot is described on the hire React page, and its delivery equivalent on Node JS development services. How a pilot is scoped, and what to score it on, is written out in running a two week paid pilot.