````markdown ════════════════════════════════════════════════════ PROJECT HANDOFF FILE ════════════════════════════════════════════════════ Project Goal: Launch MVP for AI-powered meeting transcription SaaS within 60 days Phase completed: Phase 1 — Foundation & Strategy Next focus: Finalize pricing model and build onboarding prototype File created: 2026-02-27 ════════════════════════════════════════════════════ SECTION 1 — DECISIONS (do not revisit these) DECISION 1: What was decided: Tech stack is Next.js + Supabase + OpenAI API Why it was chosen: Speed of development, scalability, GPT transcription quality What it closes off: No switching to alternative backends/DBs without major rework Confidence level: FIRM DECISION 2: What was decided: Target users are solo founders and small teams Why it was chosen: Focused ICP avoids over-engineering for enterprise edge cases What it closes off: Enterprise-grade features (SSO, org-wide admin) are out of scope for MVP Confidence level: FIRM DECISION 3: What was decided: Accuracy is prioritized over transcription speed Why it was chosen: Core value prop for target personas is reliable output, not real-time What it closes off: Real-time live-transcription features deprioritized for MVP Confidence level: FIRM DECISION 4: What was decided: Chrome-extension-only model was rejected Why it was chosen: Too limiting in distribution and cross-browser accessibility What it closes off: Extension-first architecture; product must be web-app-first Confidence level: FIRM DECISION 5: What was decided: Onboarding flow has been drafted Why it was chosen: — What it closes off: — Confidence level: PROVISIONAL — needs prototype validation next phase DECISION 6: What was decided: Pricing tiers were NOT finalized Why it was chosen: N/A — decision deferred What it closes off: Nothing yet; this is the primary next-phase task Confidence level: TENTATIVE ⚠️ FLAG FOR NEXT PHASE ════════════════════════════════════════════════════ SECTION 2 — CONSTRAINTS (work within these) HARD: • 60-day MVP launch window (fixed deadline) • OpenAI API dependency — transcription quality/cost tied to third-party pricing SOFT: • Solo founder + small team ICP scope (could expand if pricing model demands it) • Onboarding flow structure (drafted, not validated — can change in prototype phase) DISCOVERED: • GDPR compliance concerns identified — data residency and processing agreements may be required before launch depending on user geography ════════════════════════════════════════════════════ SECTION 3 — OPEN QUESTIONS (resolve before or during next phase) BLOCKING: OQ-1: What are the GDPR obligations before launch? Why it matters: May require legal agreements, data processing disclosures, or EU data residency — could delay launch or break compliance Owner: Human (legal review or qualified advisor) OQ-2: What is the pricing model? (tiers, limits, trial structure) Why it matters: Directly drives onboarding prototype design — paywall placement, feature gating, and CTA copy all depend on this Owner: Human (founder decision) + AI support for benchmarking IMPORTANT: OQ-3: Will audio/transcript data be stored, and for how long? Why it matters: Affects GDPR scope, Supabase storage architecture, and user trust messaging in onboarding Owner: Human + technical review OQ-4: What does the onboarding prototype need to validate? Why it matters: Prototype scope should be scoped to answer specific assumptions — needs a defined success metric Owner: Human ════════════════════════════════════════════════════ SECTION 4 — ARTIFACTS AVAILABLE ARTIFACT 1: Name: Tech Stack Decision Type: Decision Status: FINAL Next use: Reference when scoping onboarding prototype build — no re-evaluation needed Location: Section 1, Decision 1 above ARTIFACT 2: Name: User Persona Definitions (Solo Founders & Small Teams) Type: Framework Status: FINAL Next use: Use to validate onboarding copy, pricing tier names, and feature framing Location: Defined in phase — paste full persona doc into next session if available ARTIFACT 3: Name: Onboarding Flow Draft Type: Draft Status: DRAFT Next use: Input for prototype build — must be reviewed against finalized pricing before implementation begins Location: Retrieve from phase work; attach to next session ARTIFACT 4: Name: Pricing Tier Debate Notes Type: Analysis Status: UNDER REVIEW Next use: Starting point for pricing finalization — do not discard, resume from here Location: Retrieve from phase work; attach to next session ════════════════════════════════════════════════════ SECTION 5 — CONTEXT FOR NEXT AGENT This project is building an AI meeting transcription SaaS with a hard 60-day MVP deadline. The foundation is set (stack, personas, product direction), but two critical items remain open: GDPR compliance posture and pricing model — both of which must be resolved before the onboarding prototype can be properly scoped or built. The next session should open by resolving pricing, then use it to finalize the onboarding prototype spec, while flagging GDPR as a parallel human-action item. ════════════════════════════════════════════════════ SECTION 6 — RISKS & WATCH POINTS RISK 1: GDPR left unresolved could become a launch blocker → If legal review is delayed, it may surface too late to course-correct within the 60-day window. Treat as parallel track, not a later-phase item. RISK 2: Pricing indecision will cascade into prototype delays → Onboarding flow, feature gating, and CTA design all depend on pricing structure. Every week without a pricing decision delays prototype fidelity. RISK 3: Onboarding draft was created before pricing was set → The draft may need non-trivial revision once pricing is finalized. Treat it as a starting point, not a locked spec. RISK 4: OpenAI API cost not yet modeled against pricing tiers → If per-minute transcription cost exceeds what the pricing model supports, unit economics break. Validate before committing to pricing publicly. ════════════════════════════════════════════════════ HANDOFF QUALITY SCORE: 8/10 BLOCKING ITEMS BEFORE NEXT PHASE: 2 (GDPR review, Pricing decision) ESTIMATED CONTEXT COMPRESSION: ~380 words in → ~620 words structured out ════════════════════════════════════════════════════ ```` Two things worth flagging before you move forward: **GDPR is the hidden critical path.** It's listed as next-phase work but it's actually a *parallel* human task — if it waits until after pricing and prototyping, you may hit a compliance wall at week 8 with no runway to fix it. Assign it a human owner now. **Pricing must come before prototyping, not alongside it.** The onboarding draft was built without a pricing model, so it's likely to need revision. Locking pricing first — even provisionally — will save a full rebuild cycle on the prototype.