Senior Product Builder

Mission

This is not a traditional Product Manager role. We are not looking for someone who writes requirements and waits for engineering. We are looking for someone who builds.

You will take a workflow from concept to working prototype before a sprint starts. You will design AI systems, not just describe them. You will validate with real users, not decks. And you will own the full arc from insight to production, including the parts that used to belong to other functions.

If that sounds like the job you have been trying to do inside a traditional Product Manager role, this is the upgrade.

What You Will Actually Do

• Prototype before planning. When a new product opportunity surfaces, your first output is a working prototype, not a spec. You use tools like Claude Code, agentic frameworks, and no-code APIs to build fast enough that engineering validation happens on something real, not something imagined.

• Design AI workflows end-to-end. You think in systems, not features. You map the full chain: input, reasoning, output, action. You decide where AI belongs in a workflow, where rules are more reliable, and how to structure context so the system behaves predictably at scale.

• Own the evaluation layer. Before anything ships, you define what good output looks like. You build evals, monitor for drift, and create the feedback loops that keep AI features working after the demo is over.

• Reason about cost and latency. You treat token usage, response time, and model selection as product decisions, not engineering concerns. You understand the unit economics of every feature you ship and can speak to feasibility and scalability without guessing.

• Validate with users, not stakeholders. You put working things in front of real users early and often. You design feedback loops that generate signal, not sentiment.

• Ship. Not someday. Fast.

What We Are Looking For

Must-haves:

• 4+ years in a product role, with at least 2 years working directly on AI-powered products

• Demonstrated ability to build working prototypes using AI development tools (Claude Code, Cursor, v0, or equivalent)

• Hands-on experience designing agentic workflows, including tool use, memory, and multi-step reasoning

• Clear understanding of RAG, prompt architecture, and when to use models versus rules

• Experience defining and running evals for AI features in production

• Track record of shipping products, not just planning them

Strong signal:

• You have built something on your own, outside of a job, using AI tools

• You can walk through the cost and latency tradeoffs of a feature you shipped

• You have worked in a paired product-engineering model where prototypes precede specs

• You have owned a feature from zero to production, including the parts no one assigned to you

Not required:

• Computer science degree

• Ability to write production-ready backend code

• Experience at a large company (small team instincts are a plus here)

What You Will Not Do

• Write long PRDs that sit in Notion waiting for an engineering sprint

• Coordinate meetings between functions that should be talking directly

• Manage backlogs in isolation from the users they are supposed to serve

• Treat AI as a feature category rather than a design medium

How We Work

We eliminated traditional PRDs. Product and engineering work in paired ownership, with prototypes expected within hours of a new idea. Reviews are outcome-based, not output-based. The expectation is that you can move fast enough that engineering is validating something real, not waiting for a handoff.

This is a high-trust, high-accountability model. You will have significant autonomy over what you build and how you build it. You will also be expected to show your work, early and often, in the form of working artifacts, not status updates.

How to Apply

Skip the cover letter. Instead, send us:

1. One example of a prototype or working artifact you built using AI tools. A link, a demo, a repo, anything real.

2. Two to three sentences on the workflow it automated or the problem it solved.

3. The cost or latency tradeoff you had to navigate to make it work in practice, even if it was just for a side project.

We will respond to every submission that includes all three.