I've Been Building Backwards for 6 Months (And 3 Other Truths That Hurt Today)

i'm documenting this because i finally fixed some things that were broken in my approach. not perfect, but clearer.

the idea capture problem (finally solved)

here's something embarrassing: i'd get these brilliant ideas randomly. in the shower, during a walk, while coding. then when i'd sit down to actually build something? blank. gone. couldn't remember what seemed so obvious 2 hours ago.

today i fixed this.

The System:

• Capture ideas wherever they come (phone, notebook, during conversations)

• End of day: Review and pick best 3 ideas

• End of week: Review and pick best 5 ideas

• Integrated MCP with Claude so i can just say "capture this idea" during our conversations

sounds simple but this solves a massive problem. i was losing so many insights just because i couldn't track them properly.

built the complete Obsidian structure for this. tracking ideas, daily captures, weekly reviews, project-specific notes.

Why this matters: When i sit down Monday to write my newsletter, i'll have the entire week's best insights already documented. no more "what did i even do this week?"

the liam ottley meeting (reality check)

attended Liam Ottley's zoom today. wanted to see what everyone else is building.

here's what surprised me:

People are DESPERATE for automation. Not future automation. Right now automation.

Most attendees? Only using n8n. That's it. Simple workflow automation.

And here I am over here having built:

• End-to-end SaaS applications

• RAG systems with vector databases

• Multi-agent orchestration frameworks

• Enterprise-level solutions with monitoring, scaling, deployment pipelines

• Computer vision projects

• Full ML/AI engineering stack

honestly felt a bit weird. like i've been training for a marathon when everyone else just needs to run 5K.

But here's the thing: Someone in the meeting is working on healthcare automation. Same niche as me.

that validated everything. if someone else found this niche worth pursuing, i'm on the right track.

the hardest truth i learned today

everyone in that meeting confirmed what i was scared to admit:

Landing the first client is the hardest part of this entire thing.

Not the building. Not the technical stuff. Not understanding AI.

Getting someone to say "yes, i'll pay you to build this."

You need either:

1. Trust (they already know you or someone vouches for you)

2. Proof (you've done this before, have portfolio, testimonials)

3. Risk removal (make it so easy to say yes they'd be stupid not to try)

i have none of these right now. that's the problem i need to solve.

the strategy pivot (build second, not first)

for the past few weeks i was planning this:

Old Plan (the wrong one):

1. Build 3-5 templated automation solutions

2. Create landing pages for each

3. Market them and wait for clients

4. Hope someone buys

Timeline: 3-4 months of building before first conversation with a real client.

today i realized: that's completely backwards.

New Plan (what actually makes sense):

1. Find a client (cold outreach, warm intros, whatever works)

2. Talk to them, understand their actual pain points

3. Build exactly what they need

4. Get paid

5. Repeat and refine

Timeline: Could have first client conversation next week.

Why this is better: If i build for 3 months and nobody wants it, i wasted 3 months. If i talk to someone for 30 minutes and they don't want what i'm thinking of building, i saved 3 months.

this should have been obvious but i needed to hear it from multiple people today.

the overengineering trap (20 hours vs 200 hours)

had this realization during the meeting:

Client Problem: "We need to answer patient FAQs faster"

Overengineered Solution (what i was planning):

• Full RAG system with vector database

• Fine-tuned embeddings

• Custom React frontend

• Multi-agent orchestration

• MCP integrations

• Perfect documentation

• Time: 200 hours

• Result: Impressive technically, probably more than they need

Simple Solution (what they actually need):

• n8n workflow

• OpenAI API with prompt containing their FAQs

• Simple chatbot widget embedded on their site

• Time: 20 hours

• Result: Solves their problem, they're happy

unless they explicitly need the complex version, why would i build it?

The Rule: Start simple. Add complexity only when they need it.

If later they say "we need to pull from our entire knowledge base, not just FAQs" → then add RAG.

If they say "we need this to understand context across multiple conversations" → then add memory/agents.

But don't add it because it's cool. Add it because they need it.

this is probably the most important technical realization i had today.

how other founders actually landed their first clients

researched this today. here's what worked:

It's less about capability, more about removing risk.

Most founders got their first client through:

1. Money-back guarantees: "If you're not satisfied, full refund"

2. Performance-based pricing: "Pay me only when it saves you X hours"

3. Free pilots: "Let me build this for free for 2 weeks, you decide after"

4. Clear ROI: "This will save you $X per month, i'm charging $Y"

5. Warm introductions: Someone they trust said "this person can help you"

Notice what's missing? Nobody said "i built an impressive portfolio and they found me."

They all structured their offers to make saying yes easier than saying no.

that's what i need to focus on. not building more impressive demos. building offers where the client doesn't feel risk.

the content strategy (why i'm doing this differently)

most automation agency founders:

1. Build the agency

2. Get clients

3. THEN create content about it

i'm doing:

1. Build AND document simultaneously

2. Show every metric, every conversation, every pivot

3. Share the thinking, not just results

4. Week 1 starts Monday regardless of whether i have clients yet

Why the hybrid approach:

• Accountability: Can't quit if i'm documenting publicly

• Learning: Writing forces clarity

• Authority: Even if i don't land clients fast, i'm building proof i can execute and communicate

• Help others: Someone 6 months behind me can learn from my real journey

it's riskier. if i fail, everyone sees it.

but if i succeed, they see the real path. not the cleaned-up version people share after they've already won.

the obsidian system (finally organized)

built out my complete Second Brain structure today:

SECOND BRAIN/
├── INBOX/
│   ├── daily-captures.md (quick ideas throughout day)
│   └── quick-ideas.md (one-liners)
├── KITCHEN/ (active projects)
│   ├── healthcare-agency/
│   │   ├── dental-automation.md
│   │   ├── therapy-practice.md
│   │   ├── fitness-studios.md
│   │   ├── client-conversations.md
│   │   └── pricing-models.md
│   ├── newsletter/
│   │   ├── next-issue-draft.md
│   │   ├── story-snippets.md
│   │   ├── metrics-to-share.md
│   │   └── newsletter-backlog.md
│   └── personal-fitness/
└── ARCHIVE/

The MCP integration means i can just tell Claude "capture this idea" and it goes into the right place.

End of day: Review inbox, pick best 3, move to proper project folders. End of week: Review everything, pick best 5 for newsletter.

Why this works: My ideas are random but my review is systematic. The system doesn't fight my natural creativity, it just organizes it after.

the MCP overwhelm (still learning)

revised MCPs today. felt overwhelmed honestly.

i had built projects with them before, but today diving back in.. there's a lot.

Model Context Protocols, tool calling, function definitions, state management, conversation threading...

felt like i'd forgotten more than i remembered.

but here's what i realized: i don't need to master everything. i need to use what solves today's problem.

Today's problem: Idea capture → Solved with basic MCP commands Tomorrow's problem: TBD

stop trying to learn everything. start using what you need when you need it.

what i'm doing differently than everyone else

Most people in that meeting:

• Using only n8n

• Building simple automations

• Focused on getting clients fast

• Not documenting the journey

Me:

• Built complex AI/ML systems (maybe overqualified?)

• Starting with healthcare niche (validated today ✓)

• Building AND documenting simultaneously

• Hybrid approach: simple solutions with option to add complexity

My advantage: I can start simple (n8n) but scale to complex (RAG, agents, custom models) if client needs it.

My risk: Might overcomplicate when simple is better.

The balance: Start simple, add sophistication only when they're paying for it.

the 90-day plan (crystallized today)

Weeks 1-4: Find first client

• Cold outreach starting Monday

• Reddit posts in practitioner communities

• Warm intreach through connections

• Structure offers with zero client risk

• Build exactly what they need, nothing more

Weeks 5-8: Refine and repeat

• Learn from first client experience

• Adjust positioning based on what actually resonated

• Test different verticals if needed

• Document everything

Weeks 9-12: Scale what works

• Double down on whatever vertical responded best

• Build 2-3 more solutions in that vertical

• Establish clear positioning

• Hopefully: $2.5K-5K MRR

Documentation: Every week, share:

• Exact outreach attempts and response rates

• Client conversations (what they actually said)

• What i built and why

• What worked vs flopped

• Revenue: $0 until it's not $0

tomorrow's focus

1. Idea capture system built (done today)

2. Finalize list of 100 practices to contact (tomorrow)

3. Write first cold email templates (tomorrow)

4. Draft Week 1 newsletter outline (tomorrow)

5. Prepare first Reddit post for r/dentistry (tomorrow)

Monday: First batch of outreach goes out. Newsletter Week 1 publishes.

the honest truth

i don't know if this will work.

i've got technical skills, i've validated the niche exists, i've got a plan for getting clients.

but that gap between "here's my plan" and "here's my first paying client" is where most people fail.

and i might fail too.

but at least if i do, i'll have documented exactly why. and that'll be worth something.

let's see what happens.

Krishna