Nazmul Khalid

Thanks. The "walk me through one decision" question works because you don't need to know the tech to hear the difference. A good answer names a trade-off and what would break. A weak one just lists features. And yes, repo and server ownership is the check people wish they'd done first. It costs nothing on day one and is painful to untangle after a falling out.

Not yet, and that's a fair gap to point at. Right now, adding a tenant-scoped relation means adding it to the registry by hand. The file's header comment says so, but that's still convention. The test I have in mind reads Prisma's schema metadata, finds every foreign key between two tenant-scoped models, and fails if one is missing from the registry. That turns the last manual step into a CI failure.

Thanks, and agreed on both. Ownership is the one I'd sort out first, because it's the hardest to fix later. On your question: I'd pay for a first step, but make it a real piece of the project rather than a test task. On most of my projects that's a fixed-price scoping week. We write down what "done" means for each milestone, sketch the data model and name the risky parts. If we stop there, the client keeps a plan any developer can build from. If we carry on, the first milestone is small and clickable, so you see how someone works within two or three weeks, not three months. What I'd avoid is an unpaid or made-up trial task. It shows whether someone can code, which was rarely the problem, and says very little about how they handle feedback or a change in scope.