CETI.AI · Proposal for SCATR Corp

Zero trust,
for the code your agents write.

Eight weeks, two cohorts: Claude Code and Claude Cowork. Sixteen hours per person, on your own repos. Your team ships faster, and a human clears every merge.

8 Weekly Systems Claude Code + Cowork 16 hrs / person

Why Now

Your agents got faster.
Review didn't.

#1

your team's stated bottleneck: PR review

$12.6M

Series A (First In, Apr 2026): pressure to ship

5–10 hrs

review time/wk we baseline in week 0 (illustrative)

Generating code is cheap now. Clearing it, at your standard and without burning your seniors, is the work. That is what we train.

Your champion, 2026-07-13: "PR review is our biggest bottleneck by far." The review-hours band is an illustrative planning figure, baselined with your team in week 0 and measured at week 8.

How We Work

Trust nothing. Review everything.

You run this posture on your network. We bring it to your code path: a zero-trust posture for AI-assisted development.

Untrusted by default

Agent output is untrusted until a human clears it. The same default you enforce on the wire.

Amplify reviewers

Training makes senior review fast. It does not replace it.

Human on every merge

Least-privilege access, secrets discipline, an approval gate. Nothing auto-merges.

Built on your polyglot stack: Java, Python, C++, C#/.NET, and mobile. Not a generic AI course.

What Changes

The time we go after.

PR review & comprehension 40 → ~15 min Understanding what an agent did 25 → ~10 min Tests, boilerplate & scaffolding 35 → ~12 min
TodayTarget

Illustrative targets, not a promise. We baseline your real review time, cycle time and rework in week 0, then report the measured delta at week 8, up or down.

See It

Vague ticket in.
Reviewed PR out.

agent-run · unguided
[ SAMPLE · ILLUSTRATIVE ]
# ticket: "fix the transit retry thing"
+ 247 − 18 across 9 files, 0 tests
! swallowed exception in the retry loop
! secret read straight from config
! no summary: reviewer re-reads all 9 files
# agent re-explains itself each prompt; tokens burn

A full-file re-read becomes a scoped review at your standard. Time measured against your week-0 baseline, not asserted.

Sample is illustrative. Every skill ends in human review. Nothing auto-merges.

Before You Ask

You're wondering three things.

Is our code safe?

Tap to answer →

Enterprise controls; your data is not used to train models by default. Secrets stay in your secrets manager. Sessions record to your storage, owned by you. For CUI or classified work we scope a week-0 data-handling review and touch no repo you have not cleared.

Will it fit how we build?

Tap to answer →

We train on your repos, your Jira and CI, your standards. Your rules get encoded as skills and a CLAUDE.md, versioned in your repo and owned by you. (Tracker confirmed at kickoff.)

Does it replace engineers?

Tap to answer →

No. Your engineers apply their judgment across more of the codebase per hour. The human signs every merge. We train reviewers, not around them.

Tap a card for the answer.

Consistency

Your team. One standard.

HOUSE STANDARD

Every engineer's private Claude fragments the codebase's voice. One shared standard, skills plus a review gate, makes the PR read the same whoever wrote it.

Connected, With Permission

One protocol. Scoped access.

Repos / Git Jira CI / CD Docs CLAUDE

MCP connects your repos, tracker, CI and docs through one auditable interface. It is connectivity, not a security control, so we scope it per source, read-only first, with written approval per connection. The protocol is the plumbing; the controls are yours to set.

The Gate

Fluent is not the same
as correct.

Claude is fluent and confident, and sometimes confidently wrong. So every agent PR passes the same gate, taught and enforced:

  • 1. A written reviewer checklist your seniors sign off.
  • 2. Tests that assert behavior, checked for quality, not just green.
  • 3. A secrets scan in CI.
  • 4. A human approver. No gate, no merge.

Where correctness is non-negotiable, agents draft and humans verify

Auth flowsSecret handlingInput validationTransit-path logic

We do not put an agent near your cipher.

The Stack + The Guardrails

Claude Code. Claude Cowork.

Claude Code

The technical cohort. Ship faster in your real repos.

Claude Cowork

The non-technical cohort. Build in a shared workspace.

Craft guardrails

Senior-engineer rules against AI code slop, installed as skills.

// one real guardrail, from the CLAUDE.md we write with your seniors
- No new dependency without a justification in the PR body.
- No swallowed exceptions.
- Every public function() ships with a test that fails first.

This deck, our site and our proposals run on the same stack and guardrails we install. Open the source and check.

Your Instructor

MM

Manutej Mulaveesala

AI Instructor & Software Consultant. Founder, CETI.AI.

10+

years training engineering teams

5000+

professionals trained (references available)

20

countries

ROI-first: every recommendation comes with a number attached. We teach what we run.

The two cohorts run on different weekdays: one instructor, no parallel-capacity problem. Miss a session and you get the recording plus a 15-minute catch-up.

The Program

8 weekly systems.

One system, taught live in a 2-hour session, then the reps on your real work between sessions. Sixteen hours per person over eight weeks. It never stalls a sprint. Security comes first, not last.

WkClaude Code cohortClaude Cowork cohort
1Secure harness: permissioning, secrets, the review gateCowork foundations + data handling
2Guided prompting + token disciplineHouse style captured as a skill
3Agentic PR workflow: draft, summarize, self-reviewProposal / RFP / compliance-response skill
4Tests that assert behaviorCustomer-success + sales playbook skill
5MCP: connect repos, Jira, CI (scoped)Connect docs + CRM (read-with-permission)
6Craft guardrails vs code slop (CLAUDE.md)HTML dashboards from real data
7Cross-stack: Java backend + Python/C++/C#/mobileReview + guardrails: nothing auto-sends
8Flagship workflow end-to-end + 90-day roadmapFlagship workflow + 90-day roadmap
Continuous support, all 8 weeks: async channel + weekly office-hours drop-in + instructor review of what each cohort builds between sessions. Sessions can spread over up to 12 weeks to fit sprint cycles.

Two Cohorts

Two tracks. One standard.

TECHNICAL · CLAUDE CODE NON-TECHNICAL · CLAUDE COWORK ONE STANDARD
Claude CodeClaude Cowork

Different tools, different pace, one house standard and one governance pack. No hybrid class where the advanced half waits on the beginners.

The Math

It's simple math.

  • Loaded cost, one engineer (EST)~$85 / hr
  • Review hours reclaimed / wk (we count 5 of ~5–10)5 hrs
  • Technical cohort (you confirm the split)~8 eng
  • Working weeks / year48
$163,200
reclaimed hours / yr, technical cohort, floor assumptions
Payback, honest
Gross: ~4–9 weeks once reclaimed time starts (week 8). Net of Claude seats and ~16 hrs/person of in-program time: inside two quarters.
Year-1 all-in
$29K program + ~$25K Claude seats (billed to you direct, no markup) + ~16 hrs/person team time. No other fees.

$29,000 is about 0.23% of your Series A, or roughly two months of one loaded engineer.

Bridge: $122K band-midpoint × ~1.35 fully-loaded ÷ 1,920 hrs ≈ $85/hr (EST); band to confirm at kickoff. Conservative on the counts, not the rate: 5 of ~5–10 hrs, 48 of 52 weeks, 8 of 17 people. PR-latency and token savings are upside, listed but not added to the $163,200. We don't double-count.

Deliverables

Yours to keep. Yours to grow.

Yours to keep

  • Working skills, both cohorts
  • Craft guardrails + your CLAUDE.md
  • Governance pack: AUP, data-handling & review-gate policy, secrets checklist
  • Playbook + a lesson library on your storage
  • Recordings, kept in your boundary, owned by you

Yours to grow

  • The ability to mint new skills
  • Your 90-day roadmap
  • Eight weeks of continuous support while it embeds

You leave able to build new reusable skills into daily work, on every platform you ship.

Proof

The number you can hold us to.

We baseline your PR review time in week 0 and report the measured delta at week 8, up or down. The final payment rides on it.

Raven · engineering team

Same program and depth we would run for your Claude Code cohort.

Reference call available on request.

Second 50 Financial

A live, checkable artifact.

See the deployed proposal at second50.cetiai.co. We run CETI on this same stack: skills, MCP, Cowork, dashboards.

Our Standard

No merge
without a human.

Every output passes a person before it ships. That is the gate.

Investment

Three ways to run it.

Recommended

Dual-Track · 8 Weeks

$29,000

Both cohorts · 16 sessions / 32 hrs · up to 17
continuous support all 8 weeks
week-0 baseline + week-8 measurement
LMS + recordings

Single Track · 8 Weeks

$16,500
or $14,500

Claude Code, or Cowork
continuous support included
add the second track: both for $29K (save $2K)

Compressed Intensive

$12,500
$23K both

2 full days per cohort, same curriculum
no continuous support, no weekly reps, no week-8 measurement
use only when a weekly block is impossible

40% reserves your dates · 30% at week 4 · 30% on the week-8 measured result vs your week-0 baseline
One free reschedule (10+ business days' notice) · ship one real thing every session · you keep every artifact either way · human-review gate on every output
  • Year-1 all-in ≈ $29K + ~$25K Claude seats (billed to you direct, no markup) + ~16 hrs/person. $29K ≈ 0.23% of your Series A.
  • The 8 sessions can spread over up to 12 weeks to fit sprint cycles, same price. Compressed both = $23,000, a $2,000 discount off $12,500 × 2.

Next Step

Pick a start week.

Session one runs on a sandbox repo you pre-clear. A real PR by end of that week, once access is approved. Security approval first, speed second.

Book the start →WhatsApp

cetiaiservices@gmail.com · scatr.cetiai.co

Without humanity there is no technology. · © 2026 CETI.AI