Syllabus: Enterprise Vibe Engineering
1. Program summary
|
|
| Credential |
Certified Vibe Engineer (three levels, see section 6) |
| Duration |
4 terms x 4 weeks = 16 weeks full programme (approx. 10 to 12 hours per week), or modules taken standalone |
| Format |
Concept lesson, AI-pairing lab, red-team review, Definition of Done gate |
| Prerequisite |
Has shipped at least one app with an AI tool (Claude Code, Cursor, Lovable, Replit, Bolt, v0 or similar). No CS degree required. |
| Reference stack |
TypeScript, Next.js, Postgres (Supabase), Redis, a queue, Docker, GitHub Actions, Cloudflare or Vercel, OpenTelemetry. Concepts are stack-agnostic. |
2. Who it is for
- Founders and operators who build their own products with AI and are about to take real money or real data.
- Product people and analysts moving into building.
- Junior and mid engineers whose job is now reviewing AI output more than writing code.
- Enterprise teams rolling out AI coding tools who need a common bar for "production ready."
3. Programme learning outcomes
By graduation a student can:
- Specify a system clearly enough that an AI produces the right thing (specs, context, rules files, acceptance tests).
- Verify AI-written code against security, correctness and performance standards without taking the AI's word for it.
- Secure a web application against the OWASP Top 10:2025 and an AI agent against the OWASP Top 10 for Agentic Applications 2026.
- Design for failure: timeouts, retries, idempotency, queues, graceful degradation.
- Scale sensibly: know which of the 111 concepts matter now and which are premature.
- Ship safely: CI/CD, migrations, feature flags, one-minute rollback.
- Operate: SLOs, alerting, incident response, postmortems, tested backups.
- Govern: produce the audit trail, data-protection and AI-governance evidence an enterprise or regulator asks for (PDPA, IMDA Model AI Governance Framework for Agentic AI, SOC 2 style controls).
4. Pedagogy: the four-beat module
Every module runs the same loop.
- Concept (Learn): the why, the failure it prevents, a real incident.
- Pair (Build): student directs an AI to build the feature using provided prompts. The AI is the junior engineer; the student is the tech lead.
- Break (Red-team): student attacks or stresses their own build with a checklist and tooling. Most labs are designed so the naive AI output fails here on purpose.
- Gate (Prove): a Definition of Done with objective evidence (test output, scan report, dashboard screenshot, restore log). No evidence, no pass.
Principle: Trust, but verify is not enough for AI code. The standard is verify, then trust.
5. Course map
Term 1: Foundations (Weeks 1 to 4)
Term 2: Security (Weeks 5 to 8)
Term 3: Reliability and Scale (Weeks 9 to 12)
| Wk |
Module |
Core question |
Poster items |
| 9 |
07 · Resilience Patterns |
What does my system do when a dependency is slow or down? |
10 to 13, 20, 44, 56, 57 |
| 10 |
08 · Async, Events and Real-Time |
How do I do slow work without blocking users? |
15 to 19, 21 to 24, 101 |
| 11 |
09 · Performance and Scaling |
Where is the bottleneck, and what is the cheapest fix? |
2 to 5, 29 to 31, 45 to 50, 88 to 90 |
| 12 |
10 · Distributed Systems Correctness |
What goes wrong when two things happen at once? |
32 to 43, 95, 96 |
Term 4: Production Operations (Weeks 13 to 16)
6. Certification levels
| Level |
Name |
Requirement |
Signals |
| L1 |
Vibe Builder |
Terms 1 and 2 passed; app passes the "Do Now" section of Production Readiness Checklist |
Safe to take real users and data |
| L2 |
Vibe Engineer |
Terms 1 to 3 passed; app survives the Term 3 chaos lab |
Safe to take payments and run agents |
| L3 |
Enterprise Vibe Architect |
All terms + Capstone defended before a panel |
Can lead an AI-native team and pass vendor security reviews |
7. Assessment and grading
| Component |
Weight |
Notes |
| Module gates (Definition of Done evidence) |
40% |
Binary per item; all "must" items required to pass a module |
| Red-team findings log |
15% |
Quality of the vulnerabilities and failure modes students find in their own and peers' builds |
| Weekly architecture decision records (ADRs) |
10% |
One ADR per module explaining a trade-off |
| Incident simulation (Week 15) |
10% |
Graded on detection time, communication and postmortem |
| Capstone build + defence |
25% |
See Capstone |
Automatic fail conditions (any module): a secret committed to git history; a database table reachable by an unauthenticated user; an agent able to take an irreversible action without human approval.
- An AI coding agent (Claude Code, Cursor or equivalent) configured with AGENTS.md Template
- GitHub (Actions, Dependabot, secret scanning, code scanning)
- Postgres (Supabase or Neon), Redis (Upstash), a queue (Inngest, Trigger.dev, SQS or BullMQ)
- Docker
- k6 (load testing), OWASP ZAP (DAST), Semgrep (SAST), gitleaks (secrets), Trivy (containers and IaC)
- OpenTelemetry + a backend (Grafana Cloud, Honeycomb, Sentry or Datadog)
- Promptfoo or equivalent for LLM evals and red-teaming
9. Weekly rhythm (10 to 12 hours)
| Block |
Hours |
| Concept reading and lesson |
2 |
| Pair lab (build with AI) |
4 to 5 |
| Red-team session |
2 |
| Gate evidence + ADR |
1 to 2 |
| Cohort review (peer attacks your build) |
1 |
10. Academic integrity, AI edition
Using AI is required, not cheating. What counts as misconduct here is unverified claims: submitting "tests pass" without the run log, "secure" without the scan, "backed up" without a restore.