Projects

Video: Submit and evaluate Zoomcamp projects 🎥

The idea is that you now apply everything we learned so far yourself.

There are two projects in this course

• Attempt 1
• Attempt 2

You only need to complete one (but you can do both if you have time and energy).

This is what you need to do for each project:

• Think of a problem that's interesting for you
• Describe this problem
• Create the frontend, backend and describe their communication with API specs
  • You can do it in any order:
  • Frontend first, like shown in the course
  • Specs first
  • Backend first
  • But all three have to be done
• Make sure the application is thoroughly tested, containerized and deployed
• Make sure you review your peers - or you won't get a certificate of graduation

Peer reviewing

Important

To evaluate the projects, we'll use peer reviewing. This is a great opportunity for you to learn from each other.

• To get points for your project, you need to evaluate 3 projects of your peers
• You get 3 extra points for each evaluation
• If you don't evaluate your peers, you fail the project

Criteria

1. Problem description (README)

• The problem is not described. (0 points)
• The problem is described briefly, but it is unclear what the system does or what functionality is expected. (1 point)
• The README clearly describes the problem, the system’s functionality, and what the project is expected to do. (2 points)

2. AI system development (tools, workflow, MCP)

• No description of how the system was built or how AI tools were used. (0 points)
• The project describes how AI tools were used to build the system (e.g. coding assistants, prompts, workflows, AGENTS.md or similar guidance). (1 point)
• The project clearly documents AI-assisted system development and additionally describes how MCP was used (e.g. MCP server, tools, or workflow). (2 points)

3. Technologies and system architecture

• Technologies used in the project are not described or are unclear. (0 points)
• The main technologies are mentioned (e.g. frontend framework, backend framework, database), but without explaining their roles. (1 point)
• The project clearly describes the technologies used (frontend, backend, database, containerization, CI/CD) and explains how they fit into the system architecture. (2 points)

4. Front-end implementation

• No front-end or non-functional front-end. (0 points)
• A functional front-end exists, but structure is unclear or backend calls are scattered. (1 point)
• Front-end is functional and well-structured, with centralized backend communication. (2 points)
• Front-end is functional, well-structured, and includes tests covering core logic, with clear instructions on how to run them. (3 points)

5. API contract (OpenAPI specifications)

• No OpenAPI specification. (0 points)
• OpenAPI specification exists but is incomplete or loosely aligned with front-end needs. (1 point)
• OpenAPI specification fully reflects front-end requirements and is used as the contract for backend development. (2 points)

6. Back-end implementation

• No back-end or back-end does not follow the API contract. (0 points)
• Back-end implements required endpoints but has limited structure or documentation. (1 point)
• Back-end is well-structured and follows the OpenAPI specifications. (2 points)
• Back-end is well-structured, follows the OpenAPI specifications, and includes tests covering core functionality, clearly documented. (3 points)

7. Database integration

• No database or persistent storage. (0 points)
• Database is integrated, but configuration or usage is minimal or poorly documented. (1 point)
• Database layer is properly integrated, supports different environments (e.g. SQLite and Postgres), and is documented. (2 points)

8. Containerization

• No containerization. (0 points)
• Dockerfiles exist, but running the full system requires manual steps. (1 point)
• The entire system runs via Docker or docker-compose with clear instructions. (2 points)

9. Integration testing

• No integration tests. (0 points)
• Integration tests exist but are limited or not clearly separated from unit tests. (1 point)
• Integration tests are clearly separated, cover key workflows (including database interactions), and are documented. (2 points)

10. Deployment

• Application is not deployed. (0 points)
• Deployment steps are described, but no working deployment is shown. (1 point)
• Application is deployed to the cloud with a working URL or clear proof of deployment. (2 points)

11. CI/CD pipeline

• No CI/CD pipeline. (0 points)
• CI pipeline runs tests automatically. (1 point)
• CI/CD pipeline runs tests and deploys the application when tests pass. (2 points)

12. Reproducibility

• Project cannot be run with the provided instructions. (0 points)
• Project can be run, but setup or run instructions are incomplete. (1 point)
• Clear instructions exist to set up, run, test, and deploy the system end-to-end. (2 points)