Milestone M7

LitBot – Minimum Viable Product

A functional prototype using feedback from prospective users as the backbone of our design

Try LitBot & Share Feedback

↑

LitBot is a conversational AI designed to help students understand literature, not memorize essays. Try the product and help us improve it by sharing your honest feedback.

🚀 Try the Product

Open LitBot →

📝 Give Feedback

Go to feedback form →

Why your feedback matters: This MVP is built with students and teachers. Your answers directly influence pricing, features, and future development.

MVP Overview

↑

The LitBot MVP is a functional conversational AI assistant focused on helping Romanian high-school students understand literature through guided dialogue rather than memorization. This MVP represents the minimum feature set needed to validate our core hypothesis: that students will engage with and find value in an interactive, curriculum-aligned literary assistant.

MVP Characteristics

  • Enough value: Provides meaningful explanations and guided analysis for Baccalaureate works, addressing the top student pain point (understanding vs. memorizing)
  • Future benefit: Demonstrates the potential of full curriculum coverage, personalized learning paths, and exam preparation features
  • Feedback loop: Includes usage analytics, conversation quality ratings, and structured user feedback collection
Why an MVP now? We have validated the problem (M2: 80% of students rely on memorization), confirmed demand (M5: 67% would try immediately), and understood market size (M6: 100k-250k addressable users). The MVP tests whether our solution delivers on its promise and whether users will convert to paying customers.

Pre-MVP Validation Summary

↑

Before building the MVP, we validated critical assumptions across multiple milestones:

M2 - Customer Discovery:
  • Problem validation: 80% of surveyed students (69/86) rely heavily on memorization
  • Solution interest: 67% would try an AI helper immediately; 83% rated interest as 4-5/5
  • Top requested feature: Interactive Q&A (89% ranked it in top 3)
  • Teachers confirmed: 75% would recommend a curriculum-aligned, guided tool
M4 - User Research:
  • Students want clear, concise answers without "pompous filler words"
  • Preference for single-page interface where "I can ask everything"
  • Desire for empathetic interaction (avatar, conversational tone)
  • Step-by-step explanations of symbolism and complex themes
M5 - Lead Generation:
  • 21 qualified email leads collected
  • 61.9% conversion rate from landing page view to signup
  • 94% of visitors who started typing email completed the form
M6 - Market Research:
  • Target market: 100k-250k domestic users
  • Pricing validation: 20-30 RON/month sweet spot (60% of parents willing to pay)
  • Revenue potential: Multi-million EUR annually at scale
  • Competitive gap: No curriculum-aligned conversational assistant exists

MVP Scope & Features

↑

What's IN the MVP

✓ Full Curriculum Coverage (20 Works)

Complete coverage of all Baccalaureate literary texts including Ion, Moara cu Noroc, Luceafărul, Plumb, Ultima noapte, Enigma Otiliei, and all other mandatory works

✓ Conversational Interface

Clean, single-page chat UI with avatar, and real-time responses

✓ Curriculum Alignment

All responses verified against official Baccalaureate requirements and literary criticism standards

✓ Clear, Concise Responses

Responses optimized for clarity without "pompous filler words" based on M4 user research

✓ Step-by-Step Explanations

Guided explanations of symbolism, themes, and character analysis

✓ Feedback Collection

Thumbs up/down on responses, optional comment field

What's NOT in the MVP (Future Features)

  • Essay Generation: Intentionally excluded to promote understanding over copying (teacher concern from M2)
  • Quiz/Test Mode: Multiple users requested this feature for future development
  • Mobile Native App: Web-first validates concept before platform investment
  • Citation/Quote Database: Highly requested feature for premium tier
  • Conversation History Persistence: Requested by users, planned for next iteration
  • Voice/Speaker Mode: Accessibility feature for future consideration
Scope Justification: The MVP focuses exclusively on the #1 validated pain point (understanding vs. memorization) and the #1 requested feature (interactive Q&A). We've implemented full coverage of all Baccalaureate literary works to provide complete value and avoid the frustration of incomplete content.

Detailed Feature Justifications

↑

1. Why Conversational Interface (Not Essay Generator)?

Rationale: M2 teacher interviews (3/4) expressed concern about memorization. M4 students said they want to "understand, not just copy." A conversational approach:
  • Forces active engagement rather than passive consumption
  • Builds critical thinking skills (the actual exam requirement)
  • Reduces plagiarism concerns, making teachers allies not opponents
  • Creates defensible differentiation vs. generic ChatGPT
Implementation: AI responds with questions ("What themes do you notice?") and scaffolded hints rather than complete answers.

User Validation: A teacher stated: "In sfarsit un instrument care promoveaza intelegerea, nu copiatul. Elevii care l-au folosit vin la ore cu intrebari mai bune si pot sa discute despre opere."

2. Why Full Curriculum Coverage from Day 1?

Rationale: M4 user research revealed frustration with incomplete resources. Users explicitly wanted one page where they can ask everything ("o singura pagina in care pot sa intreb tot").
  • Avoids user frustration from discovering gaps mid-study session
  • Positions LitBot as comprehensive study companion, not partial tool
  • Enables cross-work comparisons and thematic exploration
  • Justifies premium pricing (25 RON/month)
User Validation: Multiple users praised this decision, with one stating: "Imi place ca intra in detalii si in acelasi timp explica opera pe intelesul meu, nu cu cuvinte complicate ca in unele comentarii de pe net"

3. Why Web-Only (No Mobile App)?

Rationale: M5 analytics showed 46% prefer mobile app, but 35% want "both" and 14% web-only (total 49% satisfied with web). For MVP:
  • Faster iteration: web updates deploy instantly vs. app store review cycles
  • Lower development cost: one codebase vs. iOS + Android
  • Desktop usage makes sense: students study at desks with textbooks
  • Mobile-responsive web covers 81% of stated preferences
Post-MVP Validation: 4 users explicitly requested mobile app in feedback, validating this as high-priority post-launch feature.