Can I code this? An Auto-Scheduling Task Assistant
A calendar and a task list are both buildable separately. Automatically re-optimizing your whole day's schedule every time something changes is genuine constraint-solving research, exactly why Motion is a JUST PAY on this register.
Just pay
Effort: not worth startingRunning cost: $0/mo to start
Why CanICodeThis says Just pay
A calendar view and a task list, shown side by side, are both well-bounded builds
Manually dragging a task into an open calendar slot is straightforward drag-and-drop
For someone happy to schedule their own tasks, that manual version is a real weekend project
The parts that'll cause problems
Automatically re-slotting your entire day's tasks around meetings, continuously, as things change, is a constraint-satisfaction problem — applied operations research, not a calendar feature
Balancing priority, deadlines, and estimated duration into one optimal schedule compounds that difficulty
Getting it wrong in an annoying way (constantly reshuffling) is worse than not having it at all
How I'd build this
frontend
Next.js
database
Supabase
hosting
Vercel
MVP scope
If you proceed: a calendar and task list shown together
Manual drag-to-schedule as the actual v1, not automatic optimization
Postpone to v2
Automatic schedule optimization (genuinely hard — reconsider whether you need this at all)
Two-way calendar sync
What it actually costs to build
AI agent — with a subscription (Claude Pro/Max, Cursor, etc.)
$0 marginal
AI agent — pay-per-use API, no subscription
$86–$172 one-time
Hosting, once it's running
$0/mo (free tier)
Domain name, if you want your own
~$12/yr
Existing tools solving a similar problem typically run $12–$34/mo — see how they compare below.
The build prompt
Don't build automatic schedule optimization as a first step. Build a calendar-plus-task-list view instead, where you manually drag tasks into open slots — that's the real, achievable version. Automatically re-optimizing your whole day around a constraint solver is genuinely hard, ongoing engineering, and getting it wrong is worse than not having it.