The correct option is The platform's limited capabilities will hinder their ability to evolve and differentiate the product. By selecting a no code tool that only offers one general purpose model and a few fixed widgets, the team accepts a high degree of vendor lock in and reduced extensibility, which directly threatens long term differentiation.

This choice limits the ability to experiment with alternative models, to add custom components, and to integrate emerging capabilities as the market shifts. It also constrains performance tuning, evaluation approaches, and product UX innovation because the platform exposes only a narrow set of controls. Over time, these limitations slow iteration and make it hard to respond to competitors that can adopt new models or modalities quickly, which is the core strategic risk at the platform layer.

Infrastructure costs will be difficult to predict and to control is not the main platform risk created by this decision. Heavily managed platforms often simplify cost visibility and the larger concern here is capability lock in and limited evolution rather than unpredictable infrastructure spend.

They will be unable to access Google foundation models such as Gemini or Imagen is not necessarily true because many third party builders can integrate with Google models. The issue described is that the selected tool exposes only one model of its choosing, which constrains flexibility regardless of whether that model is from Google.

They will need to recruit additional engineers with deep infrastructure skills is unlikely because a managed no code platform reduces the need for deep infrastructure expertise. This is why it accelerates delivery within the tight deadline.

Full AWS Practitioner Certification Question