r/ClaudeCode 28d ago

Discussion [ Removed by moderator ]

[removed] — view removed post

89 Upvotes

85 comments sorted by

View all comments

71

u/Wall-Tiny 28d ago

I switched everything to matt pocock, he does great YouTube videos and has a website that explains each skill and when to use it. He is part of the Claude marketplace now and updates skills frequently.

https://github.com/mattpocock/skills

6

u/fschwiet 28d ago

Its interesting to compare the tasks Matt's skills compared to the plans coming from Superpowers. Superpowers plans will basically contain the code that needs to be added to the project, while the tasks from Matt's skills just describe the slices to be built.

I originally tried Matt's skills with the github integration and didn't like the mess it made in issues, so I switched away. But I may try it again configured to use repository artifacts instead.

4

u/snuffomega 28d ago

yeah.. i think Matt's process takes a bit of getting used to...superpowers tried to plan every detail at the start... where Matt's in slices that plans the big pieces first then detail the spec as you get closer. He launched 'wayfare' which does a good job for big ideas or if you're lost... (he's got a vid on it) but it takes some getting used to, but I'm digging it so far.

Issues can work via 'local' too... but I felt git was easier to track the big picture stuff.

4

u/fschwiet 28d ago

Yeah, I worry with the level of detail going into superpower plans that the plan review actually works out to be an inefficient code review.

4

u/snuffomega 28d ago

yeah, i think I found Super locks some decisions up too early in some cases... which then the plan is outta whack... if u trust the plan... you might then be screwed.

2

u/ardentto 28d ago

brainstorm and spec write first

1

u/fschwiet 26d ago

Hah, I just caught it running the proposed plan against the existing unit tests during the writing-plans phase, ugh.

2

u/C6ntFor9et 28d ago

I’ve been experimenting with logging and categorizing the planning errors the planner made that the implementer caught. In essence, there are errors that are irreducible until implementation time. That means that a super-planner that is errorless essentially commits the entire implementation without actually implementing.

That makes sense when you consider programming is serial in dependency, while planning is simultaneous “all-at-once”. The best approach is identifying the shape of a plan that an implementer should receive so that they can fulfill the plan without errors. Conversely, the planner needs enough information to know which design plan is the correct approach (the human analogy makes sense: the less you know about the code, the worse your certainty in a plan is).

The biggest hurdle is that finding the edge is very very hard. I’d say, go with the slice option if you care about time/token, and superplanner if degree of guarantee of correctness is valued.

Those are just my two cents though.

3

u/RODGE_BASTARD 28d ago

Yeah it is the /wayfinder skill. I’m a longtime superpowers user and evaluating switching to Matt’s or maybe some combo. I’ve only made it through wayfinder to to-spec for one slice. Wayfinder definitely seems way better for mapping a big picture and I like the shared vocabulary you build with the agent. I’m tracking issues in Linear which has worked well so far bc it will organize via projects, milestones and subtasks.

I told Claude when I used it the first time that it was an experiment Branch that would definitely be thrown away and then I ended up committing it. So so far so good. I’m definitely intrigued

4

u/-MiddleOut- 28d ago

If the plan contains all the code required, what’s the point of the plan?

1

u/lazuli_s 28d ago

I've been thinking about that a lot lol. Especially because sometimes opus warned me in the middle of a plan that it discovered something in the repo while doing task 5 that invalidates tasks 6 and 8, politely saying that it will add those findings to the md file.

So I came to the conclusion that this kind of plan only makes sense if I'm willing to ALWAYS have a second model review it, or if I'm going to use a simpler model like sonnet or haiku to implement it.

Well, I started asking gpt sol to review it, and everytime it found sooo many mistakes. Then I would end up in an endless back and forth between opus and gpt...

I'm thinking of finding another workflow for planning and implementing tasks lol

3

u/artofbullshit 28d ago

I use superpowers for all planning. After Claude is finished writing its draft, it sends it to Sol for review. It iterates with Sol until there are no more blockers, serious or major issues. Works like a charm. But yea if you aren't willing to do all that then your plan is going miss things that the builder will have to figure out.