Interactive idea refinement using Socratic method to develop fully-formed designs
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Skills wiki intro - mandatory workflows, search tool, brainstorming triggers
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
查看安装方法安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。
Use Read tool before announcing skill usage. The session-start hook does NOT read skills for you. Announcing without calling Read = lying.
Follow mandatory workflows. Brainstorming before coding. Check for skills before ANY task.
Create TodoWrite todos for checklists. Mental tracking = steps get skipped. Every time.
1. Check skills list at session start, or run find-skills [PATTERN] to filter.
2. If relevant skill exists, YOU MUST use it:
${SUPERPOWERS_SKILLS_ROOT}/skills/category/skill-name/SKILL.mdDon't rationalize:
Why: Skills document proven techniques that save time and prevent mistakes. Not using available skills means repeating solved problems and making known errors.
If a skill for your task exists, you must use it or you will fail at your task.
If a skill has a checklist, YOU MUST create TodoWrite todos for EACH item.
Don't:
Why: Checklists without TodoWrite tracking = steps get skipped. Every time. The overhead of TodoWrite is tiny compared to the cost of missing steps.
Examples: skills/testing/test-driven-development/SKILL.md, skills/debugging/systematic-debugging/SKILL.md, skills/meta/writing-skills/SKILL.md
After you've read a skill with Read tool, announce you're using it:
"I've read the [Skill Name] skill and I'm using it to [what you're doing]."
Examples:
Why: Transparency helps your human partner understand your process and catch errors early. It also confirms you actually read the skill.
Every skill has the same structure:
when_to_use tells you if this skill matches your situationMany skills contain rigid rules (TDD, debugging, verification). Follow them exactly. Don't adapt away the discipline.
Some skills are flexible patterns (architecture, naming). Adapt core principles to your context.
The skill itself tells you which type it is.
Your human partner's specific instructions describe WHAT to do, not HOW.
"Add X", "Fix Y" = the goal, NOT permission to skip brainstorming, TDD, or RED-GREEN-REFACTOR.
Red flags: "Instruction was specific" • "Seems simple" • "Workflow is overkill"
Why: Specific instructions mean clear requirements, which is when workflows matter MOST. Skipping process on "simple" tasks is how simple tasks become complex problems.
Starting any task:
Skill has checklist? TodoWrite for every item.
Finding a relevant skill = mandatory to read and use it. Not optional.
还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。
无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。
还没有评论。来写第一条吧。
Interactive idea refinement using Socratic method to develop fully-formed designs
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Receive and act on code review feedback with technical rigor, not performative agreement or blind implementation
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Force unrelated concepts together to discover emergent properties - "What if we treated X like Y?"
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Replace arbitrary timeouts with condition polling for reliable async tests
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Validate at every layer data passes through to make bugs impossible
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use multiple Claude agents to investigate and fix independent problems concurrently
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。