HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
obra
superpowers
Shell2025–2026
obra / superpowers

superpowers

An agentic skills framework & software development methodology that works.

AI & Machine Learning
Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
64Distinct people
77Mentions
3Explicit recommenders
316.7KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

An agentic skills framework & software development methodology that works.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

https://github.com/obra/superpowers I use Opus/Sol with for /brainstorming, deepseek (on Pi) for /subagent-driven-development I love it, the docs are easily editable and when…

cthulberg used a recommendation phrase. 3 indexed comments match. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:03:16 PM UTC.

Locating the source of a mysterious beep direct repository linkDebated

The discussion centers on a project using AI and networked microphones to locate a mysterious beep, with users debating the practical efficiency of this high-tech approach versus simple manual methods like physical binary search or unpacking boxes. Participants also argue over whether the project represents genuine learning and utility or merely an unnecessary expenditure of computational resources for a trivial problem.

172 readable replies · Supporting reply 1 · Supporting reply 2 · Supporting reply 3 · Supporting reply 4

Mentions over time

HN mentions by month77 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2025-10-11 14:41:58 UTC to 2026-09-26 02:10:10 UTC.

0369122025-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 1 submissions, 5 commentsOct 20252025-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2025-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 5 mentions; 1 submissions, 4 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 7 mentions; 2 submissions, 5 comments2026-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 10 mentions; 2 submissions, 8 comments2026-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 9 mentions; 3 submissions, 6 commentsMar 20262026-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 12 mentions; 3 submissions, 9 comments2026-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 5 mentions; 2 submissions, 3 comments2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 2 submissions, 4 comments2026-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 10 mentions; 0 submissions, 10 comments2026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2026-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 commentsSep 2026

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Oct 20252025-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-11-01 00:00:00 UTC615
Nov 20252025-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-12-01 00:00:00 UTC303
Dec 20252025-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC514
Jan 20262026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-02-01 00:00:00 UTC725
Feb 20262026-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-03-01 00:00:00 UTC1028
Mar 20262026-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-04-01 00:00:00 UTC936
Apr 20262026-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-05-01 00:00:00 UTC1239
May 20262026-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC523
Jun 20262026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-01 00:00:00 UTC624
Jul 20262026-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC10010
Aug 20262026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-09-01 00:00:00 UTC202
Sep 20262026-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-10-01 00:00:00 UTC202

What Hacker News says

77 sources
theahura·Sep 8, 2026
Yea, we like obra/superpowers a lot. For folks who are unaware, see: https://github.com/obra/superpowers the original version of our high autonomy skillset was a fork of obra's superpowers back in...October? November? of last year. Whenever it first came out. I think basically all of the best skillsets implement SPACE, including superpowers, mattpocock skills, get shit done, etc. There are aesthetic reasons why you might prefer one over the other, but candidly I think any of them will get the job done and are strictly better than not using one of the SPACE skillsets. (I haven't played with the latest version of superpowers. My hunch is that on average our skillsets have better compliance rates with the models because of some of the ways in which we write the skills themselves, but its a hunch)
In Ask HN: How do you manage skills files?
abustamam·Aug 25, 2026
I like using grill me in conjunction with obra superpowers spec driven development https://www.aihero.dev/skills-grill-me https://github.com/obra/superpowers When I'm doing something quite complex I'll also throw in gstack office hours but I find that its usually overkill for many things https://github.com/garrytan/gstack I do often use the /qa skill regardless though. I always hated QA because it was so monotonous and it required a level of organization and creativity i never had (i mean im the developer so if I thought of edge cases id have solved for them) I like that /qa covers and documents every edge case that it tested and I can nudge it about other ones
In Coding expertise is going to collapse from AI reliance
troupo·Jul 28, 2026
> is more of an RNG-impacting (but not always for the better) lucky charm rather than it being universally helpful. I wrote this last year, it's still true: --- start quote --- https://dmitriid.com/prompting-llms-is-not-engineering In reality these are just shamanic rituals with outcomes based on faith, fear, or excitement. Engineering it is not. --- end quote --- There are some prompts useful for the user like brainstorming [1] but on the whole it's nothing but lucky charms [1] brainstorming from superpowers: https://github.com/obra/superpowers
In Interview with Boris Cherny [video]
MattRogish·Jul 20, 2026
My guess is they do something like "Hey dingus, make my app send emails" and then Claude or GPT just goes off and does a thing that makes it look superficially like it sends emails but it really only sends email exactly on Tuesdays and if the subject line is "send email to user". And there's no tests, so who knows if the next LLM can fix the bugs without introducing new ones. For the last several years (since GPT 4o) I have written several apps in use by people, making money, entirely with AI/LLMs (me neither writing nor reviewing the code in any meaningful fashion - other than high level architecture, schemas, etc.) and - yes, in a few hours it can do things that would take a normal human weeks (if ever!). But left unconstrained, it will just pile more and more garbage on the pile. Fable MAX is the thing that gets me much closer to "just
Read the rest
send emails" but even then it doesn't look in my specs directory for the spec, it just goes off and does a Jurassic Park-style "It's a Ruby-on-Rails system! I know this!" and disregards all the other ways we send email and writes its own thing. And often I'll go "Where's the button to do X" and it will say "You're right! Nobody asked for it, so this page is an orphan!" I happen to use Superpower's (https://github.com/obra/superpowers) "brainstorm -> spec -> plan" workflow in e.g. Fable MAX (for anything non-trivial) then I have Fable send to GPT 5.6 Sol XHIGH for execution, with Fable (either the original, or a separate one, depending on the criticality of the task and the blast radius) being the critical reviewer. Even then, though, I need to continually guide it against the norms and conventions of the codebase/app, because it makes a ton of assumptions. It doesn't surprise me that if people don't take a fairly rigorous approach to AI-software development then they'll end up with a mess. Even if you buy into "just re-write it" (I happen to think that's where we're ending up) - we aren't there yet and without e.g. a strong test suite, re-writing it is just as likely to create more bugs than it is to fix the existing ones.
In AI Mania Is Eviscerating Global Decision-Making
pizza234·Jul 3, 2026
Not really - it's essentially a workflow. The steps, described [here](https://github.com/obra/superpowers#the-basic-workflow), are: brainstorming → using-git-worktrees → writing-plans → subagent-driven-development or executing-plans → test-driven-development → requesting-code-review → finishing-a-development-branch. The principles, described [here](https://github.com/obra/superpowers#philosophy), are: Write tests first, always; Process over guessing; Simplicity as primary goal; Verify before declaring success. Install it, take a complex tasks, and instruct the agent to implement it; it's easier to watch it in action than to describe it. In my own experience, the advantage is that it's a very systematic workflow - investigation of requirements, breakdown in simpler steps, and TDD development, among the other aspects.
In Superpowers 6
CharlesW·Jul 2, 2026
As a long time user, I'd recommend checking out https://github.com/obra/superpowers#the-basic-workflow. If that reasonates with you, try using it to develop a few features or capabilities. It works very well for the way that I work (interactively and iteratively, not "one-shot"), and it helps me to better work in less time. Superpowers is one of the few skill/agent suites I use for all software development projects. If you like building skill/agents, the posts at https://blog.fsck.com/ are a great resource for learning how to do well. The effectiveness of my project Axiom (a skill/agent suite for Apple OS developers) has benefited enormously from the knowledge that Superpowers' creator Jesse Vincent has been kind enough to share. TLDR: You owe it to yourself to try it.
In Superpowers 6

Showing the 15 most recent of 77 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.