Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 278 posts

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#131

Post by desireco42 »

I honestly tried this a while back, unless this is something else, this was completely not very much useful thing.

If I remember correctly, it created a lot of changes, spent a lot of time doing something and in the end this was all smoke and mirrors. If I would ever use something like this, I would maybe use BMad, which suffers from same issues, like Speckit and others.

I don't know if they have some sponsorship with bunch of youtubers who are raving how awesome this is... without any supporting evidence.

Anyhow, this is my experience. Superpowers on the other hand were quite useful so far, but I didn't use them enough to have to claim anything.

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#132

Post by swingboy »

hermanzegerman wrote: post #88
hatmanstack wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a cli wrapper. Don't know how you could say it wasn't. edit: GSD is a cli wrapper, Superpowers not so much. Both are over-engineered for an easy problem IMHO.

No it's not. It's using Skills and Agents and runs always inside of Claude Code, Gemini CLI etc...

GSD delegates a lot of the deterministic work to a JavaScript CLI. That might be what the poster is talking about.

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#133

Post by unstatusthequo »

yoaviram wrote: post #17

I've been using GSD extensively over the past 3 months. I previously used speckit, which I found lacking. GSD consistently gets me 95% of the way there on complex tasks. That's amazing. The last 5% is mostly "manual" testing. We've used GSD to build and launch a SaaS product including an agent-first CMS (whiteboar.it). It's hard to say why GSD worked so much better for us than other similar frameworks, because the un…

Same. Have had great results with it. I got sick of paying FreshBooks monthly for basic income/expense tracking for Schedule C reporting and used GSD to build a macOS Swift app with Codex 5.4 and Opus 4.6. It’s working great and I am considering releasing it on the App Store. It started as a web app, but then I wanted screen capture from other windows for receipts in email or whatever. Then I wanted physical receipts, and so used Apple continuity camera. All working now in my app. And, I just added receipt auto-extract to pull salient info from and determine deduction category using Anthropic API.

Yes this is how much paying FreshBooks annoyed me. Plus I hated they forced an emailed 2FA if you didn’t connect with Google.

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#134

Post by visarga »

I did a similar system myself, then I run evals on it and found that the planning ceremony is mostly useless, claude can deal with simple prose, item lists, checkbox todos, anything works. The agent won't be a better coder for how you deliver your intent.

But what makes a difference is running plan review and work review agent, they fix issues before and after work. Both pull their weight but the most surprising is the plan-review one. The work review judge reliably finds bugs to fix, but not as surprising in its insights. But they should run from separate subagents not main one because they need a fresh perspective.

Other things that matter are 1. testing enforcement, 2. cross task project memory. My implementation for memory is a combination of capturing user messages with a hook, append only log, and keeping a compressed memory state of the project, which gets read before work and updated after each task.

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#135

Post by Rapzid »

gtirloni wrote: post #21

I was using this and superpowers but eventually, Plan mode became enough and I prefer to steer Claude Code myself. These frameworks are great for fire-and-forget tasks, especially when there is some research involved but they burn 10x more tokens, in my experience. I was always hitting the Max plan limits for no discernable benefit in the outcomes I was getting. But this will vary a lot depending on how people prefer…

I use GitHub Copilot and unfortunately there has been a weird regression in the bundled Plan mode. It suddenly, when they added the new plan memory, started getting both VERY verbose in the plan output and also vague in the details. It's adding a lot of step that are like "design" and "figure out" and railroads you into implementation without asking follow-up questions.

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#136

Post by healsdata »

gtirloni wrote: post #21

I was using this and superpowers but eventually, Plan mode became enough and I prefer to steer Claude Code myself. These frameworks are great for fire-and-forget tasks, especially when there is some research involved but they burn 10x more tokens, in my experience. I was always hitting the Max plan limits for no discernable benefit in the outcomes I was getting. But this will vary a lot depending on how people prefer…

Just tried GSD and Plan Mode on the same exact task (prompt in an MD file). Plan Mode had a plan and then base implementation in twenty minutes. GSD ran for hours to achieve the same thing.

I reviewed the code from both and the GSD code was definitely written with the rest of the project and possibilities in mind, while the Claude Plan was just enough for the MVP.

I can see both having their pros and cons depending on your workflow and size of the task.

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#137

Post by whalesalad »

gtirloni wrote: post #21

I was using this and superpowers but eventually, Plan mode became enough and I prefer to steer Claude Code myself. These frameworks are great for fire-and-forget tasks, especially when there is some research involved but they burn 10x more tokens, in my experience. I was always hitting the Max plan limits for no discernable benefit in the outcomes I was getting. But this will vary a lot depending on how people prefer…

Same experience. Superpowers are a little too overzealous at times. For coding especially I don’t like seeing a comprehensive design spec written (good) and then turning that into effectively the same doc but macro expanded to become a complete implementation with the literal code for the entire thing in a second doc (bad). Even for trivial changes I’d end up with a good and succinct -design.md, then an -implementation.md, then end with a swarm of sub agents getting into races while more or less just grabbing a block from the implementation file and writing it.

A mess. I still enjoy superpowers brainstorming but will pull the chute towards the end and then deliver myself.

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#138

Post by whalesalad »

Rapzid wrote: post #135
gtirloni wrote: post #21

I was using this and superpowers but eventually, Plan mode became enough and I prefer to steer Claude Code myself. These frameworks are great for fire-and-forget tasks, especially when there is some research involved but they burn 10x more tokens, in my experience. I was always hitting the Max plan limits for no discernable benefit in the outcomes I was getting. But this will vary a lot depending on how people prefer…

I use GitHub Copilot and unfortunately there has been a weird regression in the bundled Plan mode. It suddenly, when they added the new plan memory, started getting both VERY verbose in the plan output and also vague in the details. It's adding a lot of step that are like "design" and "figure out" and railroads you into implementation without asking follow-up questions.

I find that even with opus 4.6, copilot feels like it’s handicapped. I’m not sure if it’s related to memory or what but if I give two tasks to opus4.6 one in CC and one in Copilot, CC is substantially better.

I’ve been really enjoying Codex CLI recently though. It seems to do just as well as Opus 4.6, but using the standard GPT 5.4

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#139

Post by [deleted] »

canadiantim wrote: post #102
AndyNemmity wrote: post #98

I have a ai system i use. I'd like to release it so others can benefit, but at the same time it's all custom to myself and what i do, and work on. If I fork out a version for others that is public, then I have to maintain that variation as well. Is anyone in a similar situation? I think most of the ones I see released are not particularly complex compraed to my system, but at the same time I don't know how to convey…

you don't have to maintain it. Especially in the age of ai, just giving people inspiration and something to vibe from is more than sufficient and appreciated

[deleted]

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#140

Post by [deleted] »

tensegrist wrote: post #128
AndyNemmity wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

alright. i guess i'll create a new repo, remove out a bunch of very specific pieces, and put it up. there's a lot of patterns i think are helpful for me.

if it's on github you could even archive it from the get-go

[deleted]
Post reply on HN