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

Claude Code as a Daily Driver: Claude.md, Skills, Subagents, Plugins, and MCPs

arps18.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 297 posts

Re: Claude Code as a Daily Driver: Claude.md, Skills, Subagents, Plugins, and MCPs

#221

Post by BD7691 »

8note wrote: post #218
bcherny wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, Boris from the CC team here. I agree, we're working on consolidating these. Going forward it will just be the built-in /code-review skill. Here's how to use the skill on the latest version: /code-review # do a balanced code review. checks for bugs and inconsistencies, poor code quality, duplication, band aids, etc. /code-review --fix # same as above, but also fix the issues # choose an explicit effort level (def…

> # do an expensive and extremely thorough review (reliably catches >99% of bugs, costs $3-20 per review depending on complexity): /code-review ultra main suggestion would be to sound a lot less optimistic about that it finds 99% of bugs or that its at all thorough, and instead list that it is time capped, and will only find bugs that you explicitly tell it to look for. i used my three runs of ultrareview. the first…

[dead]

Re: Claude Code as a Daily Driver: Claude.md, Skills, Subagents, Plugins, and MCPs

#222

Post by kstenerud »

extr wrote: post #194
bix6 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Boris, what is the advantage of using /code-review vs just asking Opus to “code review”? As a casual user working on hobby projects, I struggle to keep up with the pace of changes and knowing what to use when. My default now is to use Opus for all coding (sonnet is fine but seems dumber) and to prompt it for everything I need. I’ve had great success with this but clearly I’m missing power user functions with the s…

The advantage is that /code-review supplies a structured idea of how to review and what that process should look like and then launches independent subagents to approach the issue from multiple angles. It's analogous to how in the early days you could see benefits by telling the models to "think step by step". /code-review is something like "review angle by angle". "Consider removed behavior" and also "Look at langua…

[dead]

Re: Claude Code as a Daily Driver: Claude.md, Skills, Subagents, Plugins, and MCPs

#223

Post by extr »

HlessClaudesman wrote: post #214
extr wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The advantage is that /code-review supplies a structured idea of how to review and what that process should look like and then launches independent subagents to approach the issue from multiple angles. It's analogous to how in the early days you could see benefits by telling the models to "think step by step". /code-review is something like "review angle by angle". "Consider removed behavior" and also "Look at langua…

We've all spent time -fixing someone's bright idea of a -fix. I'm sceptical of the time saving of applying a -fix before I understand the problem(s). Outsourcing comprehension to a machine is probably gonna cost you more time in the long run.

I don't even bother looking at the code until I've run a code review pass on it. Why waste my time with trivial bug fixes? I find the best way to spend time right now is like:

- Defining the issue/ticket, what "success" looks like (if I have a good idea of this), high level approach guidance 50%

- Dispatch agent to work on it 5%

- Occasionally return and nudge agent + send /simplify or /code-review 5%

- Look at the code/session summary, divergences from the plan, ask followup questions 40%

Occasionally yes there is some solution the AI chose that is suboptimal and I would prefer fixed in a different way. Mostly though it's straightforward.

Re: Claude Code as a Daily Driver: Claude.md, Skills, Subagents, Plugins, and MCPs

#224

Post by hootz »

pragma_x wrote: post #213
hootz wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't wait to learn more about how to vendor-lock-in myself really hard into not being able to code without the help of a specific corporation!

I hear you on vendor lock-in. Everyone's freaked out about other companies getting the upper-hand with AI in the loop, so there's this charge to use the hell out of it at all costs. Meanwhile, we're quietly picking winners and losers on the service side of all this, and we'll have to live with that outcome for a long time. At this point, I'm seriously considering what it would take to build a reasonable budget-AI box…

Self-hosting right now is in a weird spot. I'd say that the main benefit of the open models is not self-hosting, but having dozens of different independent providers that can host them for you. You aren't stuck with a single one.

Re: Claude Code as a Daily Driver: Claude.md, Skills, Subagents, Plugins, and MCPs

#225

Post by extr »

bix6 wrote: post #201
extr wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The advantage is that /code-review supplies a structured idea of how to review and what that process should look like and then launches independent subagents to approach the issue from multiple angles. It's analogous to how in the early days you could see benefits by telling the models to "think step by step". /code-review is something like "review angle by angle". "Consider removed behavior" and also "Look at langua…

Thank you I will try this! Is there something equivalent when coding in the first place? Eg /code high “prompt”

Are you thinking of the /effort level in Claude Code? I would just go with xhigh as a reasonable default. Most important thing in prompting is specifying what "done" and "success" looks like to you. Ask Claude to help you come up with a well formed request and spend most of your time on that, then paste that into a brand new session.

Re: Claude Code as a Daily Driver: Claude.md, Skills, Subagents, Plugins, and MCPs

#226

Post by mil22 »

garethsprice wrote: post #158
mindwok wrote: post #101

How many times can I read the same shallow guidance written by AI on using a coding agent? Good god when will it stop

You're absolutely right to call this out — and honestly? I want to sit with that for a moment. Here's the thing: this isn't really about AI writing. It's not even about coding agents. It's about something much deeper. What's genuinely worth knowing: while I generally agree, many people may not. I think there's a really interesting conversation to be had here. Thanks for naming this. It needed to be named. (/s - Blarg…

If you hadn't used ' instead of ’, I would never have realized this was actually written by hand.

Re: Claude Code as a Daily Driver: Claude.md, Skills, Subagents, Plugins, and MCPs

#227

Post by mdav75 »

mil22 wrote: post #168

We really need some consolidation around commands, skills, subagents, and plugins. For example, if you want to, say, review code, you have five options now: - Write a .claude/commands/review.md. Simple but deprecated. - Use a /code-review skill, either one you install or one you just write yourself (it's just Markdown, after all). - Use the /pr-review subagent. Also just Markdown, but it runs "in the background" and…

[flagged]

Re: Claude Code as a Daily Driver: Claude.md, Skills, Subagents, Plugins, and MCPs

#228

Post by xenadu02 »

alexwwang wrote: post #86
downsplat wrote: post #78

I've been using Claude to work on a medium-sized (100+kLoc) codebase, and it's a great productivity multiplier. Putting hours into creating a good AGENTS file is more improved results a lot. I find that over time it picks up the codebase quite well. Tedious tasks that would take a day are now a matter of a few prompts. Still... I'm not ready to give it more autonomy. Even as it gets high-level things quite well, I st…

Understandable. You don’t want to lose control to your codebase and don’t trust LLM is competent in handling that fully.

The percentage of times I prompt claude "what about checking if there are any child processes running?" or "Would using a lock here greatly simplify the design?" only to have myself be correct is approaching 100%. That is it isn't just claude sycophantically agreeing with me. The code itself becomes smaller, simpler, and more reliable with fewer bugs.

The agents tend to produce working code but the larger the scope the bigger the mess they tend to make. They will happily evolve toward a local maxima but leave world-destroying bugs lurking in the implementation.

The other issue is that claude regularly ignores explicit instructions in CLAUDE.md or in prompts. It will "helpfully" decide to just start doing whatever it wants or reinterpret instructions completely differently than it did the last 100 times.

It has nothing to do with losing control or trust. LLMs are not conscious. They have no executive function. They aren't even thinking. They're just models predicting the next word in the script. They are very useful tools but that's all they are: tools.

Re: Claude Code as a Daily Driver: Claude.md, Skills, Subagents, Plugins, and MCPs

#230

Post by winwang »

netdevphoenix wrote: post #10

What happens when you have a codebase made with claude using this setup and claude is down for let's say 8 hours? Are you able to efficiently, smoothly and productively take over the codebase?

Yes, but that's also a specific luxury I can choose for myself. Definitely a fun and interesting question. At some level of reliance, people would answer "no", but there's the large middle ground (assuming similarly-frontier models are down): having a weaker(?) AI model help you get up to speed ASAP by summarizing code pedagogically, and linearizing the code read order. Basically like an AI-assisted (but manual) code review to reorient yourself.
Post reply on HN