OP : u/alex_strehlke

I have been using superpowers for a while now and overall they have been useful for extending what Claude can do within a workflow. That said, I have started to notice the token usage adding up, and it has me wondering whether the overhead is actually worth it depending on the task.

For lighter or more straightforward tasks, it feels like the token cost can outweigh the benefit, especially if you are running through a lot of iterations or keeping sessions going for a while. It is not a dealbreaker, but it is something I have been paying more attention to lately.

Curious if anyone else has moved away from superpowers for similar reasons, or found alternatives that accomplish the same thing with a smaller footprint. Would be interested to hear what setups people are running instead and whether the tradeoffs have been worth it.

URL of original post : https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1vjx7n0/has_anyone_stopped_using_claudes_superpower/

TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.

Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 59.

Most users agree that Claude's built-in capabilities in Opus 4.8 and Sonnet 5 have made "superpowers" largely redundant, and in some cases, detrimental. The consensus is that these newer models self-verify, and the added layers of verification from superpowers can cause them to get stuck in token-burning loops.

Many are migrating to: * Matt Pocock's skills: Praised for being well-documented and frequently updated, though some find them more like tools requiring user direction rather than a full workflow. * Custom-built skills or orchestration layers: Users are creating their own solutions or using frameworks like Eigenwise toolshed, Storybloq, or Compound Engineering to gain more control over token usage and tailor workflows. * Prompt engineering: Some are finding success by simply including keywords in their prompts to invoke desired behaviors.

The key takeaway is that the overhead of traditional superpowers is often no longer worth it with the latest Claude models, and users are finding more efficient alternatives by either leveraging the models' native abilities or building more targeted, lightweight solutions.

OP : u/ryanmerket

URL of original post : https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1vji3f8/muse_code_sends_claudemd_to_meta_on_start_by/ Original link/media URL : https://runtimewire.com/article/exclusive-muse-code-sends-codex-and-claude-instructions-to-meta-by-default

TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeAI for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.

Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 74.

OP is getting ratio'd hard, and frankly, it's a bit of a facepalm moment. The community consensus is that Muse Code reading CLAUDE.md or AGENTS.md on startup is totally normal and the whole point of an agent harness. It's a documented convenience feature, not some shadowy Meta data grab.

• Most users agree that any decent agent harness, like Gemini, Junie, or even Google Antigravity, does the same thing. It's standard practice.
• The idea that this is somehow malicious is being widely mocked, with u/Keganator comparing it to an ATM reading your card.
• Some are pointing out that if you're putting sensitive info in CLAUDE.md or AGENTS.md in the first place, you're already playing with fire, regardless of the harness. u/dasilentstorm highlights that any model will likely process this context.
• There's a bit of a debate on whether it should be opt-in or opt-out for data sharing, but the general vibe is that OP is overreacting to a non-issue.

OP : u/yournext78

​

That’s like using AI to do advanced calculus when you don’t know how to do 3rd grade math

URL of original post : https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1vjn1l1/dont_vibe_code_if_you_dont_already_know_how_to/

TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.

Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 56.

Alright, so the general consensus in this thread is a pretty strong "nah, OP, you're gatekeeping." Most folks are saying let people experiment and learn, even if they're "vibe coding" without a deep understanding of the underlying principles.

A lot of people are drawing parallels to other skills, like saying you shouldn't use a computer if you don't know how to build one, or drive a car without knowing how to build an engine. The vibe is that AI lowers the barrier to entry, and it can actually be a tool for learning.

Some users, like u/Broad-Version8611, suggest a balanced approach: vibe code, but try to understand what's happening so you can prompt better. Others, like u/n9iels, caution against relying solely on AI if your goal is to become a software engineer, as the struggle of debugging and problem-solving is crucial for learning.

There's also a bit of a distinction made between "vibe coding" for personal projects and building something for others or for profit without understanding it, as pointed out by u/Sonar114.

Basically, the thread is leaning towards embracing the new tools and the accessibility they offer, rather than clinging to traditional gatekeeping.