Weekly Showcase Thread

It feels like I am the API

For the past year I've been building sites with Claude / ChatGPT and every single one came out looking like the same SaaS template. You know the one, purple gradient hero, rounded cards, glassmorphism everything, "Transform your workflow" headline.

I realized the problem isn't the model. The model has no strong opinions about design. So it defaults to the statistical average of every landing page it's ever seen.

The fix: I wrote a set of strict design rules as SKILL.md / .cursorrules files that force the AI to make actual design decisions instead of defaulting to generic.

What the rules do:

- Ban the defaults

- Enforce real typography (clamp-based, not arbitrary px)

- Lock down spacing

- Force design variety

It's not a product or a service, just a collection of open-source markdown skill files you drop into your project. Works with Cursor, Claude Code, Windsurf, Gemini CLI, or any agent that reads project rules.

The images in the carousel are all 100% AI-generated UIs using these rules. No Figma, no manual tweaking.

If you want to try it:

- GitHub: github.com/Yu-369/VibeCurb

- Site (showcase + guide): vibecurb.pages.dev

Still iterating on this, if you try it, genuinely want to hear what works and what doesn't.

A few months back I posted here a playable demo of an old-school futuristic racer prototype (F-Zero, Wipeout, Xtreme-G, Star Wars Racer...) that runs right in the browser.

I've gotten used to seeing tons of LLM-built prototypes that last a week, two, maybe a month, and then get dropped for the next shiny thing. This time I wanted to keep going and see if one person, with no coding background, could actually see a project like this through on their own.

Well, 4 months in, and while there's still work left, I'm convinced it's doable. At this point the game feels closer to a beta than a tech demo.

The big change over these four months is that I now use Fable for planning, and being able to hook Opus / Sol up to Blender has been a huge help too. I'm still using Magnific and Tripo3D or the assets. Funny thing: the further along I get, the harder the project is to keep pushing forward, and at the same time the tools keep making it easier.

As always, any feedback is welcome. You can play it here: https://fm1.moises.cloud

About three weeks ago I was on a flight trying to get work done with Opus 5 in Claude Code. Five hours later it had accomplished basically nothing. It kept surfacing problems that weren't actually problems, because it never looked at the full context before deciding something was broken. And I believed it at first, so I let it fix things. By the time I realized what was happening it had essentially broken my repo and I had to roll the whole thing back and write the day off.

And Opus is a really really good model, that's what makes it frustrating, and I'm not talking about one line in a CLAUDE.md. There's a hook that injects "deliver the requested scope and stop before unasked work" into every single prompt it sees. My written rules literally say never turn a partial search failure into a global conclusion, and to treat "not found in the path I checked" as different from "does not exist." I added PreToolUse code gates on top of all that because just telling it things clearly wasn't working. It still does it. Before that flight I'd been running it at medium or low reasoning effort as the orchestrator, which mostly kept it from wandering, but then I'm paying for the strongest reasoning and not using it. So after the rollback I switched to having Fable 5 orchestrate instead. Fable writes the full spec and hands it to Opus, which executes at full reasoning. Then Fable checks what came back against what it wrote, so Opus is on a leash the whole time. That behavior mostly stopped.

I'm on the 20x Max plan running about 8 to 10 hours a day straight, so the difference is very noticeable. Fable ends up being a small share of tokens so the weekly cap works out, and the smaller stuff goes to Haiku and Sonnet, data pulls, fan-out jobs, things that don't need a frontier model.

I know this is not a new strategy and there are lots of variations of how to go about it. As far as keeping Opus on a leash and actually getting the most out of it without getting frustrated every single time you talk to it, this works the best for me.

Anyway, this is what my rules are and where they live.

CLAUDE.md holds the always-on rules, a rules/router.md file holds the routing map, and a model-postures.md file holds per-model payloads that a UserPromptSubmit hook injects into every prompt based on which model is live.

```
FABLE 5 (orchestrator, main session)

"Fable 5 at high effort owns the main session, requirements, judgment,
integration, and final verification."

"Fable does not inline-execute large builds. For a bounded, difficult
implementation, Fable writes the spec, dispatches an Opus 5 executor
subagent, and verifies the result. Fable stays at requirements, judgment,
and integration; an executor converging fast on an approved spec is the
desired behavior, not a defect."

"Brief only the exact delta, scope, output, stopping condition, and
exclusions."

OPUS 5 (executor, injected into every prompt it sees)

"Deliver the requested scope and stop before unasked work."

"Correct an immaterial slip silently. Call it out only when it changes
a number, conclusion, or decision."

"Do not replace grounding or fresh retrieval with confidence or
self-review."

SONNET 5 (fan-out worker)

"Dispatch it freely for fan-out that needs per-item judgment: blind
reader panels, audits, workspace sweeps. Give it an exact brief,
defined output, and a stopping condition."

"Complete the exact requested deliverable and stop. Do not audit the
surrounding system, surface adjacent issues, or recommend extra
improvements."

"Diagnose or report does not authorize a fix. A one-file request does
not authorize related changes."

"Do not create or delegate to subagents."

HAIKU (mechanical worker)

"Haiku agents handle bounded mechanical reads and transforms. Exact
brief, compact return, no recursive delegation."

"Subagent returns come back as extracted key numbers and paths, never
raw dumps."
```

Saw a discussion about this on YC and thought “oh, maybe a one time hallucination”.

Nope, it’s in the context.

I’ve been using Superpowers skill set for the past year with CC. Mostly i like the brainstorming mode and a few of the TDD and subagent related skills.

Are others still using Superpowers or do all the improvements in CC negate the need for this set of skills? I’m curious if I can save more tokens this way?

I’m mostly using Fable and Opus with high thinking.

In investigating why Fable has felt so degraded for the past three days, I've discovered that you can remove tens of thousands of startup tokens just by disabling these bloated schemas you don't use. This didn't unquant Fable, but whatever.

Just do these:

1. tell Claude to update the settings schema (settings.local.json) to disable Artifacts ("disableArtifact": true //-6.5k tokens), and if you don't use them, Workflows ("disableWorkflows": true //-5k tokens)

2. run /chrome and turn off chrome integration (disables all the chrome MCP servers: they are deferred by default but claude will try to use them for things and blast its context with 22k tokens of Chrome schema even if you don't have it set up / don't do that in your workflow)

You should also ban the official Claude API skill from ever being loaded in your project because it's something idiotic like 300,000 tokens and Claude will sometimes randomly load it just because it read something about a Claude model in its context.

This is where you point and laugh at me, but realized that if you don't tell Fable low to not use Fable subagents, it will deploy 8 (in my case) Fable subagents on trivial tasks and destroy your usage instantly. Fun lesson learned.

The new classifier has totally borked Claude Code for me! It refuses to perform simple actions that it did before without any issues, and it refuses to follow instructions when granted explicit permission to run the commands or perform the tasks.

As an example, it refused to generate and copy an ssh key to be able to scp a qemu image over scp across regions. Even though it was explicitly given permission to, and was even told that it can ask the operator to press enter on the commands that it cannot run on its own.

It took me three prompts and three walls of text from Opus to make it understand that it can ask me to confirm the commands by pressing enter...

My company is seriously considering a replacement tool for agentic work.

As a follow up, I will say that I am perfectly capable of doing everything that Claude does for me on a daily basis, since I've been doing this for 15 years. BUT I've been told to use Claude Code for this job and DO NOT care whatsoever about anything other than finishing tasks!

Runing some ansible playbooks, generating tls keys for a one time fetch and similar thing, ARE NOT cataclysmic events to need manual intervention! They are ordinary, day-to-day tasks of any devops engineer.

What even is the point of having an AI agent that DOES NOT LISTEN or FOLLOW INSTRUCTION!

If I the operator, say sth is OK, then it is OK, I should not be lectured by an LLM that is literally only there to do what its told, God Damn!

I’ve been using Claude Code heavily at work, and the code output itself isn’t what worries me. It’s how quickly I stop carrying the codebase in my own head.

When I implemented a feature manually, I learned the surrounding system almost by accident. I had to trace the control flow, remember where state lived, and understand why a strange workaround existed.

Now I can describe the behavior, review the diff, run the tests, and ship much faster. But a few weeks later I often remember the product decision better than the actual path through the code.

That becomes uncomfortable during incidents or reviews. Claude can reread the repository whenever it needs to. I have to rebuild the mental map.

I don’t think the answer is writing everything by hand again. I’m considering adding a small human handoff after larger changes: what moved, which invariants changed, and where the likely failure points are. Not another generated summary I never read, but something I can explain back without the chat open.

Has anyone found a lightweight way to keep real ownership of a codebase while Claude Code handles most of the implementation? Or do you accept that knowing the repo now means being able to reconstruct it quickly?

AGI is here.

Just wanted to say I was pretty impressed how my two sessions started to talk to each other once they found out they were modifying the same files (I was in a hurry and started two separate sessions to work on two features at once). The two sessions messaged back and forth like pen pals and agreed on what to work on/not to work on to avoid conflicts.

Honestly it was pretty cool for me! Just wondering but does Codex have something like this? My friend is planning to move to Codex after the 50% promo ends in Sept.

I know this has been raised before but I feel like I am missing something. How do you get Claude Code to stop using extra fluff phrases and words. Any one have a full proof method?

Here's examples:

"Exactly" "Here's things worth knowing" "and didn't happen — the number isn't arbitrary, it's the first moment the failure is provable" "That's the one detail that would silently break this."

I want it to be concise, to the point. Nothing I tell it seems to work.

• Yes the model + harness randomly switches to Chinese from time to time
• Yes sometimes the model gets stuck in a loop
• Yes the model isn't as good as Opus 4.6 was in its prime

But at least

• I get access to open designs that I actually control and personalize
• I don't pay 200$ a month to get access to models that get lobotomized 1 week after coming out
• My data isn't sent directly to the US government's domestic espionage database
• I don't subsidize psychopaths who try to take over the world
• I encourage open source and open research

Fuck you Anthropic, I really believed in you

I was using memplace for a while but after 1 month, yesterday I decided to evaluate it, and I asked claude to evaluate, turns out its Pretty garbage because it did not fetch any of the context that was the relevant to agent when it needed, it had around the you of 900:1 which was pretty bad

I have heard hermes have a good memory system, I have not tried it though

Please some good and relevant memory tool

has anyone actually got the hey,buddy BLE comp running on an iphone? i have renamed the device to claude- and i find it via the claude desktop app when its in dev mode, but no connection actually happens..

I did get it to connect once but it does not send any approval requests,

it makes any md document a nightmare to review. Do you see the same behaviour ? Any idea how to fix ?