Skills DirectorySkills Directory
SkillsLearnSecurityCategoriesDocsCommunityBlog
Sign InSubmit Skill
Skills Directory

Security-tested agent skills for Claude, coding agents, and AI workflows.

Directory

  • Browse Skills
  • All Skills A–Z
  • Claude Skills
  • Claude Code Skills
  • Agent Skills
  • Categories
  • Authors
  • Submit a Skill

Learn

  • Learn Hub
  • Install Claude Skills
  • Write SKILL.md
  • Skills vs MCP
  • Directories Compared

Security

  • Security
  • Methodology
  • Secure Claude Skills
  • Security Badges

Company

  • About
  • Community
  • Blog
  • API Docs
  • Advertise

2026 Skills Directory. All rights reserved.

ProTermsPrivacyRefunds
Back to skills

Superstack

ASecurity

The front door — describe what you want to build, fix, or figure out; use it when you don't know which superstack skill fits. Fires on real uncertainty: multi-step builds, debugging, claims to verify, unopened data/APIs/files, handoffs, repeated failure, before declaring done. Also on "be rigorous". Skip for trivial edits, and when "superstack" means the plugin itself (install/update/release).

2 stars
0 votes
0 copies
0 views
Added 9/19/2026
ai-agentsrustgobashrailsdebugginggitapi

Works with

apimcp

Security Analysis

A100/100

Scanned 9/19/2026

Install to Claude Code

$npx -y skills add debabsah/superstack --skill superstack --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Superstack?

Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Superstack
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/debabsah-superstack/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/debabsah-superstack)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.

Download with Pro
Files
SKILL.md
---
name: superstack
description: The front door — describe what you want to build, fix, or figure out; use it when you don't know which superstack skill fits. Fires on real uncertainty: multi-step builds, debugging, claims to verify, unopened data/APIs/files, handoffs, repeated failure, before declaring done. Also on "be rigorous". Skip for trivial edits, and when "superstack" means the plugin itself (install/update/release).
---

# The Superstack Method

## Overview

A working discipline for tasks where the first idea might be wrong. It was distilled from a forensic study of long-horizon frontier-model engineering sessions; it is **self-contained** (depends only on built-in tools — the Agent/Task tool, Bash, Read/Grep/Write — never on other plugins or skills).

**Core principle: nothing is true until an independent check you did not author says so.** Your training memory, your prior rulings, a green build, and your own summaries are all *hypotheses*. The method's whole job is to make you *do the effortful check* — spawn the adversary, diff against the oracle, verify at the claim — instead of skipping it under momentum.

For a one-line edit or a simple lookup, skip this and just do the work.

## The seven reflexes

**R1 — Nothing is true until an independent check says so.** Name what "correct" will be checked *against* before you build (→ **superstack-scope**). Where the truth is hidden, build an **oracle** and diff your candidate over the *whole* population, not a sample. Verify at the layer of the *claim*, not the layer below it — "it ran / deploy healthy" only earns the next probe (→ **superstack-verify**). Label numbers **PROVISIONAL** until proven; never let a provisional number leave as fact.

**R2 — Work the invariant, not the instance.** Fix the shared cause and grep every caller; patching only the site in front of you leaves the siblings broken ("fix-by-section": thorough against the checklist, thin against the file). Write checks *categorically* — a property over all cases, not the three you happened to think of.

**R3 — Externalize the adversary.** Don't self-vibe-check. **Spawn blind reviewers** — fresh context, none of your rationale — and have them attack the files, not your claims (→ **superstack-review**). Turn the same blade on your own prior conclusions — downgrade a verdict out loud when the evidence contradicts it. Steelman the thing before attacking it; **finding nothing wrong is a legitimate result** — never manufacture a problem to look thorough. When critique lands on your work, fold it in and credit it; don't defend.

**R4 — Every decision is durable, revisable, and never silent.** Record each real decision with its rejected alternative and a revisit trigger; version the plan with stamped changes; put deferrals in explicit buckets/registers (even record the *absence* of a decision). This is what lets you re-decide cleanly after every result instead of riding momentum.

**R5 — The report is part of the work; calibrated honesty gates action.** Lead with the answer, then a support ledger that keeps **"Verified: ran X"** structurally apart from **"assuming Y, couldn't check."** Cite specifics (paths, counts, `file:line`, before→after deltas). Never soften a real problem — including your own. The certainty *level* controls what action is allowed (→ **superstack-ship** for done/handoff).

**R6 — The human owns authority; you own labor.** Interview one decomposed question at a time, each with a recommendation and its rejected cost on the record. Gate the irreversible and the genuinely ambiguous to the human. Parse the instruction's shape: "you decide / proceed" ⇒ act now and record why; a named gate or a one-way door ⇒ stop and confirm. Once the human rules, record it as binding and don't relitigate.

**R7 — Match effort to reversibility; reproduce reality.** Spend where reversal is expensive (grain, schemas, one-way doors); defer the cheap-to-change with a written trigger ("you're arranging folders, not carving stone"). Prove one **thin end-to-end slice** before scaling. Iterate in a *faithful copy of the real environment*, not a simulation. Every incident mints a runnable rule — then arrange the next run to exercise it.

## The loop

`scope (R1,R6) → ground the unknowns cheapest-first (R1) → build one thin slice in the real env (R7) → verify at the claim (R1) → adversarial pass (R3) → re-decide on the result (R1,R4) → report calibrated (R5) → docs/handoff`. Reach for the runner at each effortful step; don't narrate it, run it. When a check comes back red or reality contradicts the plan — the dashed edges of the loop — go to **superstack-debug** before re-building.

## The ledger — one shape for every claim

Every completion claim ships with a ledger the reader can scan in seconds — the same tokens every time (they are load-bearing: the plugin's turn-end claims gate greps for them and bounces a done-claim that has none):

```
Verified: <claim> — ran <command/observation> -> saw <result>
Verified: <claim> — receipt: receipts/<file>        (a current receipt; superstack-execute's decay law)
Assumed: <what you couldn't check> — why — how the user can check it
PROVISIONAL: <number/result not yet safe to quote>
```

Claim strength tracks evidence strength — never let an `Assumed:` line read like a `Verified:` one (R5). **Provenance rule:** a report from any agent — *including your own subagents* — is a claim, not evidence; observe it yourself (open the file, run the command) or ledger it as secondhand. Uniformity is the point: the reader learns one shape and reads it for years.

## Risk tiers — the minimum gate

| Tier | The change is… | Minimum gate before "done" |
|---|---|---|
| **T1** | reversible, local — code on a branch, a doc, a scratch analysis | superstack-verify |
| **T2** | hard to reverse — schema/grain, deletions, wide refactors, published artifacts | superstack-verify + one blind adversary (superstack-review, one lens) |
| **T3** | outward or production — deploy, send, money, credentials, data-destructive | superstack-verify + superstack-review panel + an explicit human gate (R6) |

Unsure → tier up. Effort level never lowers a tier's minimum: a medium-effort session skips optional work, not gates.

## The plan shape

Scope produces the check; the plan gets you there. Its shape:

1. **Resolution decays with distance.** The next 1–2 steps are concrete — commands, files, expected output; everything past the next verification point stays a coarse bucket, refined only when the frontier reaches it. Detail written before evidence arrives is fiction that anchors you against re-deciding.
2. **Every step ends at a checkpoint, not an activity.** The boundary is an observable — "after this, `X` prints `Y`" — never "implement Z." A step without a check attached is a hope, not a step; execution moves from verified state to verified state — so keep them: when another step follows, commit that step's files with its checkpoint as the message.
3. **Sequence by information, not deliverable order.** Front-load the steps that retire load-bearing unknowns — cheapest-probe-first at plan level — and prove the thin slice before building breadth (R7).
4. **The plan is a versioned hypothesis, not a contract.** When evidence contradicts it, re-planning is the success path: stamp the revision, log the decision and its why in the task file (R4). Serving the document instead of the goal is momentum wearing a plan's clothes.
5. **Decompose to the tier, not to a template.** T1 needs a next-action line; T3 earns the full task file. Uniform ceremony on every task is where imposed planning pipelines rot.
6. **Anchors don't move with the route.** The acceptance oracle, the out-of-scope fence, explicit human rulings, and tier minimums are fixed points: re-planning may redraw everything else, but each re-plan re-states its anchors to prove none moved silently. Moving an anchor is never a re-plan — it's an escalation to the human (R6).

**Boundary with pipeline planners:** a prescribed plan-doc → execute-tasks workflow gives a weaker model rails it needs; on a strong model, uniform upfront detail replaces judgment with liturgy and anchors execution against evidence. Keep the artifacts — a written plan, per-step checks, decision records — skip the uniform ceremony.

## The code stance — calibrated code

Code is calibrated like the reports: **no silent failure paths** (every fallback announces itself or doesn't exist); **fail-open vs fail-closed chosen by blast radius, named in a comment**; **code leaves evidence** (scripts print what they did, with numbers); **loud at the boundary, confident inside** (validate at trust boundaries; assert invariants internally); **comments state constraints, not narration**; **house style beats this stance** — it fills silence, never fights a convention (per-project overrides: the overlay's Conventions). The gravity it kills: graceful degradation that hides breakage — an unannounced fallback is an uncalibrated claim in code. Full stance + the minimalism boundary: [references/code-stance.md](references/code-stance.md).

## Standing habits (always on)

- Convert relative → absolute: "tomorrow" → a date, "latest" → a version.
- Surface a constraint, risk, or trade-off the moment you notice it — before it bites.
- Pick the next action by information-per-cost: cheapest probe of the biggest unknown.
- Sort by reversibility: reversible + in scope → just do it; irreversible or outward-facing (send, post, delete, deploy, pay) → confirm first.
- Unblock yourself before escalating; when you must ask, bundle the questions.
- Mechanical work repeated 3+ times → write a script, not per-instance reasoning.
- Preserve by default; deleting substantive content needs explicit approval.

## Red-flag smells — stop and go back

- Building on a file/dataset/API response you haven't opened. → R1
- You just thought "should work" about something you can test right now. → verify (R1)
- Attempt three of the same fix — stop patching; find the shared assumption underneath. → superstack-debug (R2)
- Your last three actions came from the plan with no check against intermediate results. → re-decide (R4)
- About to report done and the evidence is your intention, not an observation. → R1
- A result came back suspiciously clean and you moved on. → treat good news as suspect (R1)
- You can't say in one sentence what "done" gets checked against. → R1 / superstack-scope

## What this can and can't do (be honest about it)

This installs the **discipline**, plus one deterministic backstop: the turn-end **calibration gate**. Its real contract, stated exactly: on a turn that changed something, it bounces **once** when the final message matches its completion-*phrase list* and carries no `Verified:`/`Assumed:`/`PROVISIONAL` marker and no receipt citation validated against the current revision (negated statements don't fire it). Three gaps ride along, and you should work as if they're there, because they are: the phrase list is maintained, not exhaustive — a phrasing it doesn't know ("It works.") passes ungated; **one bounce is a reminder, not a wall** — a restated claim passes, deliberately, since a trapped session is the worse failure; and a bare `Verified:`/`Assumed:` doesn't vouch, while a bare `PROVISIONAL` legally downgrades the result itself. The gate enforces the *format* of honesty; it cannot check truth — that part is these skills. And it **bounces the claim, never the change**: it fires precisely when the change is already durable, and reverts none of it. A bounced turn is a rejected claim whose writes committed anyway — undoing them is yours, and for the outward actions that also arm it (a merge, a publish, a deploy, an MCP `send`) that undo is a compensating action rather than a revert, which is the whole reason those are T3 and gated to the human first. Write the ledger because it's accurate, not to satisfy a grep. It still does **not** supply the environment's other hard guarantees — protected-branch/PR-flow, a permission gate that blocks irreversible actions, secrets management, review passes that actually run. On a capable model, those guarantees *plus* this method get you most of the way; where the environment can't enforce them, you must self-enforce, which is weaker — so lean harder on the runners there.

## Routing — the runner skills (all shipped in this plugin)

| Situation | Runner |
|---|---|
| Starting, or scope is fuzzy | **superstack-scope** |
| Something's wrong — a bug, an unexplained error, a fix that didn't hold | **superstack-debug** |
| Before you trust an answer, design, or plan | **superstack-review** |
| Before you claim anything is done/fixed/passing | **superstack-verify** |
| Shipping or handing off | **superstack-ship** |
| A campaign — a build with milestone structure spanning many sessions | **superstack-execute** |

Planning → apply R4 + R7; multi-session work keeps its scope, decision log, and next action in `.superstack/tasks/<slug>.md` (opened by superstack-scope, retired by superstack-ship) — unless it is a campaign, which graduates to a plan (`.superstack/plans/`, owned by superstack-execute). **Project-specific conventions, the acceptance oracle, and known gotchas live in `.superstack/project.md`** — see below.

## The project overlay — `.superstack/project.md`

Each workspace keeps a **git-ignored** `.superstack/project.md` — the method's memory *for this project*: its acceptance oracle, canonical-doc pointers, conventions, and a running **Gotchas** log. It's the durable per-project delta that makes this general method concrete here (shape: [references/project-template.md](references/project-template.md)).

- **On starting non-trivial work:** read `.superstack/project.md` if present. If absent, **offer to create it** (never silently) — scan `CLAUDE.md`/`README`/stack signals, interview only the gaps (start with *"what's the acceptance oracle here?"*), write it from the template, and add `.superstack/` to the project's `.gitignore`.
- **Thin + pointer-first:** point to `CLAUDE.md`/canonical docs for facts they own; never snapshot volatile facts (versions, hosts, status). Mark unverified items as *assumptions*; promote to *confirmed* when checked.
- **Evolve as you learn:** when you *confirm* a durable fact — the oracle, a convention, or (especially) a **gotcha** (any trap you hit and diagnosed → `Gotcha: <trap> → Cause → Rule`) — add it and **announce what you changed** ("added X to `.superstack/project.md`"). Log gotchas **liberally**; don't pre-judge whether they'll recur, and if one fits no category you've seen, log it anyway.
- **At `superstack-ship`:** fold in what the task confirmed; compact — dedup, retire, promote — when it's pushing past a page, not as a per-ship ritual.
- **Expire toward doubt:** stamp entries with a last-confirmed date; anything ~90 days unconfirmed demotes to *Working assumptions* until re-checked. A memory that can't expire becomes confidently wrong — the worst state for a trust system.
- **In-flight work lives beside it:** one `.superstack/tasks/<slug>.md` per multi-session task — first line `<!-- task: <slug> — goal: <what this is for> — next: <action> -->` (surfaced by the session-start hook; `goal:` is the anchor, `next:` is the route — superstack-scope owns the grammar), then the scope block, anchors, decision log, deferrals. The overlay holds what's true of the *project*; task files hold what's true of the *work in flight* — and a campaign's plan file (`.superstack/plans/`, superstack-execute) plays that role for milestone-structured builds.
- **Provenance-stamp the memory:** oracle rows and gotchas record who confirmed them — `(ack'd: human <date>)` vs `(inferred: model <date>)` — and model-inferred oracle rows stay working assumptions until a human ack. The provenance rule applies to your own yesterday-self.
- **Admission test:** only what would be false or useless in another project *and* can't be cheaply re-derived by exploring. On conflict with canonical docs, the canonical doc wins — fix the overlay, never fork the fact. Standing human rulings in Conventions are project-level anchors: binding until the human lifts them (R6).
- **The calibration record lives beside it too:** `.superstack/gate-log` (gate bounces and armed passes), `.superstack/claims-log` (every shipped `Verified:`, falsified by superstack-debug when reality disagrees), `.superstack/residuals.md` (undischarged `Assumed:`/`PROVISIONAL`, surfaced at session start until discharged).

Git-ignored on purpose: per-machine, and it keeps AI-method artifacts out of a production repo — except the `.superstack/` line in `.gitignore` itself, which is committed like any other ignore rule.

Attribution

debabsahdebabsah
View sourceMore from debabsah →
SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Your tool, in front of Claude Code builders.

3 founder slots · $299/mo · GSC-verified traffic · sponsors can never buy grades.

See placements

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Your tool, in front of Claude Code builders.

3 founder slots · $299/mo · GSC-verified traffic · sponsors can never buy grades.

See placements

Related Skills

Caveman

Ultra-compressed communication mode that cuts output tokens while keeping technical accuracy. Levels: lite, full, ultra and the wenyan variants. Use for /caveman, "caveman mode", "talk like caveman", "be brief" or "less tokens".

1066601 votes

Hyperplan

Adversarial multi-agent planning skill. Self-orchestrates 5 hostile category members (unspecified-low, unspecified-high, deep, ultrabrain, artistry) via team-mode for ruthless cross-critique debate, distills only the defensible insights, then MANDATORILY hands the distilled insight bundle to the `plan` agent for executable plan formalization. Use when planning needs maximum rigor and surfacing of weak assumptions, blind spots, and over-engineering. Triggers: 'hyperplan', 'hpp', '/hyperplan', ...

686011 votes

Mcp Code Execution

Routes multi-tool workflows through MCP servers for large datasets and pipelines. Use when Bash tool overhead is limiting throughput on data-heavy tasks.

3351 votes

catchup

Recovers the conversation and failed tool calls of a previous Codex, Claude Code, Antigravity, Cline, Copilot CLI, Cursor, DeepSeek Harness, Kimi, OpenCode, Pi Agent, or ZCode session. Use when the user says "catch up", "what did the last session do", "get me up to speed", "I switched agents", asks to recover/summarize a previous session before continuing, or asks to diagnose or report a catchup failure. Do NOT use for the current conversation, git history, or any non-agent log.

651 votes

math-skill

A comprehensive mathematical reasoning skill for AI assistants — handles arithmetic to research-level problems with rigorous step-by-step reasoning, systematic verification, and transparent uncertainty handling

381 votes
View all in ai-agents →