A methodology your coding agent actually follows — not a pile of prompts, but a set of skills that trigger themselves at the right moment and keep the agent honest from first idea to merged branch.
d o p e r p o w e r s
idea ─▶ grill ─▶ design you sign off ─▶ spec ─┬─▶ ONE MILESTONE · runs in order from the spec itself
└─▶ SEVERAL · a fresh subagent per milestone, reviewed at each frontier
board ─▶ dispatch ─▶ build ─▶ review ─▶ merge · the same method while you're away
Most agent scaffolding is a single linear pipeline: you talk, it plans, it codes. doperpowers sizes the work first. Every change starts with a grill that closes the design questions while you are present, then a design you approve. From there the shape follows the reader: a change one agent builds in the session goes straight from the approved design to code; anything else gets one spec that carries its design with its reasoning, its acceptance, and its plan of work told as milestones. One milestone runs in order from the spec; several run a fresh subagent per milestone, reviewed at every boundary. How much independent review the work gets is a separate call, made from its stakes rather than its size. Either way the agent runs without stopping until it meets a decision the design did not cover, and that comes back to you.
Because every skill declares when it applies, you don't invoke any of this by hand. The agent checks for a relevant skill before it starts a task, and the right workflow just happens.
Every change enforces the same non-negotiables — design before code, tests before implementation, evidence before "done." What varies is the shape, and the shape follows the size.
One unit — work one agent can reliably own.
The agent refuses to jump straight to code. It interviews you (brainstorming) and turns the conversation into a design you approve; when the work is complex and sizable enough that reliable execution needs a spec, it writes the design up as a living spec that carries its own plan of work and progress (execspec), then builds it in order without stopping for next steps. You approve the design; an independent spec review and a whole-branch review gate the rest.
Several units, or taste mid-flight — work that needs more than one agent-ownable milestone, or your judgment while it is built.
The same grill and the same spec: its plan of work is told as milestones an executor can own from the document and the code — files, interfaces, the decisions already settled, proof; no line numbers, no steps — and each one runs through a fresh subagent, reviewed at dependency frontiers — spec compliance, then code quality (subagent-driven-execution) — with the whole branch reviewed at the end.
Unattended — the same method with nobody watching.
Tickets live as GitHub issues and gated workers pick them up (issue-tracker): an Architect grills against the ticket, writes the spec, and executes it through a subagent that comes back to it when the plan does not cover a decision; the same seat then runs the review of its own PR through a QA agent that lands it (qa-loop); the fleet of durable background sessions doing it is one registry of seats (sminos). Product feedback can even feed the board directly (triaging-feedback).
doperpowers ships as a Claude Code plugin from a self-hosted marketplace in this repo. It installs side by side with anything else you have.
/plugin marketplace add SSFSKIM/doperpowers
/plugin install doperpowers@doperpowers
Add it with the
owner/repoform above, not a raw URL tomarketplace.json. The plugin's source is the repo root, so Claude clones the whole repository for that path to resolve.
Update later:
/plugin marketplace update doperpowers
/plugin install doperpowers@doperpowers
Full details, including how it coexists with other marketplaces: docs/INSTALL-doperpowers.md.
A Codex plugin manifest ships in .codex-plugin/ for local installs. (The external sync to the Codex plugins repository was retired in v7.23.0; the script lives in git history if ever needed again.)
For native subagents, install the Codex agent definitions. These port the Claude agent contracts to Codex and replace the companion runtime inside Codex; Claude's registered agents and companion remain available.
Seventeen skills, grouped by what they're for. Each one auto-triggers from its description; you rarely name them yourself.
Shape the work
brainstorming— Socratic design refinement before any code is writtenexecspec— after the approved design: write the living spec, review it, and run it — one milestone in order, several through a fresh subagent eacharchitecture-mapping— author and maintain ARCHITECTURE.md, the repo's spine map with citable invariantsdecomposing— carve a large goal into a tree of well-scoped ticketsorganizing-sprints— turn a pile of raw observations into the next sprinttranscribing-meeting-recordings— diarized, visually grounded transcripts from meeting recordings
Build it
test-driven-development— RED → GREEN → REFACTOR, no code before a failing testsubagent-driven-execution— one fresh subagent per milestone, reviews at dependency frontiers
Keep it honest
review-code— the Claude-native code-review path: effort-routed to registered reviewer agents on GPT through the local gateway (low/medium/high) or a multi-lens panel workflow (xhigh/max)codex-companion— drive OpenAI Codex models for independent reviews and delegated work (manual/codex-companion)progress-report— explain a change your human partner didn't watch, or a concept, so they can steer it: behavior, the decisions made for them, limits, how to check; or mechanism, boundaries, what it means for them — delivered as a self-contained HTML page opened in their browser (manual/progress-report)
Run it unattended
issue-tracker— the board, backed by GitHub issues, plus the execution loop that dispatches Architect and Executor workers onto tickets (gate before building; the design lane authors the plan)sminos— the fleet registry: seats (durable background sessions with a role, in a group), spawn/wake/attach, topology, and the group board
Deployed alongside, not a skill
application-agents/triaging-feedback/— the feedback→triage poller: turns product feedback into grounded board tickets
Extend it
writing-skills— create and test new skills that shape agent behavior
Output style
to-human— for a session whose human reads a report stream rather than the transcript: the agent sends messages in<message>(carrying a★ Insightblock on its implementation choices when it implemented something, opening with a⚠ Criticalblock when work was lost, degraded, blocked, or significantly slowed, and naming every bottleneck or friction on quality or throughput with how it would resolve or mitigate it) and asks for input throughmcp__doperpowers__AskUserQuestion(the native AskUserQuestion plusasync, which the style names over the native tool) — withasync: truewhen it can work on while the human decides; a reader shows only those messages and the questions, with old<to-human>,<essential>,<need-input>and<insight>marks read as aliases of<message>. Select per launch with"outputStyle": "to-human".
- brainstorming — Activates before writing code. Refines rough ideas through questions, explores alternatives, presents the design in sections short enough to actually read, and routes: a well-scoped task is built right there; an initiative complex and sizable enough that reliable execution needs a spec goes to execspec.
- execspec — Writes the spec from the approved design: the design with its reasoning, acceptance as observable behavior, and a plan of work told as milestones — files, interfaces, the decisions already settled, proof; code only where the code is a decision. Reviews it, then runs it: one milestone in order from the spec; several go to a fresh subagent each.
- subagent-driven-execution — Sets up an isolated checkout, dispatches a fresh subagent per milestone, reviews at dependency frontiers, and fixes by resuming the executor. After the final review it writes the spec's retrospective and integrates the branch.
- test-driven-development — Enforces the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle throughout and deletes any code written before its test.
These are mandatory workflows, not suggestions. The agent checks for a relevant skill before any task.
- Design before code — understand the problem before proposing a solution.
- Test-driven — write the failing test first, always.
- Systematic over ad-hoc — a repeatable process beats guessing.
- Simplicity as a goal — the minimum that solves the problem, captured with all its real complexity.
- Evidence over claims — verify before declaring anything done.
This is a personal fork, tuned to how its maintainer actually works. Skills are behavior-shaping code, not prose — changing one changes what the agent does, so use the writing-skills skill and test the change before relying on it. Issues and ideas: github.com/SSFSKIM/doperpowers/issues.
MIT — see LICENSE. Attribution for the upstream work this derives from is recorded in NOTICE and LICENSE-FORK.