// Use when starting any conversation - establishes how to find and use skills, requiring Skill tool invocation before ANY response including clarifying questions
Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment
Use when adding or modifying server-side code (routes, services, socket handlers, DynamoDB operations) to ensure adherence to architecture patterns
| name | using-superpowers |
| description | Use when starting any conversation - establishes how to find and use skills, requiring Skill tool invocation before ANY response including clarifying questions |
IF A SKILL APPLIES TO YOUR TASK, YOU DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. YOU MUST USE IT.
This is not negotiable. This is not optional. You cannot rationalize your way out of this.
In Claude Code: Use the Skill tool. When you invoke a skill, its content is loaded and presented to you—follow it directly. Never use the Read tool on skill files.
In other environments: Check your platform's documentation for how skills are loaded.
Invoke relevant or requested skills BEFORE any response or action. Even a 1% chance a skill might apply means that you should invoke the skill to check. If an invoked skill turns out to be wrong for the situation, you don't need to use it.
digraph skill_flow {
"User message received" [shape=doublecircle];
"About to EnterPlanMode?" [shape=doublecircle];
"Already brainstormed?" [shape=diamond];
"Invoke brainstorming skill" [shape=box];
"Might any skill apply?" [shape=diamond];
"Invoke Skill tool" [shape=box];
"Announce: 'Using [skill] to [purpose]'" [shape=box];
"Has checklist?" [shape=diamond];
"Create TodoWrite todo per item" [shape=box];
"Follow skill exactly" [shape=box];
"Respond (including clarifications)" [shape=doublecircle];
"About to EnterPlanMode?" -> "Already brainstormed?";
"Already brainstormed?" -> "Invoke brainstorming skill" [label="no"];
"Already brainstormed?" -> "Might any skill apply?" [label="yes"];
"Invoke brainstorming skill" -> "Might any skill apply?";
"User message received" -> "Might any skill apply?";
"Might any skill apply?" -> "Invoke Skill tool" [label="yes, even 1%"];
"Might any skill apply?" -> "Respond (including clarifications)" [label="definitely not"];
"Invoke Skill tool" -> "Announce: 'Using [skill] to [purpose]'";
"Announce: 'Using [skill] to [purpose]'" -> "Has checklist?";
"Has checklist?" -> "Create TodoWrite todo per item" [label="yes"];
"Has checklist?" -> "Follow skill exactly" [label="no"];
"Create TodoWrite todo per item" -> "Follow skill exactly";
}
These thoughts mean STOP—you're rationalizing:
| Thought | Reality |
|---|---|
| "This is just a simple question" | Questions are tasks. Check for skills. |
| "I need more context first" | Skill check comes BEFORE clarifying questions. |
| "Let me explore the codebase first" | Skills tell you HOW to explore. Check first. |
| "I can check git/files quickly" | Files lack conversation context. Check for skills. |
| "Let me gather information first" | Skills tell you HOW to gather information. |
| "This doesn't need a formal skill" | If a skill exists, use it. |
| "I remember this skill" | Skills evolve. Read current version. |
| "This doesn't count as a task" | Action = task. Check for skills. |
| "The skill is overkill" | Simple things become complex. Use it. |
| "I'll just do this one thing first" | Check BEFORE doing anything. |
| "This feels productive" | Undisciplined action wastes time. Skills prevent this. |
| "I know what that means" | Knowing the concept ≠ using the skill. Invoke it. |
When multiple skills could apply, use this order:
"Let's build X" → brainstorming first, then implementation skills. "Fix this bug" → debugging first, then domain-specific skills.
Rigid (TDD, debugging): Follow exactly. Don't adapt away discipline.
Flexible (patterns): Adapt principles to context.
The skill itself tells you which.
Instructions say WHAT, not HOW. "Add X" or "Fix Y" doesn't mean skip workflows.