I've been using AI workflows to build applications for a little over one year now. I decided, for the first time, to use a pre-baked industry methodology: superpowers.
Superpowers caught my attention because it resembles how I currently work with AI. I plan my work and chunk it down into smaller deliverables, which I execute through tdd.
I have a few dimensions I wanna assess out of this experiment:
- the end result feature correctness and UX;
- the generated code;
- cost, both time and tokens;
- ergonomics: how I feel about this workflow;
Running the experiment
I used my agentic hobby project, conveyor, as the guinea pig for this. Conveyor is a TUI that lets me see which stage of the SDLC my iterations are: Pull Request, merge queue, merged or deployed. A feature it lacks is tabs. I wanna be able to cycle through PRs I wrote and PRs I need to review, for instance.
To keep it simple, this iteration focused on adding tabs just for the PRs column.
I gave two distinct Claude Code sessions running Sonnet 5.5 on medium the same initial prompt:
Let's plan a feature: tabs. Right now each column shows a fixed view based on its config. I would like to add the ability of having multiple configs for each column, and you'd cycle through them by pressing a key that defaults to . I'm ok breaking the current tab behaviour. I envision these tabs appearing at the top of the column. The currently selected one gets a visible highlight.
Both got the PR through the automatic review cycle without any further interaction with me, and in about 40 minutes I had two working versions of the same feature. I was excited to try them out!
Artifacts & Results
| Artifact | Current workflow | Superpowers |
|---|---|---|
| Issue/plan | https://github.com/piacsek/conveyor/issues/79 | https://github.com/piacsek/conveyor/issues/80 |
| Pull request | https://github.com/piacsek/conveyor/pull/82 | https://github.com/piacsek/conveyor/pull/81 |
| Screenshot | ![]() |
![]() |
| Cost | Current workflow | Superpowers |
|---|---|---|
| Build wall time | 41min | 42min |
| Token cost - main session | 104.9k | 196.7k |
| Token cost - subagents | 483k | 1.28M |
| Token cost - total | 587.9k | 1.477M |
My thoughts
Both implementations worked first time! And both of them kept retrocompatibility with the existing configuration schema.
However, I must say that I'm intrigued. My current workflow beat superpowers in all the dimensions I was interested in analysing: it basically took the same time for almost a third of the token cost to produce an outcome I enjoyed more.
- UI: I don't like the tab number showing up, it's confusing since it's so close to the PR count above;
- Code: I prefer the
Tababstraction over theViewone - it clicks faster in my mind; - Ergonomics: To my surprise, my current workflow asked me more questions than superpower's
brainstormingskill: 5x1 - I felt more in the loop;
I wasn't expecting such one-sided result. If you've used superpowers, please comment how you operate it! I'm interested in experimenting more with it.
Thank you for reading, have a great day!


Top comments (0)