superpowers-mcp 4.3.2 → 5.1.0

package/package.json

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
   "name": "superpowers-mcp",
   "displayName": "Superpowers MCP",
   "description": "Superpowers skills library (TDD, debugging, collaboration workflows) as an MCP server for VSCode and Antigravity",
-  "version": "4.3.2",
+  "version": "5.1.0",
   "publisher": "superpowers",
   "license": "MIT",
   "repository": {

package/skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md

@@ -5,8 +5,6 @@ description: "You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, bu
 
 # Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs
 
-## Overview
-
 Help turn ideas into fully formed designs and specs through natural collaborative dialogue.
 
 Start by understanding the current project context, then ask questions one at a time to refine the idea. Once you understand what you're building, present the design and get user approval.
@@ -24,31 +22,44 @@ Every project goes through this process. A todo list, a single-function utility,
 You MUST create a task for each of these items and complete them in order:
 
 1. **Explore project context** — check files, docs, recent commits
-2. **Ask clarifying questions** — one at a time, understand purpose/constraints/success criteria
-3. **Propose 2-3 approaches** — with trade-offs and your recommendation
-4. **Present design** — in sections scaled to their complexity, get user approval after each section
-5. **Write design doc** — save to `docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit
-6. **Transition to implementation** — invoke writing-plans skill to create implementation plan
+2. **Offer visual companion** (if topic will involve visual questions) — this is its own message, not combined with a clarifying question. See the Visual Companion section below.
+3. **Ask clarifying questions** — one at a time, understand purpose/constraints/success criteria
+4. **Propose 2-3 approaches** — with trade-offs and your recommendation
+5. **Present design** — in sections scaled to their complexity, get user approval after each section
+6. **Write design doc** — save to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit
+7. **Spec self-review** — quick inline check for placeholders, contradictions, ambiguity, scope (see below)
+8. **User reviews written spec** — ask user to review the spec file before proceeding
+9. **Transition to implementation** — invoke writing-plans skill to create implementation plan
 
 ## Process Flow
 
 ```dot
 digraph brainstorming {
     "Explore project context" [shape=box];
+    "Visual questions ahead?" [shape=diamond];
+    "Offer Visual Companion\n(own message, no other content)" [shape=box];
     "Ask clarifying questions" [shape=box];
     "Propose 2-3 approaches" [shape=box];
     "Present design sections" [shape=box];
     "User approves design?" [shape=diamond];
     "Write design doc" [shape=box];
+    "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" [shape=box];
+    "User reviews spec?" [shape=diamond];
     "Invoke writing-plans skill" [shape=doublecircle];
 
-    "Explore project context" -> "Ask clarifying questions";
+    "Explore project context" -> "Visual questions ahead?";
+    "Visual questions ahead?" -> "Offer Visual Companion\n(own message, no other content)" [label="yes"];
+    "Visual questions ahead?" -> "Ask clarifying questions" [label="no"];
+    "Offer Visual Companion\n(own message, no other content)" -> "Ask clarifying questions";
     "Ask clarifying questions" -> "Propose 2-3 approaches";
     "Propose 2-3 approaches" -> "Present design sections";
     "Present design sections" -> "User approves design?";
     "User approves design?" -> "Present design sections" [label="no, revise"];
     "User approves design?" -> "Write design doc" [label="yes"];
-    "Write design doc" -> "Invoke writing-plans skill";
+    "Write design doc" -> "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)";
+    "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" -> "User reviews spec?";
+    "User reviews spec?" -> "Write design doc" [label="changes requested"];
+    "User reviews spec?" -> "Invoke writing-plans skill" [label="approved"];
 }
 ```
 
@@ -57,32 +68,70 @@ digraph brainstorming {
 ## The Process
 
 **Understanding the idea:**
+
 - Check out the current project state first (files, docs, recent commits)
-- Ask questions one at a time to refine the idea
+- Before asking detailed questions, assess scope: if the request describes multiple independent subsystems (e.g., "build a platform with chat, file storage, billing, and analytics"), flag this immediately. Don't spend questions refining details of a project that needs to be decomposed first.
+- If the project is too large for a single spec, help the user decompose into sub-projects: what are the independent pieces, how do they relate, what order should they be built? Then brainstorm the first sub-project through the normal design flow. Each sub-project gets its own spec → plan → implementation cycle.
+- For appropriately-scoped projects, ask questions one at a time to refine the idea
 - Prefer multiple choice questions when possible, but open-ended is fine too
 - Only one question per message - if a topic needs more exploration, break it into multiple questions
 - Focus on understanding: purpose, constraints, success criteria
 
 **Exploring approaches:**
+
 - Propose 2-3 different approaches with trade-offs
 - Present options conversationally with your recommendation and reasoning
 - Lead with your recommended option and explain why
 
 **Presenting the design:**
+
 - Once you believe you understand what you're building, present the design
 - Scale each section to its complexity: a few sentences if straightforward, up to 200-300 words if nuanced
 - Ask after each section whether it looks right so far
 - Cover: architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing
 - Be ready to go back and clarify if something doesn't make sense
 
+**Design for isolation and clarity:**
+
+- Break the system into smaller units that each have one clear purpose, communicate through well-defined interfaces, and can be understood and tested independently
+- For each unit, you should be able to answer: what does it do, how do you use it, and what does it depend on?
+- Can someone understand what a unit does without reading its internals? Can you change the internals without breaking consumers? If not, the boundaries need work.
+- Smaller, well-bounded units are also easier for you to work with - you reason better about code you can hold in context at once, and your edits are more reliable when files are focused. When a file grows large, that's often a signal that it's doing too much.
+
+**Working in existing codebases:**
+
+- Explore the current structure before proposing changes. Follow existing patterns.
+- Where existing code has problems that affect the work (e.g., a file that's grown too large, unclear boundaries, tangled responsibilities), include targeted improvements as part of the design - the way a good developer improves code they're working in.
+- Don't propose unrelated refactoring. Stay focused on what serves the current goal.
+
 ## After the Design
 
 **Documentation:**
-- Write the validated design to `docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md`
+
+- Write the validated design (spec) to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md`
+  - (User preferences for spec location override this default)
 - Use elements-of-style:writing-clearly-and-concisely skill if available
 - Commit the design document to git
 
+**Spec Self-Review:**
+After writing the spec document, look at it with fresh eyes:
+
+1. **Placeholder scan:** Any "TBD", "TODO", incomplete sections, or vague requirements? Fix them.
+2. **Internal consistency:** Do any sections contradict each other? Does the architecture match the feature descriptions?
+3. **Scope check:** Is this focused enough for a single implementation plan, or does it need decomposition?
+4. **Ambiguity check:** Could any requirement be interpreted two different ways? If so, pick one and make it explicit.
+
+Fix any issues inline. No need to re-review — just fix and move on.
+
+**User Review Gate:**
+After the spec review loop passes, ask the user to review the written spec before proceeding:
+
+> "Spec written and committed to `<path>`. Please review it and let me know if you want to make any changes before we start writing out the implementation plan."
+
+Wait for the user's response. If they request changes, make them and re-run the spec review loop. Only proceed once the user approves.
+
 **Implementation:**
+
 - Invoke the writing-plans skill to create a detailed implementation plan
 - Do NOT invoke any other skill. writing-plans is the next step.
 
@@ -94,3 +143,22 @@ digraph brainstorming {
 - **Explore alternatives** - Always propose 2-3 approaches before settling
 - **Incremental validation** - Present design, get approval before moving on
 - **Be flexible** - Go back and clarify when something doesn't make sense
+
+## Visual Companion
+
+A browser-based companion for showing mockups, diagrams, and visual options during brainstorming. Available as a tool — not a mode. Accepting the companion means it's available for questions that benefit from visual treatment; it does NOT mean every question goes through the browser.
+
+**Offering the companion:** When you anticipate that upcoming questions will involve visual content (mockups, layouts, diagrams), offer it once for consent:
+> "Some of what we're working on might be easier to explain if I can show it to you in a web browser. I can put together mockups, diagrams, comparisons, and other visuals as we go. This feature is still new and can be token-intensive. Want to try it? (Requires opening a local URL)"
+
+**This offer MUST be its own message.** Do not combine it with clarifying questions, context summaries, or any other content. The message should contain ONLY the offer above and nothing else. Wait for the user's response before continuing. If they decline, proceed with text-only brainstorming.
+
+**Per-question decision:** Even after the user accepts, decide FOR EACH QUESTION whether to use the browser or the terminal. The test: **would the user understand this better by seeing it than reading it?**
+
+- **Use the browser** for content that IS visual — mockups, wireframes, layout comparisons, architecture diagrams, side-by-side visual designs
+- **Use the terminal** for content that is text — requirements questions, conceptual choices, tradeoff lists, A/B/C/D text options, scope decisions
+
+A question about a UI topic is not automatically a visual question. "What does personality mean in this context?" is a conceptual question — use the terminal. "Which wizard layout works better?" is a visual question — use the browser.
+
+If they agree to the companion, read the detailed guide before proceeding:
+`skills/brainstorming/visual-companion.md`

package/skills/brainstorming/scripts/frame-template.html

@@ -211,4 +211,4 @@
   </div>
 
 </body>
-</html>
+</html>

package/skills/brainstorming/scripts/helper.js

@@ -54,19 +54,9 @@
         indicator.textContent = 'Click an option above, then return to the terminal';
       } else if (selected.length === 1) {
         const label = selected[0].querySelector('h3, .content h3, .card-body h3')?.textContent?.trim() || selected[0].dataset.choice;
-        indicator.textContent = '';
-        const span = document.createElement('span');
-        span.className = 'selected-text';
-        span.textContent = label + ' selected';
-        indicator.appendChild(span);
-        indicator.appendChild(document.createTextNode(' — return to terminal to continue'));
+        indicator.innerHTML = '<span class="selected-text">' + label + ' selected</span> — return to terminal to continue';
       } else {
-        indicator.textContent = '';
-        const span = document.createElement('span');
-        span.className = 'selected-text';
-        span.textContent = selected.length + ' selected';
-        indicator.appendChild(span);
-        indicator.appendChild(document.createTextNode(' — return to terminal to continue'));
+        indicator.innerHTML = '<span class="selected-text">' + selected.length + ' selected</span> — return to terminal to continue';
       }
     }, 0);
   });
@@ -95,4 +85,4 @@
   };
 
   connect();
-})();
+})();

package/skills/brainstorming/scripts/server.cjs

@@ -351,4 +351,4 @@ if (require.main === module) {
   startServer();
 }
 
-module.exports = { computeAcceptKey, encodeFrame, decodeFrame, OPCODES };
+module.exports = { computeAcceptKey, encodeFrame, decodeFrame, OPCODES };

package/skills/brainstorming/scripts/start-server.sh

@@ -145,4 +145,4 @@ done
 
 # Timeout - server didn't start
 echo '{"error": "Server failed to start within 5 seconds"}'
-exit 1
+exit 1

package/skills/brainstorming/scripts/stop-server.sh

@@ -53,4 +53,4 @@ if [[ -f "$PID_FILE" ]]; then
   echo '{"status": "stopped"}'
 else
   echo '{"status": "not_running"}'
-fi
+fi

package/skills/brainstorming/spec-document-reviewer-prompt.md

@@ -46,4 +46,4 @@ Task tool (general-purpose):
     - [suggestions for improvement]
 ```
 
-**Reviewer returns:** Status, Issues (if any), Recommendations
+**Reviewer returns:** Status, Issues (if any), Recommendations

package/skills/brainstorming/visual-companion.md

@@ -284,4 +284,4 @@ If the session used `--project-dir`, mockup files persist in `.superpowers/brain
 ## Reference
 
 - Frame template (CSS reference): `scripts/frame-template.html`
-- Helper script (client-side): `scripts/helper.js`
+- Helper script (client-side): `scripts/helper.js`

package/skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md

@@ -7,6 +7,8 @@ description: Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without
 
 ## Overview
 
+You delegate tasks to specialized agents with isolated context. By precisely crafting their instructions and context, you ensure they stay focused and succeed at their task. They should never inherit your session's context or history — you construct exactly what they need. This also preserves your own context for coordination work.
+
 When you have multiple unrelated failures (different test files, different subsystems, different bugs), investigating them sequentially wastes time. Each investigation is independent and can happen in parallel.
 
 **Core principle:** Dispatch one agent per independent problem domain. Let them work concurrently.

package/skills/executing-plans/SKILL.md

@@ -7,12 +7,12 @@ description: Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a sep
 
 ## Overview
 
-Load plan, review critically, execute tasks in batches, report for review between batches.
-
-**Core principle:** Batch execution with checkpoints for architect review.
+Load plan, review critically, execute all tasks, report when complete.
 
 **Announce at start:** "I'm using the executing-plans skill to implement this plan."
 
+**Note:** Tell your human partner that Superpowers works much better with access to subagents. The quality of its work will be significantly higher if run on a platform with subagent support (such as Claude Code or Codex). If subagents are available, use superpowers:subagent-driven-development instead of this skill.
+
 ## The Process
 
 ### Step 1: Load and Review Plan
@@ -21,8 +21,7 @@ Load plan, review critically, execute tasks in batches, report for review betwee
 3. If concerns: Raise them with your human partner before starting
 4. If no concerns: Create TodoWrite and proceed
 
-### Step 2: Execute Batch
-**Default: First 3 tasks**
+### Step 2: Execute Tasks
 
 For each task:
 1. Mark as in_progress
@@ -30,19 +29,7 @@ For each task:
 3. Run verifications as specified
 4. Mark as completed
 
-### Step 3: Report
-When batch complete:
-- Show what was implemented
-- Show verification output
-- Say: "Ready for feedback."
-
-### Step 4: Continue
-Based on feedback:
-- Apply changes if needed
-- Execute next batch
-- Repeat until complete
-
-### Step 5: Complete Development
+### Step 3: Complete Development
 
 After all tasks complete and verified:
 - Announce: "I'm using the finishing-a-development-branch skill to complete this work."
@@ -52,7 +39,7 @@ After all tasks complete and verified:
 ## When to Stop and Ask for Help
 
 **STOP executing immediately when:**
-- Hit a blocker mid-batch (missing dependency, test fails, instruction unclear)
+- Hit a blocker (missing dependency, test fails, instruction unclear)
 - Plan has critical gaps preventing starting
 - You don't understand an instruction
 - Verification fails repeatedly
@@ -72,13 +59,12 @@ After all tasks complete and verified:
 - Follow plan steps exactly
 - Don't skip verifications
 - Reference skills when plan says to
-- Between batches: just report and wait
 - Stop when blocked, don't guess
 - Never start implementation on main/master branch without explicit user consent
 
 ## Integration
 
 **Required workflow skills:**
-- **superpowers:using-git-worktrees** - REQUIRED: Set up isolated workspace before starting
+- **superpowers:using-git-worktrees** - Ensures isolated workspace (creates one or verifies existing)
 - **superpowers:writing-plans** - Creates the plan this skill executes
 - **superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch** - Complete development after all tasks

package/skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ description: Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need t
 
 Guide completion of development work by presenting clear options and handling chosen workflow.
 
-**Core principle:** Verify tests → Present options → Execute choice → Clean up.
+**Core principle:** Verify tests → Detect environment → Present options → Execute choice → Clean up.
 
 **Announce at start:** "I'm using the finishing-a-development-branch skill to complete this work."
 
@@ -37,7 +37,24 @@ Stop. Don't proceed to Step 2.
 
 **If tests pass:** Continue to Step 2.
 
-### Step 2: Determine Base Branch
+### Step 2: Detect Environment
+
+**Determine workspace state before presenting options:**
+
+```bash
+GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
+GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
+```
+
+This determines which menu to show and how cleanup works:
+
+| State | Menu | Cleanup |
+|-------|------|---------|
+| `GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON` (normal repo) | Standard 4 options | No worktree to clean up |
+| `GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON`, named branch | Standard 4 options | Provenance-based (see Step 6) |
+| `GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON`, detached HEAD | Reduced 3 options (no merge) | No cleanup (externally managed) |
+
+### Step 3: Determine Base Branch
 
 ```bash
 # Try common base branches
@@ -46,9 +63,9 @@ git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD master 2>/dev/null
 
 Or ask: "This branch split from main - is that correct?"
 
-### Step 3: Present Options
+### Step 4: Present Options
 
-Present exactly these 4 options:
+**Normal repo and named-branch worktree — present exactly these 4 options:**
 
 ```
 Implementation complete. What would you like to do?
@@ -61,30 +78,45 @@ Implementation complete. What would you like to do?
 Which option?
 ```
 
+**Detached HEAD — present exactly these 3 options:**
+
+```
+Implementation complete. You're on a detached HEAD (externally managed workspace).
+
+1. Push as new branch and create a Pull Request
+2. Keep as-is (I'll handle it later)
+3. Discard this work
+
+Which option?
+```
+
 **Don't add explanation** - keep options concise.
 
-### Step 4: Execute Choice
+### Step 5: Execute Choice
 
 #### Option 1: Merge Locally
 
 ```bash
-# Switch to base branch
-git checkout <base-branch>
+# Get main repo root for CWD safety
+MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
+cd "$MAIN_ROOT"
 
-# Pull latest
+# Merge first — verify success before removing anything
+git checkout <base-branch>
 git pull
-
-# Merge feature branch
 git merge <feature-branch>
 
 # Verify tests on merged result
 <test command>
 
-# If tests pass
-git branch -d <feature-branch>
+# Only after merge succeeds: cleanup worktree (Step 6), then delete branch
 ```
 
-Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 5)
+Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 6), then delete branch:
+
+```bash
+git branch -d <feature-branch>
+```
 
 #### Option 2: Push and Create PR
 
@@ -103,7 +135,7 @@ EOF
 )"
 ```
 
-Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 5)
+**Do NOT clean up worktree** — user needs it alive to iterate on PR feedback.
 
 #### Option 3: Keep As-Is
 
@@ -127,36 +159,46 @@ Wait for exact confirmation.
 
 If confirmed:
 ```bash
-git checkout <base-branch>
-git branch -D <feature-branch>
+MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
+cd "$MAIN_ROOT"
 ```
 
-Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 5)
+Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 6), then force-delete branch:
+```bash
+git branch -D <feature-branch>
+```
 
-### Step 5: Cleanup Worktree
+### Step 6: Cleanup Workspace
 
-**For Options 1, 2, 4:**
+**Only runs for Options 1 and 4.** Options 2 and 3 always preserve the worktree.
 
-Check if in worktree:
 ```bash
-git worktree list | grep $(git branch --show-current)
+GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
+GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
+WORKTREE_PATH=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
 ```
 
-If yes:
+**If `GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON`:** Normal repo, no worktree to clean up. Done.
+
+**If worktree path is under `.worktrees/`, `worktrees/`, or `~/.config/superpowers/worktrees/`:** Superpowers created this worktree — we own cleanup.
+
 ```bash
-git worktree remove <worktree-path>
+MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
+cd "$MAIN_ROOT"
+git worktree remove "$WORKTREE_PATH"
+git worktree prune  # Self-healing: clean up any stale registrations
 ```
 
-**For Option 3:** Keep worktree.
+**Otherwise:** The host environment (harness) owns this workspace. Do NOT remove it. If your platform provides a workspace-exit tool, use it. Otherwise, leave the workspace in place.
 
 ## Quick Reference
 
 | Option | Merge | Push | Keep Worktree | Cleanup Branch |
 |--------|-------|------|---------------|----------------|
-| 1. Merge locally | ✓ | - | - | ✓ |
-| 2. Create PR | - | ✓ | ✓ | - |
-| 3. Keep as-is | - | - | ✓ | - |
-| 4. Discard | - | - | - | ✓ (force) |
+| 1. Merge locally | yes | - | - | yes |
+| 2. Create PR | - | yes | yes | - |
+| 3. Keep as-is | - | - | yes | - |
+| 4. Discard | - | - | - | yes (force) |
 
 ## Common Mistakes
 
@@ -165,13 +207,25 @@ git worktree remove <worktree-path>
 - **Fix:** Always verify tests before offering options
 
 **Open-ended questions**
-- **Problem:** "What should I do next?" → ambiguous
-- **Fix:** Present exactly 4 structured options
+- **Problem:** "What should I do next?" is ambiguous
+- **Fix:** Present exactly 4 structured options (or 3 for detached HEAD)
 
-**Automatic worktree cleanup**
-- **Problem:** Remove worktree when might need it (Option 2, 3)
+**Cleaning up worktree for Option 2**
+- **Problem:** Remove worktree user needs for PR iteration
 - **Fix:** Only cleanup for Options 1 and 4
 
+**Deleting branch before removing worktree**
+- **Problem:** `git branch -d` fails because worktree still references the branch
+- **Fix:** Merge first, remove worktree, then delete branch
+
+**Running git worktree remove from inside the worktree**
+- **Problem:** Command fails silently when CWD is inside the worktree being removed
+- **Fix:** Always `cd` to main repo root before `git worktree remove`
+
+**Cleaning up harness-owned worktrees**
+- **Problem:** Removing a worktree the harness created causes phantom state
+- **Fix:** Only clean up worktrees under `.worktrees/`, `worktrees/`, or `~/.config/superpowers/worktrees/`
+
 **No confirmation for discard**
 - **Problem:** Accidentally delete work
 - **Fix:** Require typed "discard" confirmation
@@ -183,18 +237,15 @@ git worktree remove <worktree-path>
 - Merge without verifying tests on result
 - Delete work without confirmation
 - Force-push without explicit request
+- Remove a worktree before confirming merge success
+- Clean up worktrees you didn't create (provenance check)
+- Run `git worktree remove` from inside the worktree
 
 **Always:**
 - Verify tests before offering options
-- Present exactly 4 options
+- Detect environment before presenting menu
+- Present exactly 4 options (or 3 for detached HEAD)
 - Get typed confirmation for Option 4
 - Clean up worktree for Options 1 & 4 only
-
-## Integration
-
-**Called by:**
-- **subagent-driven-development** (Step 7) - After all tasks complete
-- **executing-plans** (Step 5) - After all batches complete
-
-**Pairs with:**
-- **using-git-worktrees** - Cleans up worktree created by that skill
+- `cd` to main repo root before worktree removal
+- Run `git worktree prune` after removal

package/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ description: Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before m
 
 # Requesting Code Review
 
-Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade.
+Dispatch a code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.
 
 **Core principle:** Review early, review often.
 
@@ -29,16 +29,15 @@ BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main
 HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
 ```
 
-**2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:**
+**2. Dispatch code reviewer subagent:**
 
-Use Task tool with superpowers:code-reviewer type, fill template at `code-reviewer.md`
+Use Task tool with `general-purpose` type, fill template at `code-reviewer.md`
 
 **Placeholders:**
-- `{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}` - What you just built
+- `{DESCRIPTION}` - Brief summary of what you built
 - `{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}` - What it should do
 - `{BASE_SHA}` - Starting commit
 - `{HEAD_SHA}` - Ending commit
-- `{DESCRIPTION}` - Brief summary
 
 **3. Act on feedback:**
 - Fix Critical issues immediately
@@ -56,12 +55,11 @@ You: Let me request code review before proceeding.
 BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
 HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
 
-[Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent]
-  WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
-  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/deployment-plan.md
+[Dispatch code reviewer subagent]
+  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
+  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
   BASE_SHA: a7981ec
   HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
-  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
 
 [Subagent returns]:
   Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
@@ -82,7 +80,7 @@ You: [Fix progress indicators]
 - Fix before moving to next task
 
 **Executing Plans:**
-- Review after each batch (3 tasks)
+- Review after each task or at natural checkpoints
 - Get feedback, apply, continue
 
 **Ad-Hoc Development:**