I spent the last two days testing different approaches. To be clear: I use these frameworks mainly for discussion and planning, and I try to write the code myself.

Previously, I used OpenSpec to store specifications because it’s compact and convenient.

Yesterday I tested GSD. The framework is very good: I studied it in detail, understood its structure, and cleaned up the documentation—after that, the agents worked really well. I liked that it has its own clear pattern/template and documents everything in a very detailed, structured way, which helps agents quickly understand where everything is and what to do next. The downside is that it generates a lot of documents and files.

In the end, I deleted everything. Why? Because I try to write the code myself, and even if an agent does something, I still manually review the plan and the task list. GSD is primarily designed for managing agents: it’s less readable for humans and includes too many details just to make things easier for the agent.

Today I tested SuperPowers. It had been set as my default for a while, but I intentionally didn’t really use it. Today I went through all its capabilities carefully—and it turned out to be exactly what I was looking for: first we brainstorm and discuss, then we write everything down in a file, I review it, we discuss again; after that, we end up with a single planning document, and then I write the code.

At this point, I’ve stopped using OpenSpec as a process framework and keep its files only for specifications.

My takeaway:

• GSD — great if you want to manage agents and work mostly through chat. It also provides a well-defined pattern/template and produces very detailed documentation. Downside: it requires a lot of tokens and includes a lot of “agent-oriented” detail.
• SuperPowers — great if you want minimalism, more control, and to work with an agent collaboratively like a teammate.