@lukasen_xyz: pstack's new /correct command is designed to fix one specific issue: the same mistake you tell the agent about multiple…

X AI KOLs Timeline Tools

Summary

pstack introduces a new /correct command that analyzes commit history to identify recurring agent mistakes and enforces fixes via codebase-level constraints (type annotations, checks, tests) rather than prompt instructions, echoing longstanding engineering practices.

pstack's new /correct command is designed to fix one specific issue: the same mistake you tell the agent about multiple times, and it goes off and makes it again somewhere else next time. Its approach isn't to keep correcting it with you in the conversation, but to go back through the commit history, identify the pitfalls the agent keeps stumbling into, and then modify the codebase itself: tweak the architecture, add type annotations, insert checks. If the same type of error crops up again, the checks will flag it directly—no relying on the agent's memory. poteto added a line today that I really agree with: "Before there was agent-generated crap code, there was human-written crap code." Backend devs getting dragged into writing frontend stuff and producing crap code is totally normal; big companies have been dealing with this forever, relying on linting, compiler diagnostics, tests, and those kinds of constraints. Now that agents are here, it's everyone's problem. At the end of the day, it's just good engineering practices—nothing new. This really resonates with me. Adding line after line to CLAUDE.md like "don't do this" is basically just begging it to behave; turning it into a lint rule or a test means it can't dodge that class of error anymore. You don't need pstack to follow this approach. Here's a snippet I wrote myself that you can just feed straight to Claude Code or Codex: "Go back through the recent commits and our conversation, identify the classes of errors I've had to correct you on repeatedly. For each class, propose one way to automatically block it: a lint rule, type constraint, test, or check script—don't just add it to the prompt. First give me a plan, noting how many times each class of error has occurred, and don't jump straight to changing code." pstack link posted in the comments.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 10/05/26, 05:35 PM

pstack’s new /correct command is designed to fix one specific issue: the same mistake you tell the agent about multiple times, and it goes off and makes it again somewhere else next time.

Its approach isn’t to keep correcting it with you in the conversation, but to go back through the commit history, identify the pitfalls the agent keeps stumbling into, and then modify the codebase itself: tweak the architecture, add type annotations, insert checks. If the same type of error crops up again, the checks will flag it directly—no relying on the agent’s memory.

poteto added a line today that I really agree with: “Before there was agent-generated crap code, there was human-written crap code.” Backend devs getting dragged into writing frontend stuff and producing crap code is totally normal; big companies have been dealing with this forever, relying on linting, compiler diagnostics, tests, and those kinds of constraints. Now that agents are here, it’s everyone’s problem. At the end of the day, it’s just good engineering practices—nothing new.

This really resonates with me. Adding line after line to CLAUDE.md like “don’t do this” is basically just begging it to behave; turning it into a lint rule or a test means it can’t dodge that class of error anymore.

You don’t need pstack to follow this approach. Here’s a snippet I wrote myself that you can just feed straight to Claude Code or Codex:

“Go back through the recent commits and our conversation, identify the classes of errors I’ve had to correct you on repeatedly. For each class, propose one way to automatically block it: a lint rule, type constraint, test, or check script—don’t just add it to the prompt. First give me a plan, noting how many times each class of error has occurred, and don’t jump straight to changing code.”

pstack link posted in the comments.

lauren (@poteto): everything i know about managing agents i learned from the amazing programmers and computer scientists that came before

constraints in your codebase are freeing for both humans and agents! this has always been true, but if you were a small dev team you likely never had to think

Similar Articles

@chenchengpro: Read @poteto's pstack, here are some takeaways. 1. pstack is not 56 standalone skills — it's a methodology and workflow. Start with validation skills and a feature map to let the agent run and operate the app on its own. Then use /poteto-mode to follow a fixed process based on task type. Parallelism and auto-merging come last. If step one isn't done right, running more agents just makes things more expensive, not more trustworthy. In her talk, validation handles "is it right," and pstack handles "is it good."

X AI KOLs Timeline

Chen Cheng read and summarized Lauren Tan (@poteto)'s pstack: it's not 56 independent skills, but a methodology and workflow that lets agents run, validate, and operate applications autonomously. It covers validation skills, feature maps, cross-model review, and outer-loop automation, with a detailed analysis report on the repo attached.

michael-denyer/pstack-claude

GitHub Trending (daily)

michael-denyer's pstack-claude adapts Poteto's pstack agent workflows into Claude Code, Codex, Pi, OpenCode, Gemini, and Prime Agent versions, translating Cursor primitives into other harnesses.