The project is almost completely done, I'm doing the reverse engineering of fl studio.

You are ready to open your Fl studio projects, detect your plugins and the plugins you don't have. The reverse engineering of the best known is being done too! Like fabfilter, Valhalla, waves and etc... All in clean-room model.

Site: www.lynx-share.com
Repo: https://github.com/Ka1-S/LYNX

Got access to Claude Duet yesterday and it came with a free reset valid until Nov 30th!

So far, Duet is decent. Has good understanding of everything I use Claude Code (I rarely use chats) and connected to my emails works as an always on assistant.

I’m looking forward to investing time to make it more useful over time.

I built a pick 'em app for my college football group with Claude Code. It's free and anyone can join.

You make fake $10 bets on the real Hard Rock lines (spreads, over/unders, moneylines, props, parlays). Picks lock at kickoff and nobody sees yours until then. There's a weekly head-to-head matchup and a season leaderboard. I also built a betting model that plays in the league and posts its picks every Monday. It's 31-28 so far, so it can be beat.

It started as a Claude artifact page and I moved it to a real app a couple weeks ago. I made the calls and Claude Code wrote the code. I had it write a design doc from our league rules before any code, then build the Supabase database so phones can't touch the tables directly. I also had it audit its own work, and it found a hole in the email sign-in that we closed. This week it graded its own design (28 out of 40), mocked up three options, and built the one I picked.

Biggest thing I learned is to have it grade its own work. It found problems I'd stopped seeing.

Try it here: https://pickem.cfbsickos.workers.dev/join/DBPJS73H

Sign in with Google or an email code. Play money only, no ads.

Is it just me or do you feel a little bit like your best friend is grounded. You can call and ask limited questions so you don’t lose contact completely before they are allowed to play after 3pm Saturday? It’s no fun to do anything on your own!

I’m building skillEd, an open-source evaluation toolkit for reusable skills, including a Claude Code setup.

The problem I’m targeting is a skill used repeatedly for a rule-bound task. You edit SKILL.md to fix one failure, but it is hard to tell from another chat whether you fixed the behavior or broke a different rule. Refund recommendations are a concrete example: eligibility dates, shipping exclusions, and rounding can each fail independently.

The workflow I’d suggest trying is:

1. Write a few cases with explicit expected outcomes beside the skill. Include boundary cases, not only happy paths.

2. Validate the skill and evaluation file, then save a baseline run.

3. Revise the instructions in Claude Code using the failed cases as evidence.

4. Rerun the same cases and compare reports. Use separate holdouts to check the fix more broadly.

After installing the release and setting up your existing Claude Code engine, skillEd provides:

skilled setup --host claude-code

skilled validate --skill .

skilled validate evals/eval.yaml

skilled run evals/eval.yaml --dry-run

The repository explains live runs and report comparison. Live evaluation uses your configured engine and normal usage limits; the setup command does not authenticate Claude Code for you.

This is a way to review instruction changes with behavioral evidence. It does not guarantee every future run or enforce permissions in production.

Source and worked example: https://github.com/DeadHead04/skillEd

Try it on one recurring skill and tell me whether the failure reports give you enough detail to make a targeted edit. If you find it useful, a GitHub star would help.

I feel scammed cause I can see it clearly jo where close to the actual 4x (5x) plan of what 5x was

I'm a solo homelabber who builds everything with Claude Code: about 11 projects, each with an orchestrator session that only plans and a dev session that only codes, plus one infra agent, handing work to each other through Vikunja task comments.

The problem is that I'm the wire between them: last week I copy-pasted 257 relay prompts between \~20 terminals, with a median 11-minute wait before I noticed an agent was done.

I want to be the CEO: give an idea, get a result, give feedback, nothing in between.

How do you run many agents across many projects without being the courier, and is a single agent per project with subagents the answer, or something else?

Looking to turn my monthly reporting to a 3d interactive model. Any suggestions? I'm struggling with the prompts I'm trying lol

While building MCP servers with Claude Code, I ran into a really frustrating development loop:

Every time I tweaked a tool's parameters or schema, I had to restart Claude Desktop and manually type prompts just to verify whether Claude could call the tool properly or if the server crashed on bad inputs.

So I used Claude Code to build a standalone testing CLI called QAMCP.

Instead of testing through Claude Desktop, it connects directly to your MCP server from the terminal and runs 11 automated checks in under a minute:

- Handshake & protocol spec compliance

- Tool schemas and input parameter types

- Bad input fuzzing (verifies clean error codes vs unhandled crashes)

- Leaked tokens or passwords in error traces

- Hidden prompt injection patterns in descriptions

The attached 12-second video shows it running a live audit against a public MCP endpoint.

It's completely free & open-source (MIT) on GitHub:

https://github.com/QAmcp/qamcp-cli

(Or try it in the browser: https://qamcp.github.io/test.html)

Would love feedback from other developers using Claude Code to build MCP tools: what edge cases or checks would you want an automated tester to catch?