hope @ moo.md
Why does this exist? Why introduce theatrical friction?
Because YOU the human -> end up being the world model. The LLM powered agentic coder is just your hands with tiny muscle memory.
Before moo:
"Build a settings page" → starts coding → wrong pattern → rebuilds → ships something nobody asked for
After moo:
"Build a settings page" → clarifies what matters → shapes the approach → builds with confidence
Try it
/plugin marketplace add saadshahd/moo.md
/plugin install hope@moo.md
You say: /hope:full build a settings page and moo:
- clarifies intent — What settings? Who sees them? What should this NOT do?
- shapes design — 2 approaches with tradeoffs. You pick before writing code.
- consults experts — Surfaces what you'd miss. One actionable next step.
See it in action — real session, messy scenario
Intent — "Make the homepage better."
[INTENT] Specific questions, not "what do you want?"
moo asks:
- What's the main thing the homepage should accomplish?
- What specifically feels wrong or weak about it right now?
- What should the homepage NOT do or become?
You answer:
- "Get more signups. We're at 2% conversion, want 5%."
- "People don't understand what we do. Hero is too clever. Signup button is below the fold."
- "No long-scroll landing page. No chatbot widget."
Two more rounds — product details, tech stack, traffic split, social proof assets. Each question targets a specific gap.
[ECHO] 33 words. You confirm or edit before anything proceeds.
moo echoes back: Rewrite homepage copy and layout (Next.js/Tailwind) to clearly communicate the AI email marketing value prop, move signup above the fold, and add social proof — targeting 5% conversion, especially on mobile.
[ASSUMPTIONS] Surfaces decisions you never stated — forces you to choose.
Page length — you said no long-scroll. How many sections?
- A) Max 4 B) Max 5 (you pick) C) Max 3
Signup mechanism — what fields?
- A) Email-only + "Get Started Free" (you pick) B) Email + company name C) Separate signup page
Mobile target — mobile is at 1.2%. Separate target?
- A) Same 5% B) Mobile 3.5%, desktop 5%+ (you pick) C) No separate target
Shape — "How should we build this?"
[CONSULT] Experts debate. Real tension, not rubber-stamping.
moo identifies the key architectural decision: should the hero section lead with the product or the outcome?
Krug (usability): "Don't make me think. Lead with what the product does — users scan, they don't read. Clever taglines fail."
Cialdini (persuasion): "Lead with the outcome — social proof and results pull harder than feature descriptions. Show the 50M emails number above the fold."
Tension: Krug wants clarity-first ("AI email marketing for e-commerce"). Cialdini wants proof-first ("50M+ emails sent for brands like yours"). Different advice, real tradeoff.
[SHAPE] Two concrete approaches with tradeoffs. You pick before code.
| Approach A: Clarity-first | Approach B: Proof-first |
|---|
| Hero | "AI-powered email campaigns for e-commerce" + signup | "50M+ emails sent" + brand logos + signup |
| Strength | Instant comprehension | Instant credibility |
| Risk | Feels generic without differentiation | Confusing if visitor doesn't know the category |
| Best when | Product category is unfamiliar | Product category is obvious, trust is the gap |
You pick Approach A — visitors don't know the category yet. Proof moves to section 2.
Brief — precise spec, no code written yet
| |
|---|
| Objective | Rewrite homepage copy and layout. 5% desktop / 3.5% mobile conversion. |
| Non-goals | No visual redesign, no long-scroll, no chatbot, no CMS changes. |
| Acceptance | Hero = "result + how." Signup in first viewport. Social proof within 2 scrolls. Single CTA style. |
| Stop conditions | Conversion drops below 2%. Lighthouse below 90. Page exceeds 5 sections. |
From "make the homepage better" to a spec with stop conditions — before a line of code.
Gratitude
Nate B. Jones · Superpowers · Farnam Street
saadshahd