fka

A distributed app store for projects built with AI coding agents. Each store is an apps.json in a GitHub repo. A build script aggregates them into a unified catalog on GitHub Pages. No backend or database needed. just JSON.

Adding your apps: create an apps.json, open a PR. Or tell your AI agent to do it the spec is designed for that.

Built on Appétit (https://github.com/f/appetit), a standalone App Store UI in vanilla HTML/CSS/JS you can deploy as your own store. WVW federates multiple Appétit instances into one catalog.

Source: https://github.com/f/wvw.dev

Hi HN,

I built Agentlytics because I use multiple AI coding editors and had no way to see how I actually use them.

It's a single-command local dashboard that reads chat history from Cursor, Windsurf, Claude Code, VS Code Copilot, Zed, Antigravity, and OpenCode. (contribution needed for more support)

Technically it's a Node.js CLI that reads from local SQLite databases, state.vscdb files, JSONL logs, and (for Windsurf) a local ConnectRPC API exposed by the running language server. Everything gets normalized into a local SQLite cache and served via Express to a React frontend with Chart.js.

Yes :))

Hi HN!

I'm Fatih, maintainer of prompts.chat. I've built a new NPM package called "typed prompts" which is a new approach to write chat, image, audio, video prompts using types and methods. It's actually an opinionated string builder, but it works!

Happy to hear your feedbacks!

that makes sense!

My username was f before Elon made Twitter X.

this is a really good idea.

Nope, just seems cool.

honestly, I used to like writing README files before the AI (see my other repos), but I don’t like writing them anymore. GPT does it really well, it may have some mistakes but thankfully, you guys highlight them :)

yes that’s what I’ve done! :)

it's like, every day ;_;

totally agree. in principle, commit histories should be treated as immutable, especially on shared or production branches.

this tool is not meant to rewrite public history or alter real project timelines. it's more of a utility for personal or experimental repos (or branches), the kind of messy ones full of "update again" commits that never had a proper history. that's exactly why I built it.

Agreed! I've already added several warnings and disclaimers to the README :) It's really meant to be a "use it once or twice in your lifetime" kind of tool, not something to run on every project. Actually, mostly shouldn't.

I've created my account ~16 years ago :)

Good point. The purpose of git-rewrite-commits isn’t to "polish" history or rewrite meaning, it’s more of a rescue tool for those chaotic early stages of side projects (like mine) where commits are basically "update again" for months.

In those cases, the "intent" was never recorded in the first place, so the AI is just giving some structure and readability to what’s already lost context.

It’s not about pretending the repo was well maintained, it’s about making messy histories a bit more understandable for humans (and future me) without rewriting the actual code or meaning.

Using Hyperdrive makes things faster for the DB.

Haha makes sense.

Thank you for bringing these out.

It’s just an initial version and a boilerplate, so it’s waiting for PRs to make it production-ready.

Hope to see someone opens PRs to fix these issues and make it better.

Just like any 3rd party server, it needs its own auth i think. like Sentry MCP. You want to track your own, authenticated servers on Sentry. So you need to auth with your own creds.

MCP has announced "elicitations" as part of the protocol (as draft) which made me excited. I wrote about how it standardizes interactive AI workflows - basically formalizing the AI-generated UI concept I was exploring already.

The response to my AI-generated UI post was incredible.

And it got me thinking: What if we could skip A/B testing entirely?

I've imagined a world with AI creating personalized interfaces for every single user, in real-time.

I still do think you haven’t read the post :D

Well, AI might ask you to choose a color. Now, is it better to show a color picker UI or just ask for the name?

You might say naming the color is enough, but in reality, a color picker is the more natural way to interact.

As humans, we don’t communicate only through words. Other forms of interaction matter too.

Yep, that's why it's "on-demand". With LLMs, you won't need to fill the form, it's an optional interaction makes your UX process better. Please read the post and then comment :) You're possibly commenting on the title.

We don't do most of our jobs with our voice. "Click" interaction is still an important one.

Didn't read the paper but sounds like a similar idea.

Exactly! LLMs can generate UIs according to user needs. E.g. it can generate simplified or translated ones, on-demand. No need for preset forms or long ones. Just the required ones.

OpenAI would implement this within a minute or smth I guess.

You can say this for all kind of inventions and new ideas.

Perfect home automation never exists.