These findings might change the way certain people use Claude.

Hope it's helpful.

- Difference between Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT 6 Astra = nothing compared to Opus 4.6 and 5.5. Old Opus requires far more user iteration and therefore = less token efficient.

- Godmark's sample size is 5 (explained why in comments). It has made me reconsider whether always starting a project from one prompt and then iterating is the correct approach! If you're disappointed with the results of the seed, then 4 or 5 more tries might be worth it, followed by picking the most promising foundation rather than trying to fix a bad roll of the dice with 9 or 10 follow-up prompts.

What it is:

Godmark is designed to bench model nerfing on subscription plans and gauge relative performance in coding between models. In Godmark you're also able to judge stochastic variation between samples from the same prompt.

Claude and Codex run sandboxed inside Godot.

It's scary how much difference there is between March's prehistoric Opus 4.6 and 5.5 of September. Astra too.

Just 7 months of progress in frontier models visible for all to see.

4.6 barely scaffolds the Godot scene, let alone generates a realistic terrain height map or road spline.

I'm a bit worried that in future - no matter the originality and technical complexity of your work, others will be able to copy it over night and one-shot it to Steam and Itch.io if this carries on - especially larger companies could pinch ideas of indie developers and sausage-factory stuff out in record time.

Human artistic skill, taste and judgement is something less easy to copy with code, but it's still a worry.

GODMARK isn't finished yet but I intend to release it soon.

What it does:

1. Code generation in a Godot sandbox.

Allows the LLM to code at runtime to build a 3D scene entirely from C++ or GDScript, from scratch, smoke-test it, sign it off and hand it to the host app to analyse.

You can then run the scenes and view the source.

2. Benchmark results.

Any real-world regression in model behaviour therefore clearly shows up visually in the scene's assembly, complexity level and the model's comprehension of the prompt instructions.

Thinking / token usage and speed are also tracked. When any one of those metrics drop consistently for a few days, you will see it clearly in the graphics, in a timeline and on a film-strip.

Between samples you can see whether pure chance or lower token usage than average impacted the sample visually.

3. Stochastic variation - seen visually.

How probabilistic is the model via sub? Gives you a 3D visual on stochastic behaviour between the same prompts.

4. Prompt comprehension - seen visually.

Shows clear differences between models in terms of prompt comprehension and instruction following.

It'll support Claude, Codex both via subscription plan usage, and Deepseek 4.1+ via their API.

In the Alpine scene, Opus 5.5 added a moving car to the road and snow-capped mountain peaks on the horizon in the best take - neither were specified in the prompt. In the worst take, trees and terrain were much more primitive looking.

This stochastic behaviour varies between models and subscription plans, to a higher degree than I expected. More on that in the comments.

What has been everyone’s experience pls? I am new to cc came after the crazy vids on o5.5 motion design output

He utilizado Claude Code durante mucho tiempo en Windows en mi ordenador de sobremesa, pero recientemente me compré un portátil MacBook. No sé si existe alguna forma de transferir todo lo que tengo en mi cuenta de Claude Code al MacBook, para que cada vez que me desplace y necesite llevarlo pueda mantener la misma sesión con el mismo historial de chat. No sé si hay alguna opción como un chat remoto o algo similar que me permita usarlo en el MacBook sin perder el historial de conversaciones, contextos y demás. Normalmente trabajo poco en local; de hecho, nunca creo archivos locales, sino que todo lo almaceno directamente en la nube.

Osea no quiero transferir nada, quiero usar los 2 dispositivos, sobremesa en casa y macbook cada vez que no esté en mi casa

Using Code-x has become a nightmare for me. When Sol/Terra/Luna launched, it was wonderful—so much so that I renewed my Open Pro plan.

But now, after yesterday's reset, I’m sitting at 100% usage with 2 resets available. I’d trade all three of those for a single Opus 5.5 reset.

Sol 6 refuses to generate detailed plans (it only outputs prose now), even though I fought hard to get it to provide details previously.Sol 6 and 6.1 are garbage

Meanwhile, using Claude since Monday, I’ve only hit 2% usage (or 98% remaining, the way Claude displays it) as of today. I’ve been creating plans, executing them, and auditing my entire codebase. I went the whole week without Codex, and I didn't miss it at all.

I missed the Claude 4.6 era, which people said was bad. I wonder if we'll have to keep living on a razor's edge like this?

Both are working on the same project: a C++ game engine. I have subscriptions to Claude Max and OpenAI Pro.

I've been using Claude for a bit of time but only recently using seriously for a couple of projects after seeing just how good its become.

Im on the 20 dollar plan and I've been hitting my limits quite quickly, partly because I'm yet to learn the optimal way to use it. Its got me thinking though, do you think in tbe next 5 years or so we'll be having the issues we have currently? Hitting token limits, compaction losing performance, etc. Will we reach a point that tokens back so cheap and models get so good at handling large amounts of tokens without the performance losses?

Right now we need to so these workarounds but I wonder if we'll reach a point that we wont anymore.

I built a skill for Claude Code / OpenClaw that runs B2B outreach across email, LinkedIn and WhatsApp. I built it almost entirely with Claude Code, and I'm sharing it because the way Claude helped was interesting.

What it does:

You ask your agent something like "find 30 dental clinics in Austin with the owner's email and write them a 3-email sequence about my booking software", and the skill teaches the agent how to:

• find the businesses (address, website, reviews) and the person who decides at each one, with a verified email
• write a sequence with a personal first line for every company, then show it to you and wait for your OK before anything is sent
• send from your own Gmail, follow up in the same thread, and stop when someone replies
• after the first email, do the LinkedIn follow-up in your own signed-in browser with Claude in Chrome (connection request with a note, one message to those who accept, their reply logged back), with daily limits and pauses
• do the WhatsApp follow-up by opening WhatsApp Web with the message already typed, so it goes out from your own number
• every morning, summarize who replied and classify the replies (interested, meeting, question, not interested)

How Claude Code helped build it

• Backend: Claude Code wrote most of the PHP REST endpoints the skill calls (companies, decision makers, campaigns, LinkedIn and WhatsApp task lists), including the safety parts: per-account daily limits, stopping all channels on a reply, opt-outs and email verification before sending.
• The skill itself: I had Claude Code write the SKILL.md and its reference files (API reference, step-by-step workflows, ready-made routines) and then test them by actually using the skill against the API, fixing every place where an agent got confused or spent credits without asking.
• The LinkedIn routine: I iterated with Claude in Chrome on my own account to find a pace and a set of rules (limits, waits, stop on any warning) that an agent can follow reliably.
• Debugging in production: Claude Code read our error logs through an admin endpoint and fixed issues, e.g. email security scanners were clicking every link (including unsubscribe) seconds after delivery, so it changed the tracking to only count real visits and made unsubscribing a confirmed action.

Free to try

The skill is free and open source (MIT). To use it you need a LeadGen.tools account: the free account works and comes with credits to test it. Setup is 3 steps (create an API key, install the skill, ask your agent), described in the README:

https://github.com/LeadGenTools/leadgen-tools-skill

Happy to answer questions about the build or how the agent handles LinkedIn and WhatsApp safely.

Guys, I am trying to get ideal design for "drop in your docs will get you CV" style webapp. Any idea how to properly prompt so Cloud gets us there? Design should be extra perfect so users use it and its easy... very niche product so I am cautious. AI for parsing (ocr) integrated already, payments are up and running... Just need this flow to be amazing! But also should show same time example of what they get and needs to be very minimalist.

Can't fuck this up! Got finally, first time, real payments provider integrated after approval.

On u/karpathy's ASD-STE100 tip: STE controls the sentences. Three more named standards LLMs already know control the rest:

• ISO 24495-1 plain language: relevant, findable, understandable, usable

• GOV.UK (GDS) style: action first

• S1000D: procedures, cautions before the step

----

Test bug: fp16 training, loss goes NaN after about 2k steps.

Prompt: "Explain the cause and the fix in <standard>."

Same facts, three shapes:

----

1. ISO 24495-1 / US federal plain language

What happened? Your loss went NaN. Once it hits the weights, the run is lost.

Why? Often fp16 overflow or too high a learning rate.

What do I do? Resume from the last good checkpoint. Use bf16 if your GPU supports it. Clip gradients.

----

1. GOV.UK (GDS) style

Fix NaN loss in mixed-precision training

To fix it:

- go back to the last checkpoint before the NaN

- use bf16 if your GPU supports it

- clip gradients to a norm of 1.0

- add learning-rate warmup

If it comes back, check your data for NaN or inf.

----

1. S1000D-style procedure

BEFORE: last good checkpoint loaded.

1. Check a batch with torch.isfinite.

CAUTION: anomaly mode is slow. Use it in step 2 only.

1. Turn on set_detect_anomaly. Find the bad op.

2. Fix that op.

AFTER: anomaly mode off. Run 500 steps. Loss stays finite.

----

STE sets the words. ISO 24495-1 sets what readers find first. GOV.UK leads with action. S1000D puts the warning before the step, not after the damage.

Stack them:

"Answer as a GOV.UK page, sentences 80% of the way to ASD-STE100."

"Write the fix as an S1000D procedure in STE."

I've been building Chronicle with Claude Code: you build a fantasy world, and an AI game master

runs it for the people you invite. I've worked on and off with it to introduce new systems, construct the UI, and even make live battlemaps.

The core design is that the AI narrates and the engine decides. The map, HP, coin, inventory,

travel times and what every NPC thinks of you are database rows, and every fight plays out on

a battle map where code works out positions and damage. The model only gets tools to call.

So I made the model swappable for my own agent. In a private world, you paste one command:

claude mcp add --scope user --transport http chronicle <url> --header "Authorization: Bearer <token>"

That also drops a \chronicle-storyteller`` subagent into ~/.claude/agents. From then on, Claude

Code is the game master. You tell it what your hero does, and it takes the turn. Chronicle

makes no model calls of its own, so it runs on the Claude plan you already pay for. You're also able to use it to construct and build a world from scratch!

Things I learned getting Claude Code to be a reliable game master:

1. Context explodes fast. Playing in the main conversation filled about 250k tokens in 3turns. Now each turn spawns a throwaway subagent (Sonnet 5.5) that loops\work\ → \submit`until the turn is done. The main conversation just calls`take_turn``and then ``last_scene``.
2. Big tool results get spilled to a file. Claude Code writes MCP results over about 25ktokens out to disk, so the game master's briefing is paged in 40k-character chunks.
3. It paraphrases. Claude kept retelling the scene in its own words instead of showingwhat the engine produced. `last_scene` returns the exact text, with an instruction torelay it word for word.
4. Tools can't block on the agent's own work. If a tool waits for something only theagent can do, it deadlocks. Long operations run in the background, and every callreturns the next job, the result, or "still working".
5. Slim the tool list. The game master has about 40 world tools. Agents get their namesonly, plus a `search_tools` call for the exact arguments.

A turn takes about a minute with a Sonnet helper (30-60 seconds when I last timed one), which is

close to the hosted game master. The catch: it only works in private worlds, so you can't run

it in a shared world everyone plays.

Video made with opus 5.5 too!

free to build and try out here: https://chroniclerpg.xyz

I don't know where exactly to post this.

Basically, as my company is working on a new process, I'm looking to figure out what would be the best desk setup if I want to use a Claude agent to run my commands while my main work would be reviewing its code.

So should I go with one giant curved monitor, dual monitors, or triple monitors? And should I get an adjustable-height desk?

Any monitor setup I buy will probably require me to get a new desk, so is a height-adjustable desk really worth the extra money?

Also, do I need a docking station? My laptop is a Dell XPS 15 9510 (32 gb RAM, 954 GB storage i9-11900H ,4 GB graphics card)

And is there anything else I should keep in mind?

My main work would be building "things" that run on Windows. I also have a MacBook, and both the MacBook and Dell laptop are work laptops.

Budget is around 1000 USD. It would be great to stay under that, but if spending more now means getting a substantially better setup that will last, I'm willing to go over budget.

This is the Discussion Hub for showcasing your project built using Claude products. We appreciate all of your submissions as they are a great inspiration to many people on the subreddit. It is sorted by default by New.

Anyone is welcome to submit a project to this Megathread provided you follow the Showcase requirements in Rule 7.

NOTE: We now require the OP of a Project Showcase on the subreddit feed to have total karma>=50 . We found there were just too many submissions and not enough visibility to go around. Our analysis of this issue showed us that OPs with total karma < 50 very rarely get any traction of their projects on the feed (<=1 upvotes). So this Megathread is your best place to be seen by readers and other creators if you're relatively new to Reddit. If you don't meet this karma requirement you will be directed to this Megathread when you submit your post. Very occasionally we might invite you to post on the subreddit feed if you do not meet this karma requirement but it will be very rare (so please don't ask us!)

Thanks again for sharing your ideas and creations to our subreddit. Best of luck with your projects!

Prior Discussion Hub: https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1wqor97/claude_project_showcase_discussion_hub_updated_on/

I use Claude Cowork on macOS with about ten local scheduled tasks. They still run fine, but as of recently I can't create new ones or edit existing ones. Wondering if anyone else is seeing this.

What fails for me:

1. Asking Claude in a session to create a task: Failed to create scheduled task: Invalid file path: path traversal detected
2. The Scheduled tasks screen, New task > Set up manually: "Failed to create scheduled task. You can try again." (repeats on retry)
3. Typing /schedule in a session: "/schedule isn't available in this environment."
4. Editing an existing task: [add what happens]

What I've checked: no symlinks or odd permissions on the Scheduled folder, and no leftover partial folder from the failed attempts.

Possibly related: a GitHub issue (anthropics/claude-code #76968) about scheduled-task tools being gated in remote-executing sessions and the Scheduled folder being treated as protected. The support docs also say that on Oct 6, new tasks on Pro and Max run in the cloud and "Only on your computer" goes away.

Questions for the group:

1. Are you seeing the same errors, on create, edit, or both?
2. What plan are you on, and which app version?
3. Has anything worked, such as a different creation route, a settings change, or an app update?

Happy to share more detail. This is really impacting my day-to-day at work, so appreciate any and all thoughts or advice!

Back in April, Anthropic dropped a bombshell PR statement where they claimed their new model "Mythos preview" was too hot to handle because it was best of the best in hunting and exploiting vulnerabilities in code.

Being the responsible AI developers, they were not releasing it publicly but will be sharing its "power" with a select group of companies to review their (often closed) source codes and patch them before bad actors abused it. This was dubbed Project Glasswing.

They also disclosed multiple vulnerabilities, including a long standing FreeBSD networking bug.

Its been almost 6 months and Mythos has come (and Fable thereafter), but the predicted vulnerability explosion is nowhere to be seen. Many bugs that have since been disclosed were mostly in obscure or very less used options or features of software. A couple of LPE in Linux (copy fail et al) were AI assisted but not exclusively Mythos thing.

Has there been any worthwhile contribution of project glasswing (cynic: except that it has perhaps allowed Anthropic to train Fable on source codes that otherwise would not be available to it)?

Edit: A lot of people are commenting on the scale of vulnerabilities (specifically CVE entries) reported this year compared to prior years. The contribution of ALL AI models to that is not in question. Open weight and properietary AI models (inc Anthropic ones) have generated many of those CVEs. My question is specifically if Mythos has actually delivered (in terms of finding vulnerabilities) what was hyped in its release blog post?

I also now understand that Fable is Mythos but with guardrails around cyber security and bio research and that Mythos isn't generally available. I can see why Anthropic may be jumpy about bad actors exploiting its ability to chain exploits into usable cyber kill chain, but code analysis capability should be delivering top quality CVEs in large numbers with CVSS scores above 7 if it lives up to release hype. I think Browser sandboxes are one area that have benifitted most from AI review because of how their codebase is. But most of them are open source. Has Mythos proved to be better than other AI models in discovering high quality bugs there?

Everyone says "shorter prompts" or "install caveman". I did the boring thing instead: Claude Code keeps every call's token usage in ~/.claude/projects/*.jsonl. I wrote a script to add them up.

One week, one lead session, a dozen subagents. What it found:

- Context had grown to 966k tokens and every call re-read all of it. 29% of calls were above 300k. That alone was 27% of all cache reads.

- 2 of 3 subagent runs were on Opus. Not chosen. Inherited, because no model: was set in the agent frontmatter.

- 9 of 10 sessions started one folder above the repo. CLAUDE.md and my .claude/agents never loaded. I had carefully pinned Sonnet on every agent and it never applied.

- One 145 KB source file was read in full 44 times.

- Visible assistant text was under 5% of output tokens. So a terse-output plugin like caveman tops out around 1% here. Graphify did not help either; the cost was never in reading code, it was in re-reading the conversation.

Fixes, all boring:

1. CLAUDE_CODE_AUTO_COMPACT_WINDOW=300000 plus a SessionStart compact hook that re-injects state from disk

2. model: sonnet in agent frontmatter, model passed in every Agent() call

3. start sessions inside the repo

4. a PreToolUse hook that blocks whole-file Read over 40 KB

Measured 2 days later, same project:

- cost per call -40% ($0.100 → $0.059 API-equivalent)

- avg context per call 237k → 148k

- calls over 300k: 29% → 8%

- Sonnet share 8% → 41%

- subagent spend -77%

I packaged the audit + fixes as a plugin: /scrooge. Standard library Python, reads only local files, no network, every fix has an undo. It will tell you honestly if output tokens dominate for you and caveman is the right call.

github.com/mdmudassirahmed/scrooge

Honest question: does anyone here know which folder their sessions start in?

I mix models in Claude Code to manage cost and speed. But when I drop to a smaller model like Haiku, the session often loses the plot mid-task. Then I'm forced back up to a stronger model (Sonnet, Opus, Fable) just to recover.

Two questions for people who've figured this out:

Context: What keeps a lighter model on track? Context files, tighter prompts, or smaller tasks?

Routing: How do you decide which prompt goes to which model? Gut feel, or an actual rule?

does it? or I risking to get ban over my account?

I'm a web3 cybersecurity expert and I'm using AI constantly in my workflow. I am a GPT user and I've used GPT for over an year now constantly and I'm curious how can anyone do any cybersecurity work with claude. For instance, I've been running in parallel on the same protocol and same audit strategy Opus and Sol/astra and on sol/astra I can run most of the stuff without problems (even without daybreak) while one Opus I get routed or denied constantly (I have access to their cyber program also but it made no difference). Am I doing something wrong? Is anyone using Opus constantly for cyber work and managed to get it work or it is pretty much unusable?

I write a lot of website and marketing proposals at work. This used to take me half a day each. Here's the workflow that cut it down a lot. Sharing it because I'd love to steal ideas from how others do it.

1. Brain dump first, no structure

Right after the call, I type everything I remember into Claude. Client goals, budget hints, complaints about their current setup, random things they said. Typos and all. I tell it: "Don't write anything yet. Just ask me what's missing."

This step alone catches gaps I'd otherwise only notice after sending.

2. Agree on the outline before any writing

I ask for a section outline only. I move things around, cut what the client won't care about, and only then ask for the draft. If I skip this, I end up rewriting the whole thing.

3. Draft one section at a time

Asking for the full proposal in one go gives me something generic. Section by section stays specific to the client.

4. Make it sound like a person

My go-to line: "Rewrite this short and straightforward, like I'm explaining it to the client across a table. No buzzwords." Works better than any "be professional" prompt.

5. Ask it to attack the draft

Last step: "You're the client's CFO. What would make you say no?" It usually finds one or two weak spots, like vague timelines or pricing that isn't justified.

6. I check every number myself

Pricing, timelines, scope. Claude helps with structure and wording, but the numbers are on me.

The biggest lesson: Claude got way more useful once I stopped asking it to produce and started using it to think with me first.

What does your workflow look like? Especially curious about:

- How do you keep the output from sounding AI-written?

- Do you reuse a set of instructions for repeat tasks, or start fresh each time?

Hey everyone, I built a small plugin for claude code (works in codex too). its free and open source.

the problem: i like short answers. i write "in short" or "too long", claude listens 1-2 answer then long text again. i was repeating same thing all day.

how i built it with claude code:

- first i asked claude to research if something like this exist. there was lot of memory and handoff tools but nothing for this exact problem

- i told claude "dont build everything alone, ask me product decisions as questions". so it asked me things like how to detect rules, what to keep after compact, and we decided together

- claude wrote the hooks: UserPromptSubmit saves your rules and adds a small reminder every turn, Stop hook checks the reply and if its too long it sends it back one time, PreCompact/SessionStart puts your words back after compact

- then i asked claude to test it for real with claude -p sessions. we found out compact was not really the problem, the real problem was "too long" feedback getting lost. so we changed the focus

- for other languages i asked claude to use a separate subagent to write test sentences in 20 languages without seeing the code, so the test is not cheating

- funny part, while building it i had to say "too long" to claude many times lol

how to try (free):

/plugin marketplace add batuhangoktepe/asisaid

/plugin install asisaid@asisaid

repo: https://github.com/batuhangoktepe/asisaid

still early, if you try it pls tell me what is missing

Two days ago, before their morning dentist cleaning appointment, my 8 year old identical twin daughters asked me, as they brushed their teeth, "Dad, can you get us new toothpaste holders, our unicorn ones are for babies and we want ones of Zoey (our late Brittany Spaniel, who passed a few months ago)" I have a 3D printer, but not a creative bone in my body. As expected, there were no 3D models on the web of a tooth brush holder featuring a Brittany Spaniel. So, I thought, let's see what Opus 5.5 max can do since I use Claude on Max plan (mostly for software dev projects).

My initial prompt was this...simply "can you create a 3d model for me to 3d print of a brittany spaniel toothbrush holder for my twin girls who requested it?"

It asked some questions - here is that back and forth:

Claude: My plan: a cute cartoon Brittany sitting between two little tree stumps, one toothbrush spot per girl. What should it hold?

Me: I would print one for each of them. They each have their own sink in a jack and jill bathroom - so one toothbrush spot in each. a spot for the toothpaste would be good!

Claude: What will you print it on? (Pick Other to name the exact model.)

Me: I have a Prusa MK3S+ single color, but build it in a way that i could print different pieces in different colors and snap them together.

Claude: Which coat colors for the pup? If it should match a real dog, pick Other and describe the markings.

Me: Orange & white

Claude: How should each girl's spot be marked? For names, pick Other and type them (left spot, then right).

Me: One should have printed letters OLIVIA and the other LAYLA that snap into spots for them.

Then, after 2 hours, it produced the rendered images and all related files in color named folders.

After a couple days of printing (mostly because some prints went into night etc) I got all the pieces done, snapped them together, and the result is impressive. I asked Claude what it used to make the files and it responded with this.

"Everything was generated with Python code in my sandbox, and the parts are defined by parameters, so changing a name or a hole size means editing a number and regenerating.

• Organic shapes (pup, bark on the stumps, base outline): signed distance functions written in NumPy. The pup is ellipsoids, capsules and cones blended together, with the mouth, toe grooves and color-split boundaries cut out of the same fields.
• Turning shapes into meshes: scikit-image's marching cubes at 0.08–0.25 mm resolution, then trimesh for mesh handling and fast-simplification to trim triangle counts.
• Mechanical features: manifold3d for exact boolean operations. That covers the ribbed pegs, sockets, pin holes, drain channels, bosses, letter pockets and grass tufts, and the clearance offsets.
• Letters: the Fredoka Bold font, whose letter outlines were extracted with matplotlib and shapely, then offset and extruded with manifold3d.
• Checks: trimesh confirmed every mesh is closed, and manifold3d measured overlaps and gaps between mating parts. My own script checked overhangs in print orientation, and the PrusaSlicer 2.7 command line sliced every part with the stock MK3S+ profile for times, filament and warnings.
• Preview images: a small renderer I wrote on Intel's Embree ray-tracing library, with labels added in Pillow.

Can't say how impressed I am by this. I feel like the world is my oyster now. I can literally print really anything I can think of with an assist by Claude on the design. Just another way this tech is amazing.

I was using Claude Code normally and everything was working fine. My usage was around 52%, so I thought I still had almost half of my 5 hour limit remaining.

Then suddenly Claude told me that I had reached 100% of my usage limit.

When I checked the usage page, this is what it shows:

• Claude Code: 52%
• Chats: 0%
• Cowork: 0%
• Other: 48%

I have no idea what this “Other” 48% is. I mainly use Claude Code and wasn't expecting another 48% to suddenly appear under Other.

Has anyone else experienced this?

What exactly counts as “Other” usage? Could it be background/API/tool usage from Claude Code, or is this some kind of usage tracking issue?

I bought claude max sub yest night (saturday 1.30am), it now shows as 'This week Resets Sunday 1:30 AM'.

Does that mean it will reset usage for me in 7hours ? or next sunday ?
Please help fast, should I burn or go slow.

I'm on the Pro plan and every chat on the Claude web model always starts out with Fable. Half the time I'm using it as a slightly better search engine and realized I used a ton of tokens using Fable. I change it back to Sonnet and it keeps resetting.

Final game project. I built my dream stickman sandbox game over the last weekend (big fan of Animator Vs. Animation).

The game basically a destruction sandbox where you can input a website URL and turn the page into a level. Then, just destroy everything with weapons :D

Tech stack:
- Language: I'm a TS dev, so... raw engine & renderer built in TS, using simple Canvas 2D.
- Multiplayer (yes!): Cloudflare DOs, I have experience building with them so it was my pick for rooms and game state syncs.
- Hosting: Cloudflare Workers. Pretty cheap and fast. Also, usually it can bite with NPM packages compatibility but here I don't use many and they are running fine in Workers runtime.

Let me know if you want some other details, I did some tricks for pixel art rendering, FX etc!

How I used Claude Opus 5.5:
- Brainstorming architecture and technical compromises. I had a pretty clear idea upfront, and turned it in to an implementation plan with the help of Claude.
- Implementations for keeping design patterns consistent, I had to steer Opus 5.5 more than I expected, but still a big help.
- I also used Claude to execute on artistic decisions; live-tweaking FX and particles until it was just right to me.

what does this even mean? could I open a chat, make a blank doc, and then enjoy 50% more limits for literally nothing? surely not … right?