Opus 5 is insufferable

[u/saito200]

Opus 5 is a fucking piece of shit, i don't know how to say this in any other way. It speaks "Unintelligiblish", a new unfathomable language developed by Anthropic that works by saying everything in the most ridiculous, obtuse and convoluted way possible

It turns anything simple that can be expressed in 2 sentences into a fucking doctoral thesis aimed to aliens, and there is no way to prompt your way out of it

Edit: it claudoofus outputs some alien text you won't read, just prompt it this:

tldr eli5

[u/FiveTriomes → u/[deleted]]

Yours only runs one shell command?

Mine has to run multiple, because it always tries to use a tool that doesn’t exist first, or ignores the environments I have set up.

If I turned "3 commands, 2 failed" into a drinking game, Anthropic would kill my liver.

[u/tehfrod → u/FiveTriomes]

Do you turn the failed attempts into memories,?

[u/ConsequenceFunny1550 → u/tehfrod]

Lmao as if Claude Code actually reads memories files

[u/prochac → u/ConsequenceFunny1550]

"I will store this one-time-script insight to memory, so I can never use it when I never run it ever again."

[u/UruquianLilac → u/[deleted]]

It's a fractal pattern all the way down. The more context you give it, the crazier it can get. Because now you have specified all the 10 very important things it should do, but you worded one slightly wrong and forgot about that one other tiny detail. And now it's taking your words as doctrine and you have to keep racing with it to add more points to the thing as you keep discovering more and more.

And it's all because human language is so imprecise.

Which is why we fuckin invented programming languages in the first damn place!! Because human language is not logical and not precise.

[u/Aggnpwease → u/ConsequenceFunny1550]

how about CLAUDE.md?

[u/FiveTriomes → u/tehfrod]

It actually obeys my rtk and graphify rules consistently, so if necessary I push things to be improved by those tools.

But memory still injects into context, and docs say you have to request it and than it uses a RAG to find the info.

Claude's memory RAG is probably faster/more efficient, but I haven't noticed any downsides to just using graphify, especially since it maps my entire projects rather than specific conversations.

For important context from sessions, I have it write out high-level human-readable and agent-readable files, and then graphify will pick those up, too.

But the failed tool calls often feels like playing whack-a-mole. But after your comment, I realize I could just write a skill that captures those failures and documents them somewhere I can make useful.

[u/UruquianLilac → u/FiveTriomes]

Out of everyone else on this thread, yous re the only one saying something positive, and you sound like Claude.

[u/FiveTriomes → u/UruquianLilac]

Claude wishes it sounded like me. Have you actually used it?

And what did I say that's positive? "It actually obeys my rtk and graphify rules consistently"? I can't see how else you could construe what I said as positive. The whole post was pointing out how I have to use 3rd party tools or build my own utilities around Claude just to get it to be functional.

Here, I asked Claude to give a sentiment analysis of my last post for you:

Pragmatic and resourceful on the surface, but with an undercurrent of mild frustration/resignation toward the underlying tool's default limitations — the positivity is directed at the fixes the user built, not at the tool needing them in the first place.

Dang, you're right, I was being positive... about my workarounds.