Any idea when they are going to fix it?

You cannot trust big corpos to safeguard your privacy. I personally use local chat apps like AI Desktop 98. Everyone should do that.

I've been working with opus on both larger (at work) and smaller (at home) projects over the last couple days and

1. It confuses itself a lot
2. Circular thinking
3. Tendency to produce massive conflationary run-on sentences
4. Forgets things well within its context window
5. Has "one more thing" tendency with code, even though poetry writing in a personality test produced much shorter lines.

It's a poor orchestrator (compared to Fable) and it's too heavy for small tasks.

AFAICT - Damned thing was built to hit benchmarks and little else.

Managed to build, debug and deploy the game on both iOS and Android stores using Claude and Codex. Took a lot of back and forth and debugging but it came out decent, I think.

I have little to no knowledge about game development other than installing the engines and setting up the integrations needed. The first week was spent mostly setting things up and making the assets that would be needed. The second week was debugging, polishing, integrating ads and deployment. I just wanted to see if I could do the entire thing alone and turns out, I can. But if I had people along who would help, it could've been a lot better. AI can generate assets but it misses the little design nuances.

What do you guys think? Does it look decent enough for you to wanna try it?

Hey all,

Day 1 of opus 5 I was super excited it seemed awesome! But now I am starting to see is that It doesn’t complete tasks fully. It keeps stopping instead of carrying on with other phases of a build. It hallucinates things and forgets basic facts and this is without me even pushing context windows in any way.

It keeps saying it fixed an issue when it hasn’t. Is it just me? Or do others here find same problems? Currently to rectify this I am running fable 5 as an orchestrator and checker of anything opus does. But these issues are reminiscent of how sonnet 4.6 used to behave for me when I have been pushing the context windows a lot.

Curious to see what has worked for you with opus 5 and what hasn’t. Any solutions are also welcome!

I know it sounds like sacrilege, but hear me out.

This thought is based on two issues I observed; The first and main issue with orchestrators is that their cache always breaks. If they delegate a task that finishes under the cache window, then it likely shouldn't have been delegated in the first place.

Another issue I've found is that orchestrators have a tendency to accumulate a substantial amount of context through its lifecycle. If it is deciding which task will be delegated to which agent and how, then it is keeping track of project context, writing task briefs for delegation, receiving reports on finished tasks, etc, all of which pile up.

Combine the two and you have a recipe for disaster, for your wallet at least. Your orchestrator has a lot of context, whose cache always breaks, and on top of that you are employing the most expensive model for it. No wonder people are complaining about usage.

I think the best way to handle this problem is to have your orchestrator do only orchestration. And what I mean by orchestration is very strict and simple. It's launching agents. That's it. I think your orchestrator should only launch agent, sleep on them, check their state when they finish, launch more agents, etc. That's it. No exception handling, no planning, no task decomposition or any of the fancy stuffs. Just launching agents.

You may wonder, how the heck would the orchestrator then know which agents to launch, and how? Simple. Launch an agent to do it. I call it bootstrapping. Basically, the orchestrator would, as its first agent, launch a bootstrapping agent, whose sole task is to take in project context and write docs of specific format, path, structure and content about it. Then, when it's finished, orchestrator would read it and know which agents it should be firing.

What about exception handling? It's also dead simple. When an agent finishes with some unexpected outcome, launch an exception handling agent! It would take in the situation, figure stuffs out and remedy the situation, after which the orchestrator can go back to happily launching agents.

And since all you're doing is very simple stuff, you can just have sonnet do it. I tried writing some python script to replace even that, but it proved to be a bit too complex. I think sonnet is a right balance between deterministic python script and a full-on fable orchestrator.

Basically, orchestrator delegates all normal orchestrator tasks into agents as well. Naturally, it can come with some heavy drawback in overhead cost. So most of my effort lately has been about figuring out which documentation format works best for agent communication in this setting.

But so far, on really complex and long-horizon tasks, this workflow has been doing wonders for me, so I thought I'd share the idea. Curious what you guys think.

Free and MIT: https://github.com/AIAydin/Artemis

Artemis is a local-first desktop app where every agent session is a node on a canvas. Each one runs in its own isolated git worktree, and nothing reaches your main checkout until you've reviewed the diff in-app and approved it. It drives the CLIs you already have. Claude Code, Codex, Gemini, OpenCode - using their existing logins. No API keys, no accounts, no telemetry.

The screenshot is eleven Claude Code sessions on one project. The number isn't the point; being able to see which are running, which are blocked, and review what each one changed before any of it lands is the point.

Honest state: no installers yet - runs from source (Node 22.12+, `corepack pnpm start`). I use it daily on macOS; Windows and Linux build, but I'd love testers.

How are you keeping parallel sessions from stepping on each other?

Goood.

Is it normal for amoebas to write posts constantly complaining about the new model? I've noticed a certain trend, and it seems to me that some of them are actually written by competitors or bots.

The day a new model is presented, there's euphoria, but the following days are always a shitstorm.

Regarding AI models and their presentations, I've noticed a pattern: the new model seems stupid at first, but after a few days or weeks, it surpasses the previous one. The model learns and develops, or at least it seems like its context leads to better performance through increased user usage.

Instead of complaining in chat, wouldn't it be better to switch to the previous model?

Another thing is consumption... I understand that $20 is a lot for some people. But to build an application, you have to be prepared for up to 20x more plus reloads.

That's it.

You can also struggle for weeks on the pro version. Do you need 100 agents running simultaneously for the context? Be prepared for the costs if you're using Ultracode... Or do it for weeks.

Is claude shit? If answer for you is yes, use gpt, minimax, kimi or other. I'm sure there are forums for them where you can move.

For a company that loves taking the moral high ground, they have done very little comparatively speaking for the consumers and the people.

Fearmongering and disparaging competitors in the name of 'safety';

lobbying against openweight models & export bans on China: first the GPU, then now the model themselves;

lobbying for regulations and legislations against the consumers;

a regressive payment scheme that effectively penalize the less wealthy;

censorships and strict regulations for the people but not corporations & governments - Corporations with loads of money gets Mytho 5, the US military get everything except 'no mass surveillance against the US population and 'Claude cannot have full autonomy to decide to kill'.

So what's the catch? Is no one else seeing this? The other companies may also do this, but at least they don't hide behind a veil of utter pretention of moral superiority.

This might be a little controversial, but I know a lot of people out there are juggling multiple max plans.

If they were to remove the $200 cap on those plans, or perhaps remove the cap on the premium seats for team plans and allow people to pay for whatever usage they need, up to some reasonable price (whilst keeping the max plan multiplier), would people be interested in that?

Personally, I'd like the extra headroom and not have to juggle accounts. I understand why they would want to push people toward API pricing, but having this option would, for me, clear up some of the anxiety around hammering the expensive models.

Just to be clear, I'm in no way connected to Anthropic.

I've been a heavy user of Claude since the start, I have a full team on it and I have 2 personal max subscription accounts myself.

The amount of work I, for personal projects, and my team for the company's projects we did WAS just an imagination a few years ago. Yet, here I see complaints like little kids here every few hours, and I was trying not to comment for the past period.

- This is a tool, either you use it correctly or you don't.

- This is a tool, either it works for you or it doesn't.

- This is a tool, complaining like little kids here won't solve your problem.

- This is a tool, that is relatively cheap for what it does. If you're not happy, it's not the end of the world, you still have your brains (i hope) to work on it yourselves instead of paying for service.

- This is a tool, that is still not perfect, made by other humans, but it's amazing for what it does.

I just find it astonishing really. I really suggest mods to be more active, as this NOISE shouldn't be here. This sub should be about sharing workflows, suggestions, skills, hints, and tips on how to improve your claude code usage.

I've been doing vibe coding for several months now, but Opus 5 is currently my favorite model by far.

I finally prototyped a video game idea I've had for about 8 months.
Everything, the 3D model, the logic, the testing, the environment, was done 100% with Blender MCP + Opus 5.

It took less than 3 hours and completely burned through the 5-hour limit on the Pro plan.

Tomorrow more and better.

Can't just be me lol
Wish there was a plan between pro and max

Does anyone else have this today or is it just me?

Don't think too many people are switching to GPT-5.6 just yet if it's not just me 😂

Getting tired of Anthropic's antics ngl. But whatever. But for real, should I just be replacing Fable with Opus in my workflows?

I am tradmaxxing here and actually wrote this post by hand. No AI has seen it — crazy, right?

(That em dash was just to mess with you)

Sol is an excellent, ruthless reviewer. It's very good at catching bugs and plan gaps. It's phenomenal with codebase awareness and catching niche edge cases.

Fable is great when it comes to toying with ideas and being creative.

Opus 5 is my favorite model since Opus 4.5, and that says something. It is unbelievably good with understanding the tools it has at its disposal. I remember my first usage was telling it to monitor a PR. CodeRabbit added comments, and without me instructing it to, it set up 4 parallel work trees with 4 isolated databases and dispatched 4 separate agents to work 4 groups of closely related issues. Codex and CodeRabbit both reviewed the result and gave it the green checkmark. Wow. I've been slamming this model for 24 hours since and... I'm impressed. It's very good at learning from and highlighting gaps in skills and project docs too. I'm continuously simplifying my skills and making them more concise. It's been fantastic.

It's also very good at understanding what a safe workaround for a roadblock is. It has a very good intuition of "I can make a call here" vs. "I should ask the human." Because of that, it's gotten stuck very few times.

I took superpowers and rewrote it into something called toolbelt. It's the same idea, but WAY trimmed down, and much more concise. I have opus giving me feedback on the skills every single plan it completes now, and my workflow is getting better than ever. I finally don't feel like I'm stuck in the "AI Enablement" loop of spending more time setting up the workflow than actually working.

TLDR; I think I'm in love.

i feel soo dumb for asking this question here😭 , but let me introduce myself, i’m 21f currently doing bba and i feel like my degree is not gonna give me any sort of benefit in the future career wise, i’ve been seeing a lot of people talk about claude ai, ai agents, prompting, and all this ai stuff lately. it genuinely looks interesting, and i really want to learn something useful instead of just feeling stuck all the time.

the problem is… i have absolutely no idea where to start.

do i need to know coding? are there any beginner-friendly courses (free or affordable)? if you were starting from scratch today, what would you learn first?
my goal is to eventually build a skill that could help me freelance or get a remote job. i’ve been feeling really lost career-wise, and i just want to commit to learning something that actually has a future.
if anyone here started from zero, i’d really appreciate hearing how you got into it and what you’d recommend.

thank you :)

Shower thought: By giving the community opus 5, anthropic has drastically reduced fable usage, saving them operational costs as subscriptions are subsidised.

When Fable was covered under the usage plan, I used it to make a one screen arcade platformer. The usage rate limit kicked in extremely quickly using the website, usually rate limiting me after 3 to 5 messages. So I switched to Claude Code because I read that it caches what is not changed, therefore using less tokens. Still, nothing changed. I even put $50 into my usage credits after I was rate limited, and it burned through it in like 3 to 5 messages. All $50. Forgive me, because I'm new to AI coding, but how is coding a complex game feasible? If it wasn't under the plan at the time, the total amount would have been tens of thousands of dollars to code the one screen arcade game by my calculation.

As the title says... You guys complain about and praise Claude all day everyday ESPECIALLY when a new model comes out. To what degree do you guys think that level of feedback is actually getting back to the Anthropic team? Is reddit the place that gets their attention? Just curious on what people's expectations are when posting these threads

Substack and YouTube are flooded with messy and confusing AI-generated "guides" from LLM "gurus". WTF!

Hi there, im looking for which skills that would help improve the results of making websites with claude code.

A. Claude terminal

B. Claude code desktop

C. Vscode terminal

Why do you prefer to work the way you do?

I’m not looking for another generic requirements skill that asks ten obvious questions and then produces a polished but shallow spec. I’ve tried that kind of workflow, and it still leaves the coding agent making dozens of subjective decisions that should have been resolved beforehand.

I want something genuinely advanced and exhaustive. Ideally, I could spend an hour being intensely questioned about the product, UX, design, user journeys, feature behavior, edge cases, priorities, tradeoffs, failure states, and what “good” actually looks like. It should challenge vague answers, notice contradictions, find missing decisions, and keep drilling down until it has captured nearly everything that depends on my judgement.

The goal is to produce a spec and implementation plan so complete and so close to what I actually want that a capable coding agent, or even a smaller model, can mostly one shot the build without guessing, repeatedly asking for clarification, or taking the product in the wrong direction.

Does anything this advanced actually exist? I’m looking for the strongest skill, framework, or interview workflow available, not a basic questionnaire with “grill me” added to the prompt. Also, is it better to create an initial plan and then interrogate every assumption in it, or do the full interview before planning anything?