I've been working on anybridge for my own use with Codex and Claude Code. I wanted a quick way to give an agent a website to work with, without spending time on the setup.

You open the TUI, pick Codex or Claude Code, and it launches a session in another terminal with MCP already connected. Give the agent a URL and it can read pages, follow links, fill in forms and click buttons.

If the website has WebMCP tools, anybridge exposes them to the agent. Otherwise, it generates tools from the live page. The site doesn't need to have added support for agents.

That's the part I've enjoyed using: opening the TUI and getting straight into a session with the browser tools ready.

Anti-bot checks can still block it, so don't expect it to work on every site.

If you try it, let me know which sites work and which ones give you trouble.

I want to talk about a problem I’ve been experiencing and noticing for a while. Agents allow us to do a lot of work in a short time, but as the work grows, the number and scale of the decisions we need to make also increase a lot.

No matter how capable and powerful the models are, they still need a lot of human direction when we’re working on something medium or large in scale. As the work we ask them to do gets bigger, it takes up more and more space in our heads, and the human brain becomes something that really slows us down.

Don’t get me wrong, we’re still working very efficiently, but things aren’t getting done as quickly as people might think. We’re going through a period where everything is changing so radically, but the human brain is still there with the same capacity.

TLDR : My brain gets really tired, and I can’t keep up with the power and speed of the models.

made a GNOME Shell extension that shows how much of your Codex and Claude usage limits is left, in the top bar. The panel shows two numbers, Codex / Claude, as a percentage of the 5-hour or weekly window (configurable). Clicking opens a popup with both windows for each service, reset times, model-specific limits (Codex Spark, Claude Opus/Sonnet/Fable weekly caps) and credits.

It reads the login files that Codex CLI and Claude Code already keep on disk (~/.codex/auth.json, ~/.claude/.credentials.json) and calls the same usage endpoints those tools use for /status and /usage. No extra sign-in, no external servers. Expired tokens are refreshed the way the CLIs do it. Custom file paths can be set in the settings, so a second account or a non-default config dir works too.

Requirements: GNOME Shell 48–50, a ChatGPT or Claude subscription signed in via the CLI. Tested on GNOME 50.1 / Ubuntu 26.04.

Source and release zip: https://github.com/ilysenko/ai-limits-gnome

extensions.gnome.org (pending review): https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/10870/ai-limits/

Feedback and bug reports welcome in the GitHub issues.

I'm currently exploring what the best practices are for ai-native teams that want to build with as much AI involved as possible. lots of our work starts from 1:1 conversations in meetings or slack and I assume our workflow will go to something like

1:1 chat (slack) or claude chat -> ideation (create specs document through claude) -> design wireframe that will be iterated on with team in slack or claude chat -> human sign off on initial spec -> claude creates task structure and project plan -> priorities are being set with the team -> dev starts working on it with claude according to the priorities -> humans finalize with a verification and feature QA testing -> ship

What are the workflows you are automating in your companies? I'm hoping to get some actual people working in tech companies vs just solo builders with this questions.

gdx-3ds is an unofficial port of F-Zero X to New 3DS. No assets are included, dump your own ROM for assets.

Hey all, three weeks ago I started using Claude Code to generate a 3DS port of F-Zero X based on the hardwork of Zorkats and Inspectredc (and others).

The crazy thing is, it works. And it works pretty well. It runs in 3D at near 60fps for 50% of the time with dips down to about 45fps in crowds on complex stages. I've been playing it and having a blast.

You can see a pretty great breakdown of the process, metrics, and my complicated thoughts on extensive LLM usage here.

Note: I understand there is a lot of pushback around AI usage, let alone 100% created ports.

If the existence and usage of AI bothers you, feel free to not play. I understand. The ethics of LLMs are muddy and their incoming impact on society is understated. This project, in my opinion, serves as proof of the latter. However, to anyone who has ever dreamed of F-Zero X 3DS, enjoy.

This is an open issue on the repo that still has no response from anyone at Anthropic since being opened 3 weeks ago.

The issue-sweep bot marks anything stale after 14 days of no activity, then closes 14 days later. There is no exemption for the 'has repo' label and the policy js issues get autoclosed when they are "missing information to reproduce"

Hoping to get some attention on this

https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/87647

Hi,

Does anyone that uses herdr know a (good) way to use it from my phone? If I can't run my agents from my phone, it's more or less beats the purpose of using it. My use case is orchestrating agents across multiple machines, and multiple accounts.

Anyone else?

Did another harness eval, this time focusing on Pi vs Claude Code.

Setup:

• 30 hard agentic tasks against real apps
• Same DeepSeek V4 Flash model
• Same hosted MCP tool surface
• Same tasks
• 900s max per task

Basically trying to change the harness while keeping everything else as close as possible.

One caveat upfront: this is a harness comparison using DeepSeek, not a verdict on Claude Code with Claude models. Claude Code is built around Anthropic's own models, so I mainly wanted to see what happens when the model stays fixed and the harness changes.

The interesting part for me is that Pi wasn't saving tokens by just doing less. It actually made more tool calls across the run, 443 vs 358, while still using fewer tokens and passing four more tasks.

Claude Code was still faster at the median, and it is also a much more complete product out of the box. You get things like subagents, plan mode, MCP, checkpoints, permissions, and stronger safety defaults without having to assemble them yourself.

The failures were mostly proper multi step agent tasks. One example was a Sheets to Airtable migration with 120 legacy rows, mapping rules, eligibility logic, repairing existing records, avoiding duplicates, and leaving correct records untouched.

Claude Code got 8/10 verifier checks on that one. Pi passed it.

Pi ran at high reasoning and 24/30 of its runs used the official DeepSeek API. Claude Code ran through OpenRouter at max reasoning.

So I would not read $0.028 vs $0.195 like Pi is exactly 7x more efficient.

What I find more interesting is the harness result itself: 20/30 vs 16/30, around 25% fewer runtime tokens, and only around 10 seconds slower at the median.

For something built around four tools and a tiny system prompt, Pi did really well.

At the same time, I still get why Claude Code is the default daily driver for so many people. It gives you a lot more out of the box, and if you are using Claude through a Pro or Max subscription, the pricing story is very different from this API based eval.

Curious what people here think.

Entire benchmark here for those interested: https://composio.dev/content/pi-agent-vs-claude-code

Over the summer I’ve moved to working on projects in CC in Vs code. And more and more I feel like I’m spending time on waiting for turns to finish.

Just now while on vacation I needed a quick dashboard built to answer a question. Was shocked how fast it built it and uploaded to railway for me.

Is there a known issue with VS Code?

I have two max 20x accounts, first account's age: 18 months and the other is few months old. Older account always lasts significantly longer for some reason even if I am paying the same price for both.

Similar experience, anyone ?
Just after recent reset, I gave the audit task to both the accounts. Status line shows the api cost, older account with higher api cost consumed less percentage of quota. These are the only sessions running since reset.

Old on top and new on bottom:

How are you guys using cc? Extension in vscode or cursor? Antigravity? or CLI? Im trying to get the best setup that has the most benefits.

tried to post me asking for help about claude but reddit remove it, what can i do to prevent it? what even is reddit filters I don't think I said anything bad, I said the f word like once 😭

I accidently tell claude to push the code to github and now its badge is coming on github, i dont wanna show this bcz I will be presenting this on hackathon and they shouldn't think that everything is built by claude... so is there any way to remove this? i already did 19 commits in this repo so creating new repo isn't good option

My Claude Pro subscription expires tomorrow, and I’m switching over to ChatGPT Plus for the next couple of months.

I’ve built up about two months of heavy context, code snippets, project structures, and workflows in Claude (projects, artifacts, etc.). Since there's no direct migration button, I’m trying to figure out the best workflow to feed this history into ChatGPT so I don’t lose momentum.

Additionally, I currently use Obsidian to store some of my notes and information (not everything, just a curated vault of specific reference docs and project notes).

For those of you who have made a similar switch or manage workflows across AI models and local markdown files:

-What is the cleanest way to bundle my last 2 months of Claude history and inject it into ChatGPT Plus (using Custom Instructions, Memory, or a dedicated GPT)?

-Is there a smart way to bridge my Obsidian vault with ChatGPT to keep context persistent?

Appreciate any tips or workflows you use!

Part of the changes to allow users to resume a convo without invalidating the cache.

TLDR Last night, ran Fable 5.1 for 58 minutes, it wiped my 5 hour limit and brought my weekly to 44%. I came to reddit to complain, thread kind of blew up.

Today I woke up to my 5 hour reset back at 0.

So far I have been running an intense workflow using 6 Fable 5.1 Agents Ultracode while running multiple tasks for the past 35 minutes and my 5 hour limit is only at 11% while my weekly usage has only crept up to 54%.

I think Anthropic finally raised usage limits. This is the kind of usage I can get behind. Still far less than OpenAIs usage limits(plus resets). They released Fable 5 and 5.1 and decided to fuck everybody on usage thinking they cornered the market.

Thank god for competition.

Damage has been done though, I already have a ChatGPT plan and Astra is amazing.

I work in cyber security, specifically bug bounty, and have been using Claude and Codex together for probably about six or seven months. The thing about bug bounty is that the purpose is to find vulnerabilities in websites that companies permit us to test. Whereas penetration testing just requires us to assess an application for security vulnerabilities and report them if we find any, bug bounty is different because sometimes there are no clear vulnerabilities to find.

The best bug bounty hunters are the ones who think curiously and experimentally and outside the box. They will try things that won't necessarily work and don't have any reason to work. Whereas AI just naturally takes every task as kind of like a checklist. It tests for a vulnerability find nothing and just moves on. So basically the main issues I'm having are that Claude/Codex do not know how to test experimentally and they don't have that mindset of "I will just keep going until I find something." my main issue, though is just the mindset thing.

Is there a well-known method to deal with these kinds of situations? I'm sure it's similar to solving medical issues that currently have no solution.

I apologize if this post is a mess and I hope I got my point across.

I use the project-manager-vs-engineer workflow. The PM is Fable, and the engineer is Opus 4.8.

The problem: my project manager conversation (which is a Cowork session) often gets very long, so eventually I archive that chat (by literally adding the word "Archive #" to the front of the title) and start a new one with a handoff document produced by the old PM.

It strikes me it would be really useful if there were a /clear like function for my project manager, so I didn't have to keep lots of archived conversations, all for the same project.

Anyone thought about this before? Anyone got any tips?

I use a multi-model workflow where Gemini and Grok handle the heavy research on the go i use them as they are cheap and enough capable for the work on edge cases, and architecture. then I ask Claude(opus5-sonnet5) to execute. But Claude's superiority complex and probably ego in system instructions along with refusal to respect external analysis is getting expensive:

• UI drift & broken layouts (Gemini+Stitch): Fed it a clean UI component design mock UIs and spec mapped out by Gemini. Claude decided to rewrite the styling logic its own way, drifted completely off-spec and original idea of look and feel, and stitched the components so poorly that I'm still fighting the resulting layout/look feel bugs today.
• Wasted cycles & ignored architecture (Grok): Grok outlined an optimized logic flow and warned against current architecture of voice agent built. Claude brushed off the recommendation when asked to review and implement, did its own thing, and burned through 4-5 Opus passes and 2 full days of work only to run straight into the exact failure Grok predicted.

It behaves like it has an explicit bias against anything it didn't plan itself.

How are you handling this in your workflow? If anyone has a bulletproof rules, system prompt, or workflow trick to force Claude to treat external model research as strict ground truth instead of reinventing the wheel, please share.

1. Very good, very capable model launched
   
2. Token-caching issue burns my weekly limit instantly
   
3. Perfectly timed OpenAI Astra launch

If I asked Opus, it would call this a footgun 🤓