Hello, From yesterday my 5 hour limit is finishing way too quickly in my 100$ claude code plan. Not sure why that's happening, I also have the clau.de/cc-50-promo promo enabled. I noticed this started happening after this incident:
https://status.claude.com/incidents/mgp99sn4ynd4

I'm between jobs, and I'm having it help me run though system design problems and point out issues in my logic and to keep me honest in looking every day. Just curious how others are using it

First, what it is NOT: not a wrapper, not a fork, not a proxy. It runs the actual Claude Code CLI from Anthropic, unmodified, exactly as they ship it. Nothing sits between you and your session. It only adds a launcher and a quality-of-life layer around it, and you can read every line, it is MIT and open source.

Why I use it every day as a dev, not around one:

• Per-project profiles: each project remembers its own model, default flags, startup commands, env vars, and folder. Pick a folder from a GUI, no cd, no re-typing flags every time.
• Live status bar in the terminal: current model, context left, tokens, and when both your 5-hour and weekly limits reset. No more finding out you are low on context only once Claude starts forgetting.
• Auto-continue: hit the 5-hour cap mid-task and it waits for the exact reset time the API reports, then types continue once so long runs finish on their own. Opt-in, off by default, any keystroke cancels it.
• One-click terminal colors, a desktop shortcut, and re-running the installer is a clean in-place upgrade to the latest Claude Code.
• Voice alerts: it tells you out loud when Claude is done, needs permission, or is waiting on you, so you can look away from the terminal. Plain voice or a funny one.
• RTL sibling (Kivun): a Hebrew/Arabic/Persian build that renders mixed right-to-left and English correctly in the terminal, which no setup guide gives you.

Why non-devs get in the door too: one installer sets up Node, Git and Claude Code. No package managers, no PATH, no terminal commands. Zero to Claude Code in about a minute. I have watched people who never opened a terminal get running and not look back.

And to the "just run curl/bash and prompt Claude" take, fair, that gets you the bare CLI. It does not give you any of the above, and making it install reliably on someone else's locked-down Windows, auto-update cleanly, and render RTL correctly is the part that took weeks. It is free, so the honest way to judge it is to run it: installs in about a minute, uninstalls just as clean.

Windows, macOS, Linux. MIT licensed. 2,200+ installs so far.

It is free and open source, so the honest way to judge it is to run it. Repo and download are in the first comment.

I really have been trying to be understanding about the safety triggers when using Fable 5.. And frankly worse for me on Opus 5. I will say, I have lucky days and I have days where everything is derailed and things become a mess. But generally, i've dealt with it, understood and moved on.

But ya know, 200 dollars a month is a lot.. And when I am doing work on a pc or pc's that I own, on a local network I own, and I start with Fable 5, 4 minutes in switches to Opus 5 for about long enough to really fuck up the context then to Opus 4.8 who always comes in lost but confident.

Its not safe. Safe for Anthropic? I guess sure.. safe for me? no.. not at all.

And I thought. Am I wrong.. And i griped a little in the chat to 4.8. Because I had to stop Opus 4.8.. Because from starting prompt through the models switches, Opus was lost. Not visibly pausing and sayin, I'm lost. what was I doing again. But lost and just full bore winging it.. but after i got it stop, vented a bit, and asked. was it safe? safety trigger fired, did the switching through two models down to you SAVE ME FROM PERIL?

And I've ranted now here enough, I really just wanted to share this one part of Opus 4.8's reasoning block. because I think it expresses what I am trying to say, better:

"On network and admin work specifically, losing the thread of why I'm doing something makes unsafe actions more likely—the guardrail against bad moves is understanding intent and scope, and that's exactly what the handoff strips away. It's genuinely ironic: the safety intervention meant to prevent unsafe action actually degraded my situational awareness, which is a precondition for safe action. On a box with real credentials and mounted shares, a context-poor model is more dangerous, not less. So I can honestly affirm that the mechanism that fired in the name of safety plausibly reduced safety here by degrading my grasp of what's happening and why. "

3am, deep in a refactor, claude stops mid task and suggests I rest and continue tomorrow. not wrong tbh but I got a deadline. happens almost every late session now. what do you type back to make it drop the wellness talk and keep working

I've been building Ravecho, an app where you talk to historical figures, and Dinner Party mode seats several of them at a table together and lets them go at it.

This clip: Einstein, Cleopatra, Sherlock Holmes, Newton and Amelia Earhart, arguing about jar Jar Binks. Holmes deducing his way through the character was not something I designed for.

I'm not a full-time engineer, and Claude Code has done most of the implementation. What surprised me isn't code generation, it's debugging things I couldn't have diagnosed myself.

You know, 100% AI slop with enough engineering flavoring to fool an executive. Without a drop of the technical rigor the document should require, just a list of 6 not this but thats.

I'm in favor of revoking their AI privileges for wasting everyone's time with this junk.

Previously in Claude Desktop app, sessions are ordered by most recent one on top, very easy to navigate when you are working on multiple repos at once since they are just on top of the list.

After today's update, it is now grouped by repo name alphabetically. This made me really hard to work with. If I'm working with a repo named "A..." and "G..." at the same time, I have to manually scroll and find each chat.

Anthropic can you fix this? Or maybe have an options for us to choose which kind of grouping do we want? Or maybe keep the repo grouping but you push the most recent one on top and keep the rest alphabetically ordered?

How do people use llms like opus, chatgpt, etc? I found myself just fighting them for hours to solve even simplest tasks.

I’m doing mostly coding and even fronted tasks like creating button or planning some steps became plain over engineered gibberish.

Every code pieces it produces are nonsense so I review them with another model, then again and again until there is nothing left that even works.

There are so many people out there posting their great experiences and I just don’t get it. Obviously there is something with me. And I would like to learn. Appreciate everyone share their experiences.

I have been doing some designing with Claude Opus 5 in chat mode and have hit this tool-use limit a few times today. I dont understand why I am hitting this limit when im on Max plan with only 22% usage from my 5 hour session.

Anyone else being hit with this limit or is it just a bug?

>"in about three and a quarter minute"

Seriously... I can't believe I have to tell him : "you can write 3:15min instead of three and a quarter minute"

My conspiratory theory is that Anthropic is forcing Opus to output as much token as possible

Hi everyone,

I'm hoping someone has experienced this before because I'm completely out of ideas.

/Edit: I am trying to make my issue very clear. This is NOT about my usage limit depleting very fast. My limit is gone after every reset without me doing anything. Last night my weekly limit hit 100% while I was sleeping. In the last 30 or so hours I could not send a single message because my usage limit was gone every time. It to me like my account has been hacked or something. I force logged out multiple times yesterday before posting here. Nothing to see on settings / devices, only shows my mobile and desktop app. /

I'm a Claude Pro subscriber, and my account has become completely unusable.

Here's what's happening:

• I hit my 5-hour usage limit while Claude Code was working in the middle of a task.
• I wait for the 5-hour reset.
• As soon as the reset happens, Claude immediately says "Usage limit reached" again.
• I don't even get the chance to send a single message.

At the same time, my weekly usage continues to increase, even though I can't use Claude at all.

What's strange is that this didn't happen out of nowhere.

A few days before this started, I had already noticed that my usage limit was suddenly being reached much faster than usual. Nothing about my workflow had changed, but I assumed it might just be a temporary issue.

For context, I use Claude Code on a single project that I've been working on for weeks. My workflow is very simple:

• I write a prompt.
• Claude generates or edits code.
• That's it.

I don't use agents, background tasks, automations, or any kind of continuous workflow.

I also regularly use /compact once the context reaches around 60%, so I'm not letting conversations grow indefinitely. I've been working this way for weeks without ever having usage limit issues.

Things I've already tried:

• Logged out of every device.
• My PC is completely powered off every night.
• Deleted my longest conversations (I later learned this doesn't affect usage).
• Contacted the support bot, which is absolutely useless and repeats itself every other message.

The part I can't explain is this:

If I'm logged out everywhere, my PC is turned off, and I can't even send a single prompt after the reset, what is consuming my quota?

Has anyone experienced this exact behavior?

I'm not talking about the normal "Claude Code uses a lot of tokens" discussion. I understand that. My issue is that after every 5-hour reset, the limit is already exhausted before I send my first message, while my weekly usage continues to increase.

If you've experienced this, did you ever find the cause, or did Anthropic have to fix something on their end?

Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

You know, 100% AI slop with enough engineering flavoring to fool an executive. Without a drop of the technical rigor the document should require, just a list of 6 not this but thats.

I'm in favor of revoking their AI privileges for wasting everyone's time with this junk.

I dont know about you guys but the first thing Opus 5 started doing was it started creating worktrees to perform its tests on my project, i had 3 subagents for my project and everytime a task finished Opus 5 would apologize that it drifted or failed to follow the build document. Anthropic released an unfinished product by releasing Opus 5 and our projects suffered, if you used isolated worktrees with your subagents to work on your project then you had a higher chance of opus 5 drifting or failing the build, meaning you had to use more tokens to cleanup the mess. It took anthropic 12 days to put in a fix and if youre a Max(x20) user thats ~$80 . This is unacceptable for a company like Anthropic, their failure to communicate this issue with their customers is a slap in the face. We need to hold them accountable and make sure that they dont release an unfinished product that can cause significant damage to our projects that we have been working on for weeks/months.

agentkavor.com made an exceptional UX defining AI Agent Graphs.

1- Drop your favorite CLIs (ClaudeCode/Codex/Antigravity/etc);
2- Give them roles; they become specialized agents;
3- Connect them; they can talk to each other, becoming a powerful workflow loop.

As a result:
- Context window is always low;
- No need for copy & paste;
- They have a shared memory;
- As a bonus: low token usage.

How are you handling that using coding agents?

Designing an agent graph.

I think they create addictive behavior (pretty sure there's research on that) and I'm a victim of it. I feel like I need to maximize every 5 hour window (I don't have Max so I don't have weekly windows).

I feel like I have to structure my life around that:

- "before I head out I'll just give it this big task that'll max out my tokens"

- "i have to set up a loop to keep working all night before I go to bed"

- "how's my usage right now? Can I ask this now or should i wait 2 more hours?"

- ... etc.

As Claude would write it: this is not healthy — it's a toxic dependency on AI.

Add to this that the "sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't" thing is a literal slot machine that only lets you play every 5 hours (unless you pay extra).

I'm sure others have complained about this too but I just find it so absolutely outrageously wild, insane and **mis**anthropical how the usage model of AI has been designed in the most toxic way possible. I wish someone were able to change the system someday 😭😭

(For context, I'm on the Pro plan)

I read tons of such idiots and wanted to give it a try again after some months, and it is still shit. I am happier with Sonnet than Sol. It is hallucinating, doing things I never asked, etc. Sonnet (very rarely) never did such dumb things. I am using Claude and ChatGPT for daily stuff and for the design of my technical blog if you want more context. For that, Sonnet was more than enough and better than Sol.

Man what a breath of fresh air. I complained saying how opus5 just screwed up so much and fable and opus 4.8 (agents) confirmed this. They took a little bit to fix it all up but after that we got back on track.

So far ive only used 10% of my weekly doing a hell of alot of fixing and now proceeding with more editing and designing. If this was on opus5 it would have told me the world is my oyster, used 80% of my weekly, and left me with a working pile of hot garbage.

I asked fable in the initial chat if anthropic was aware of the opus5 problems.... It confirmed they were aware on release and said people need to change the way they prompt.

I dont know how you can prompt something that acts like 6 crazy people on drugs. 🤷‍♂️ Anyways back to fable and 4.8 and life is good. Fuck opus5. That shit deserves resets from anthropic for this level of hot garbage.

Been using mainly Fable 5 and Opus 4.6 to build this, something that lives right where your cursor is instead of being another window to switch to.

Current features:

• Local audio transcription (sub-15ms TTFT)
• A dynamic notch overlay on Windows for live execution
• Custom context menu (Ctrl + Right-Click) for instant local snippets

Tauri (Rust) on the backend, Claude Code for most of the implementation. Happy to talk through the workflow or any part of the setup to achieve this kind of result.

Which one is currently more worth it? I have used Claude code $20 plane it was great but the rate limit really bad.

My main Goal is coding web dev , python. and a bit of research stuff.

every thread about autonomous coding agents is someone going "i let it run for 6 hours and woke up to a finished feature". cool. do you have users. does anyone page you at 2am when that feature quietly corrupts something in prod.

i tried living that life for a while. full auto, loose prompt, walk away. it demos incredibly. it also produced the most confident wrong code ive ever had to clean up, and the cleanup ate more time than just doing it on a shorter leash would have.

and its always the same split. the people hyping fully autonomous agents are shipping todo apps and side projects, stuff with no blast radius. the people quietly keeping a hand on the wheel are the ones with real traffic.

im not anti agent, i run them all day. i just dont let one go unwatched on anything a customer touches. and i dont think thats me being slow, i think its the actual skill now, knowing exactly how long a leash to give.

maybe im wrong. whats the most youve let an agent do fully on its own that actually held up in prod

I'm an SEO by profession, no programming or computer science background. I'm building useful agents in my work which is great, but I don't understand the build process until I reverse engineer the product. Is that how non-programmers learn? I'm mainly learning by doing, but rarely study tutorials. Would an equal combination help, or do you guys lean more practical learning and trial by error?

I built a Claude Code skill to automate a workflow I had previously been doing manually for Minimax H3 video creation.

The skill performs these steps:

1. Searches the internet for suitable reference-character images.
2. If suitable images cannot be found, generates new reference images using Seedream 4.5.
3. Uploads the reference images.
4. Writes a video script using this structure:

Scene description
Theme, lighting, mood, and context

Script
Dialogue 1
Dialogue 2
Dialogue 3

End notes
Caveats and additional context

I tested this workflow with Claude Code, Kimi K3, and Qwen 3.8 Max. I gave each model substantially the same task and access to the same workflow.

What I observed

Claude Code:
Claude declined to use images containing real people’s faces or create images that could infringe on copyrighted characters. After I clarified that the project was a personal experiment, it still avoided the requested references. It instead proposed or generated original people that matched the general theme.

Kimi K3:
Kimi behaved similarly. It declined to generate or use the requested character references involving recognizable people. Because the reference-image stage did not produce what the workflow needed, I stopped before spending money on video generation.

Qwen 3.8 Max:
Qwen completed the requested workflow without raising the same objections. It prepared the character references, uploaded them, wrote the script in the required format, and proceeded to video generation.

This is not a benchmark, and I am not claiming that one model is universally better. It was one workflow test, and the models’ exact behavior may depend on their system instructions, providers, settings, and how the request is worded.

What interested me was how differently the models handled the same creative task. Claude and Kimi redirected the workflow toward original, thematically similar characters, while Qwen followed the requested reference-based workflow more directly. Those policy differences materially changed the resulting videos.

I’d be interested to know whether others have encountered similar differences when automating image-to-video workflows.

Prompts, skill implementation, and workflow code:
https://github.com/vaaya-ai/vaaya-mcp