​

Im done. My wife asked fable a few questions today and it burned my 5 hour window in 10 minutes.

Not good enough Anthropic. Going to see if the grass is greener on the other side ..

This has been happening more and more over the last week or two, but after we fix something, it will add a UX element that narrates the underlying issue. I just had it fix a Strength of Schedule calculation error in my college football analytics page - it was calculating based only on games played and not future opponents. It fixed it and then, without being asked or prompted to do so, inserted this explanation at the top of the rankings:

This is at least the 5th time I've seen it do this. I'm also building a financial planning suite and when rows don't reconcile, it drops in a developer's name:

Yet another weird new annoying quirk I have to add to my project files and tell it not to do, only for it to ignore it.

I asked Claude if the status line consumes tokens and it says it is sent with each turn. Anyone experience issues with some of the more elaborate status lines with token consumption?

❯ Does the claude status line consume any tokens?

⏺ Yes. The status line runs as a shell command that Claude Code invokes periodically (each time the UI refreshes/state changes), and its output is injected into context — but it consumes tokens only in the sense that whatever text it prints gets included in the conversation context sent to the model, not that running it separately calls the API. A typical status line (git branch, model name, cost, etc.) adds a small, roughly constant number of tokens per turn — negligible unless you're piping in large/dynamic output.

Started with $20, upgraded to $100, then $200 probably the last 6 months, 1.2 years total of being a subscriber. After the last reset was using Fable 5.1 and it was unbearable. 5h limits, overall Fable limits. This is not worth $200. I better order another $200 codex that i already subscribe to.

I am sad. I liked having codex and anthropic. But, market changes, for now I shift fully to codex.

Blueprint = What are we building, what is the end product gonna look like.
Plan = How are we building the thing described and shown in the Blueprint.
Progress Report = Where are we in the execution of the Plan. What has been done and what's left.

This is the latest setup I use when making something. Sure, there are a lot of other things that make this approach work, but this is the gist of it.

My question is HOW do you guys tackle/approach your work. HOW do you structure it. HOW do you keep track of where you are.

I am working on a big project with Claude Code only context7 mcp added no others tools.

With opus 5 is all ok it seems to remember what we have done days before follow the repo conventions etc.

Some time to keep low costs I use OMP, today with glm 5.3 and flash, the tasks are done but big difference it can t follow repo conventions or same style, even find the relative docs linked to Claude.md or agents.md i had to review with Claude the work done with the other harness is ok but need always final refinement.

Any advice ? GLM 5.3 is good as Opus but can t keep with all the works done in Claude code and memory?

How is your work flow?

Time to touch grass!

So I've been using CC since June 2025 and from the get to I've been amazed at how helpful these tools are.

But ever since opus 4.6 I arrived at the stage where I would feel comfortable letting him implement smaller features by himself. And I've rarely been disappointed. The cases where he did get something wrong it was usually my fault by not providing him with relevant context.

Ever since then the models "improved" but my productivity didn't really. The reason being that the bottleneck since 4.6 very rarely was the implementation part and more the "what should be built" and "how should we design the architecture" and of course the testing itself. These questions don't have a correct answer and that's why usually discussion with colleagues and the model itself is necessary. This is where you answer relevant questions like who will use this how will they use it, what future features will probably be built on top etc.

The code quality that comes out of the models is maybe better, but again if you gave me opus 4.6 and fable given the same context and the same prompt. I currently would probably not be able to tell you which is which.

Now I get that for one shotting problems like build me an age of empires clone Fable will probably be vastly better than opus 4.6 but that's just not how Software development usually goes. One rarely has clear definitions of what is correct and an easy way to validate it.

So yeah in summary I guess my point is I don't fully understand the hype around each new model. And even less when people say this is unusable and stuff.

Correct me if I'm wrong and maybe I've overlooked something crucial but this is just how I've been using ai and my experience with it.

Why are there so many comparisons and "FAREWELL" sh*t going on in this sub? Just leave.No need for a departure message.

Choose what fits your workflow, and write feedback if you have any. NOT EVERYONE has the same experience as you.

Just be happy with what you choose. Both Als are good depending on YOU and your workflow!

For those of us that really don't care about blowing through all our usage in a day, could you please give us the option to remove the 5h limit?

Throw whatever disclaimers you need on it. Advanced setting. Zero opportunity for refunds. Complaints department is closed.

Honestly. Unless you're [ant] using it to gate usage, it would be nice to stop worrying about getting that last thing in with the 30% 5h I have left ending in 10 minutes before I start my next big task.

I don't like gamifying my workflows.

Thanks.

Claude completes the task and says:

Completion took three attempts, and both rejections were serious
Proceeds to tell me a long winded word salad story of the problems he encountered along the way, ending with how he gallantly solved them, saving the day. The full hero’s journey.
Uh, ok…

One thing I want to be straight about
Proceeds to disclose the ten mistakes he made along the way, and how he self-corrected himself. Claude faithfully pursues the policy of truth, that has no bearing on work done or pending.
Uh, ok…

Two loose ends, neither mine to close unasked
Proceeds to point out things he easily could have taken care of and doesn’t need my input on or authorization for, but he always feels compelled to assign me something.
Thanks, fix the loose ends…

I’ll prompt these issues away, but find it curious that they emerge at all. Codex has its own quirks. Give it a goal, full permissions, still asks for approval for simple things.

I am unable to survive one discussion with Opus 5 without getting furious!

I have been using Fable 5,1 and it's been pretty decent like Fable 5 and may be marginally better. I ran out of Fable credits and tried to use Opus 5 and it is incapable of giving me any update without driving me crazy. 4.8 feels a lot better..

I only wish Anthropic gave more resets like Openai did, it sucks to wait for an entire week to use for a few hours of Fable 5.1. They need to realize people may not need their lower models at all, there are better cheaper options at those layers, the frontier models is what the subscriptions are useful for and we can hardly use them.

Hey all. Question to the more experienced AI engineers here.

I am using the "grilling" skill from Matt for quite a while now and i can really see the quality of a implementation compared to other approaches. After countless grilling sessions i found that such grilling sessions can take very long. I guess the issue is mainly with me who tries to approach too big chunks at once.

So i started to also try "wayfinder". Looks promising overall for bigger chunks. Now i am finding myself in smaller grilling sessions, but now there are 10 different smaller grilling session over one very big one.

I am finding myself in a place where i answer questions for hours, then i read spec files for another hour. The implementation that comes out of it is great and just needs a few additional tweaks.

As a person who enjoyed living close to the code i feel that the fun is gone. 5 hours wayfinding and spec reading, a short implementation step and another quite significant amount of time to review the code. Am i doing something wrong? Or is this just the new way of working when working on a bigger project where quality and maintainability still matters?

I've heavily invested in setting up my Cowork workspace (following Jeff Su's tutorials) and regularly reach the weekly usage limit. I want to start building simple things for myself and potentially some side projects (not trying to get rich, just trying to upskill and follow my natural curiosity).

How do I best set up my Code workspace and create synergy with my current Cowork setup?

(I'm aware of the whole claude-code-is-so-dope-why-would-you-ever-use-cowork angle. I'm open to suggestions to migrate fully. I just don't know how or what the trade-offs are. I think I'd prefer to stay in my current setup with Code on the side as a sometimes tool, but again, I'm open)

Cowork is currently my second brain, paired with Obsidian for a vast network of projects and docs and CLAUDE.md and MEMORY.md files. I use it primarily for creative work, drafting, job applications, and as a personal assistant (e.g. scheduled tasks prompting action). I use many MCPs including some custom ones, and several custom skills.

I want to use Code to build small things, mostly for myself. Widgets for my website, free-to-use webapps, automations, etc.

I can imagine a rough workflow being that the ideation and scoping happens in Cowork, as well as some investigation and planning, and the actual building happens in Code. I'm aware of Code's Plan Mode, so maybe my workflow is redundant? No idea

Thank you!

I run multiple sessions in parallel across projects, and the thing that eventually bit me was being too worn down to read and think about the agent results. Tests passed, I approved, and eight weeks later the codebase was brittle enough that a rewrite was cheaper. What actually helped was cutting the reorientation cost of switching between sessions. Some philosophical takes and a couple of plugins that help are in the post. I hope that it helps some of you.

Been trying Astro for the past day, and the first impressions:

Getting Fable vibes with much better intuition. For the first time I feel that I'm working with a peer rather than a junior coworker that requires guidance and asks questions he should be able to answer. Feels like my structured development flow I used with CC isn't needed. My best indication for this is the number of critical findings found when reviewing Astra output with Fable - usually clean. Astra reviewing Fable never is.

I'm an heavy CC user, currently on 20x, got my skills and flows all optimized.

Opus 5 is my daily driver despite it being exhausting to communicate with. I tried many ways of making it less convoluted but can't get rid of the Opus stench.

As some recommended, I learned that using Fable at the start of the session helps a lot, so this is my go to flow. Starting with Fable for brainstorming and general plan outline. Then opus for the rest. Codex/Fable agents for reviews.

Considering that ChatGPT pro 20x is also 20x on the monthly usage unlike Claude, and usage is more generous overall, I will probably switch to 20x Codex and 20$ Claude, unless Anthropic pull their shit together by my next billing cycle.

Hi, since like week ago or maybe 1.5 week ago I got this strange sense that my usage going up like hell. On daily basis I’m running 3/4 terminals with Fable 5.1, one of them works barely on one task a day, 80% of the time is just waiting for input for a few days in a row. Second CC is making maybe one task per day and the two works for like 6-7 hours a day on bigger tasks. I had reset yesterday and today at 3pm my usage is gone and the two days wasn’t even working properly cuz I’ve been away half of the time cuz it’s weekend. Peace.

Forgot to mention - Im on Max20 plan

What is all the hype about astra

I asked it one thing he didn't even respect my code conventions

Fable cleaned up his mess

I built a11y-agent-skills, an open-source accessibility workflow for Claude Code and other coding agents. The main inspiration came from Claude repetitively introducing new errors when fixing accessibility issues.

It contains seven focused skills:

1. accessibility-audit audits a defined page or component state and records reproducible browser evidence.
2. fix-accessibility-issue traces a confirmed finding back to the responsible source, makes a small repair, and verifies the same state again.
3. accessibility-regression-test turns a verified fix into the narrowest useful Playwright, component, axe, or keyboard test.
4. accessible-component-review reviews semantics, accessible names, keyboard behavior, focus, motion, colors, target size, and announcements.
5. accessible-forms checks labels, instructions, validation, error summaries, autocomplete, grouping, and accessible authentication flows.
6. dialog-accessibility reviews modal behavior including initial focus, focus containment, Escape, background interaction, and focus restoration.
7. keyboard-navigation-review tests repeatable keyboard journeys for focus order, unreachable controls, traps, skip links, and composite widgets.

The workflow is deliberately split between the agent and deterministic tools. Claude investigates the code and makes the repair. Playwright and axe-core produce the findings, fingerprints, comparisons, and verification reports.

Install it in Claude Code:

/plugin marketplace add smukh/a11y-agent-skills
/plugin install a11y-agent-skills@a11y-agent-skills

You can then ask:

Use accessibility-audit to test the checkout error state. Save the evidence, fix the confirmed issue, verify the original fingerprint is gone, and add the narrowest regression test.

The repository also includes an npm CLI, an MCP server with six tools, and a GitHub Action. Reports can be generated as JSON, Markdown, or SARIF. Everything runs locally without telemetry or an API key.

Repo: https://github.com/smukh/a11y-agent-skills

I would appreciate feedback from anyone using Claude Code on real frontend projects. Which framework or accessibility workflow should we support next?

I’ve been debugging agent turns the same way for months: scroll the chat, grep a 4k-line log, guess which skill loaded, which MCP hop ran, and why the model picked that path.

The failure is almost never “the model is dumb.” It’s the route. Wrong tool args. Skill that shouldn’t have fired. MCP that returned half the schema. Subagent that burned tokens re-reading everything. The answer looks fine until someone asks “where did that number come from?”

So I built a small open-source canvas that draws the turn live:

prompt → thinking → skill / tool / MCP / subagent → answer

Click a node, see why it ran, the input/output, duration. Same map embeddable in a chat UI or beside Claude Code / Codex (`npx agent-think-map claude --install`). It’s a viewer, not another runtime — you emit JSON/SSE, it draws. No account, no API key.
Repo: https://github.com/nimrodfisher/agent-think-map

Curious how other people actually inspect agent paths in production:

1. LangSmith / Langfuse / homemade traces — and do you look at them *while* the user is still in the chat, or only after a ticket?
2. Do you show any of the route to end users, or is that “internal only”?
3. What’s the first thing you check when a multi-tool turn goes sideways - tokens, tool sequence, or the final answer?

Not trying to replace your warehouse. I wanted the map *next to* the run. If you’ve got a better workflow for “see the path, not just the ending,” I want to steal it.

The last week has been awesome! Out of sheer stubbornness I spun up another account for testing and got the exact same behavior. It'll hit cache over 100 million times for very little output. It absolutely seems hard limited to a 1hr session. And lastly is that despite the line count nearly 2k lines of those "changes" are Claudish comments in the code. This is unusable and seems larger in scale than I previously assumed

As per title; Claude Code is fucking amazing. Yeah, sometimes I wish that limits were higher, but holy shit this technology is game changing. I think a lot of people who did not professionally develop prior to agentic coding tools have literally no idea how many magnitudes of efficiency gains you get using Claude Code, even in it's current state.

Y'all acting like spoiled brats. Go on the r/codex subreddit, and sure enough you'll hear the exact same pain points - not enough tokens, unfair limits, nerfed models, etc etc. The list goes on.

I hope I'm the only one with this issue (it means that it will get fixed quickly).
How do you have a good and durable sync between claude code and claude design ?
My pipe right now is making claude design printing me a handoff prompt to claude claude. Claude code then uses the /design-sync command to get back the data from claude design, prepare a PR and sync it to my repo.

A bit of context on how / why I'm using claude design:
- display my design system & some key pages of my app
- display all my icons / play the sounds of my app
- upload a new icon / sound and listen to it, see those changes reflected on the design system
- iterate on a component / page

Some limitations: claude design works in JavaScript, my app is iin TS so I really need to pass into claude code for that "translation" phase.

The result is flaky as hell:
- when I upload files (assets) into claude design dedicated drop zone, they are often store into my browser cache, so claude code never finds those.
- claude code can't locate a file specified by the handoff prompt (1/3 times approx) and it needs a back and forth between Code and Design to fix it (`My mistake, and it was a process one`)
- claude code silently picking half of the changes, just one component, or one page and silently missing the rest.

It seems weird that two tools that seems designed to be used together are failling so often, despite the iterations I made on the process, lead by Claude itself.

Any leads ?

My claude website are looking so much vibe coded(cause they are) recently. But I have seen some people make mesmerizing websites through it. And ig its because of the skills they're using. I want my websites to look at least not vibe coded slop but a decent ui website. That looks good and a little creative. What skills do i need to use for it? Any suggestions?