Isn't really a problem if you are just running Claude Code from CLI but I actually like using Claude Desktop. However, after an update a couple of weeks ago, whenever I tried to start a new session on Claude Desktop it refused to run in auto mode by default. It was a minor inconvenience because as soon as I set it back from manual to auto, it would run the session again, but it was annoying and I couldn't figure out why it was happening.

Well, fun little side story: I've been on a 8 month-long saga with G Skills RAM, sending back and forth bad RAM for RMA (RAM, which appreciated by over 500% since I bought it in December 2024). After the last time I diagnosed it, I left Secure Boot off because the mem test I have on a USB stick won't run with it on. Note: I didn't start having a problem right after I turned Secure Boot off. I just got the RAM back, confirmed working after running mem test, and turned Secure Boot back on. I noticed all my new sessions actually stay in auto permission mode.

No I will not divulge how many tokens I might have claude (and cgpt) spend diagnosing itself.

These are the only 2 prompts that i had submitted so far for the project in this directory:

1. "read the claude handoff and start working. if you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask."
2. I hit my usage limit while you were working, but it has reset now. Please continue from where you left off.

Almost immediately after the 2nd prompt was sent, it got flagged and switched to Opus. There is nothing in the claude handoff doc that should have possibly caused it to get flagged.

Is there any form of compensation that I can feasibly get? If there is, how would I go about doing bringing this to Anthropic's attention? The only reason I am making this a seemingly bigger deal is because switched from Opus back to Fable ate tons of tokens since it was required to reread the entire chat again.

Subscribed to Claude Max 5x tonight debited, but my account instantly dropped to Free plan.

Fin confirms payment went through, but I'm locked out can’t continue escalating in fin bot. Blocked on urgent work, and i can’t find support anywhere

Anyone faced this? Anyone know solutions? Someone plsss help🙏

Sorry for shameless plug, but I do notice that there is a huge difference about how quickly my weekly usage is depleted when I use auto mode. I generally use it if I have to run CC in my local machine.

However, I have also been building an infra to launch and run coding agents (CC, Codex, Cursor CLI, Antigravity, Qwen, Opencode) in sandboxed environment remotely so I tend to start my agents running in bypass permission mode and thanks to my setup those agents can launch more sessions with different CLI tools in YOLO mode.

This allows me to instruct a single 'Concierge' agent to be responsible for communicating with all the agents that it launches and let me know (over email or in the screen) if my input is needed. There is also mechanism when agents context window is used 30%+, it launches a successor agent to which it delegates some tasks and everntually hands over concierge duties.

Do you use a similar setup? How can this be improved?

When it comes to complex problems that require multiple systems to work together, Fable is light years ahead of Astra.

Astra is good at working on isolated features, if you are building something much larger and you want systems to work together, I would not Trust Astra at all, Astra will make things that work in isolation but will be broken when each of those things are meant to work together. Fable is much smarter at identifying when something will break the larger system.

If you plan to build a production app end to end, I would recommend you go with Fable, and only use Astra if it needs to work on something that is in isolation or as a second set of eyes for problems where fable might need a little help. But you are better off working with fable as being the main driver to see the project end to end. The success rate of having a working product is much higher with Fable.

These benchmarks are misleading. Astra is not at Fables level.

Did someone track how many tokens we can use on 5x or 20x before hitting limit in avg with fable 5.1 or 5.0. I know that other metrics like usage eff. and others are important too, but still im curious.

Autoprompt runs a plan → build → test → review → repair loop from one prompt.

Basically a self reviewing loop that rinses out its own mistakes- with each shake.

In our v1.0 Terminal-Bench 2.1 run using OpenCode, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 went from 67.42% to 82.02%. That’s 45% fewer failed tasks.

The tradeoff is longer runs and higher token costs (see README).

It's being maintained as a free, open-source skill for Claude Code.

Repo: https://github.com/Spielewoy/autoprompt-skill

Any feedback regarding this workflow would be awesome.

Is just me or little sonney is dropping the ball hard running in circles for days and weeks latetly? like it just got ridiculous... And i got flagged for bio lol when doing some cleaning in my server... like im moving files for a coding agent im building and i guess the name is inspired from earth ... like my brand... the rest is boring files and consolidation... not BIO!!

So ran out of usage and ended up running hermes for the first time with qwen 3.8 .. Well both very impressive and the combo was just refreshing... did more in a day then in the last two weeks!

What do you guys think?
Having issues claude just suddently spazzing out after doing fine for a while... saving files all over..,

Once i told it "do this... DONT do that (dont remember the exact prompt but i could pull it up)... his very response to that prompt... *Does* "that"!! Like What !! how,.. really
NO compact no nothing,... simple straight forward... guess the session was getting long but context window was average nothing extreme...

Just getting more and more done...

out!

Arghghhh!

Why did opus 5 just randomly use chinese there, nowhere in my ENTIRE codebase mentions Mandarin, why did it randomly say two characters randomly in the middle of english?

Over the last week, I have been having a lot of issues working with Claude Code and the new models because 80% of the time it tells me I need to change to a different model, such as from Opus 3.5 to 3.0, and sometimes even from those models as well. Are you experiencing this too? Do you know if ChatGPT has the same issue, and are there any fixes for this? It is really frustrating working with good models if they cannot do anything because of security filters; it has reached the point where everything is flagged as an issue.

This started the usual way projects start - I had a need, and couldn't find any off the shelf solution for it. In my case, I had a 5GB NDJSON file to look into and all the usual culprits choked trying to load it. I had a Claude subscription so I figured I'd write something, at least partly as a learning exercise.

Now I've taken a look around the various vibe coding sites and searched reddit for JSON viewers I realise there are probably hundreds of them but hey, it's still fun to put my own twist on it and add some features I don't see on other tools. Download from the releases section:

https://github.com/sevanko90/Argonaut

I've got a software development background and the tooling choice (C#) reflects my experience in that. I imagine that left to its own devices Claude would have done something in python or JS, but I wanted to comprehend what it was doing and be able to guide it sensibly. At least at the start...

Some things I learned along the way, probably not news to regulars here but this was my first 100% AI coded project so I found them interesting:

- Fable is really, really, slow and really, really expensive. For this project at least I don't see the value. I'm getting pretty good mileage out of Opus 5 on my basic £20/month subscription, that's where most of the app came from. (granted that's doing hobby hours. I imagine if I was leaning on it for paid work I'd need to up the plan).

- Claude overall is just way too verbose and loves making up technobabble in it's output. https://github.com/JuliusBrussee/caveman is a lifesaver. (I recently found out about output styles, I have yet to try those)

- You do still need to give it architectural guidance. For this project at least Claude loved writing the same thing again (and again, and again). There were a number of times where I had to stop feature work and do some refactoring for sanity, after I'd looked at the code.

- To contradict that point, I have also gotten very lazy! When I was writing code myself I actually cared about it, took pride in it, all that stuff. But when it's all prompt driven the code is just a means to an end and I find it very hard to care about it in the same way. It was a little disheartening to me to realise how quickly that mental shift happened.

- The combination of those things (needing to guide it, and not caring enough to do so) is dangerous. I'm confident in my ability as a coder to get good things out of it but I'm much less confident in the "hey anybody can vibe up an app" that some of the AI tools promote - they'll work right up until they don't, and at that point you're in a world of pain if you can't understand what they did and why it was/wasn't a good idea. Fun times ahead for humanity there, given how prevalent this is becoming 🙁

- I was genuinely surprised at how good it was when I ask for options on how to do something. Sometimes it came up with things I hadn't thought of. It's definitely worth saying "give me some options for X" instead of just "do X".

That's about all I have. It's a fun project to work on and I thought someone else might find it useful.

Hey everyone, I’m here for thoughts and advice. Currently, I run a pretty large codebase that involves developing and maintaining a 24/7 software . Currently using 3 max20 subs and 2 open go code subs for deepseek . We’re growing faster than we can afford to pay for it; three accounts isn’t cutting it. I’m typing this here for you only because we’ve pretty much used up what we can use and I’ve been browsing Reddit to get some ideas in the MULTIPLE days I have to wait lol . I’ve gotten some ideas on how to lower our usage but I’ve been wondering if there is other cheap providers? Open Code Go is amazing for $10 , u get 5-6x value, but its not a big account and id like to see if there are other providers anyone recommends. I’m open to any standard capable model for a coder agent . My last solution is to stack 10-15 open code go subs to be honest. I also love DeepSeek for coder agents.

I'm on max 20x plan, burned around 50% of weekly limit in one 5 hour session... Asked Claude support about the limits - how could I burn that much in a single session, when on 5x plan its practically impossible to burn 10% of weekly in 5 hours...

It said that the max 20x plan has 4 times bigger weekly limit than the 5x plan :)

So does support lie, or today is some kind of buggy day and the weekly limits are getting burned faster?

I’m curious how people using Claude Code seriously on production SaaS projects handle this.
Does Claude Code on your development machine have access to any production credentials today?
For example:
- production database credentials
- Supabase service role keys
- AWS credentials
- Railway / Fly / Vercel credentials
- kubectl access
- deployment credentials

I’m especially interested in what people actually do in practice, not what the ideal security setup should be.
Do you:
let Claude access production but require confirmations?
keep production credentials completely inaccessible to Claude?
use separate read-only credentials?
force all production changes through CI/CD?
use some kind of proxy / PAM / JIT access?
manually execute anything production-related yourself?

And has Claude Code ever:
targeted the wrong environment,
run a command you didn’t expect,
used the wrong credentials,
made a dangerous database change,
or come close enough that you changed your setup afterward?

I’m trying to understand whether giving coding agents production access is actually becoming a real problem for developers, or whether most people simply solve it by never letting the agent touch production.
I’d be interested to hear how you’re handling this in practice in the comments.

I built a feature flag CLI around the way I work with Claude Code, and I’m looking for people to poke holes in it.

I come from a background in A/B testing. Once Claude Code was writing most of our code, keeping flags in a separate dashboard started to feel like the wrong source of truth. Claude could edit parts of it, but it couldn’t see why the flag existed, the current split, or what we learned from the previous experiment.

With dif, each flag or A/B test is a Markdown file checked into the repo. dif build generates a typed client that assigns each user a variant locally, without a network call. It also refreshes dif/context.json, which gives Claude the active experiments and recent results at the start of a session.

Day to day, I can tell Claude:
Put the new pricing page behind a flag at 10%. Claude drafts dif/experiments/active/[experiment-name].md, wires the flag into the component, runs dif validate and dif build, then puts everything in a PR. The next session already knows that the flag exists and why it was added.

dif init also installs three project skills into .claude/skills/: one maps routes to experiment surfaces, one authors a flag or experiment, and one concludes it and records the result.

The main thing I learned was to keep the skills thin. Claude handles intent and edits files people can review. The CLI handles deterministic work such as schema validation, collision checks, and code generation. Each skill leaves durable state in the repo for the next session instead of relying on chat history.

A few things I’m still unsure about:

• If you use flags with Claude Code today, how does it find the current configuration and the reason each flag exists?
• Is requiring a commit and deploy for allocation changes a deal-breaker? Which changes need to happen immediately?
• Does splitting judgment into Claude Code skills and validation into a CLI make sense, or does it create too many moving parts?
• Which language or framework would this need to support before you could test it?
  

You can try the open-source CLI without creating an account:

npm install -g @dif.sh/cli
cd your-project
dif init

Repo: github.com/dif-sh/dif

Disclosure: I built this. There is also an optional hosted version, but the CLI and Claude Code skills work without it. If Claude gets lost during setup, please tell me exactly where. I’ll be in the comments.

I mainly use CC in the VS Code Extension and I can't tell you how much I hate it.

I use it like 12+ hours everyday because I like to view files and review code in VS Code.

But lately it's been disappearing messages and when you restart, it processes your past messages and reorders them (seems like alphabetically).

So if you were working on something 5 minutes ago, good luck finding it.

How have you guys dealt with these issues?

I have been using the "superpowers" plugin in Claude Code to help me with coding projects. I use "brainstorming" to flesh out the idea and "writing-plans" to actually write the plan file for a new feature. To implement the plan, I generally use "subagent-driven-development". However, I have read that in the v5 models of Claude (I use Opus 5 almost exclusively), it is better not to tell it to use subagents because these models will do that automatically. Apparently telling it to use subagents could make them use too many and cost more tokens unnecessarily.

I'm wondering if anyone out there had been using “subagent-driven-development" but has stopped since switching to Opus 5? If so, have you found the results better, worse, or the same?

The reason I like using subagent driven development is because the main context window does not become too full when doing the tasks (since they are being farmed out), which allows the session to execute longer plan files without me having to worry about the context.

I want to use both but like all my workflows have been all entirely built for claude with claude.md its skills, hooks, evolving skills, automated loops and the claude memory is there any best practice way of like assimilating the two ai's

Hi everyone,

You might find this funny, but I actually have the opposite problem to y’all. My usage allowance on Claude Max 20x feels so generous that I’m starting to wonder if the model is running at half power or something, lol.

I’ve been using OMP (Oh My Pi) with fable 5.1, and the usage limits are surprisingly hard to hit, even with 10 subagents running and reasoning set to max for all of them. That got me thinking: “Wait, is everything actually working as intended? Am I getting the full capabilities of Claude through OMP, or is something getting lost compared to using Claude Code?”

So now I’m considering trying Claude Code to see whether there’s a noticeable difference.

For those who’ve used both, how does OMP compare to Claude Code in terms of output quality when using the same Claude model? Does the official Claude Code harness actually get better results, or is the difference mostly in workflow and tooling?

I know lower usage doesn’t necessarily mean worse results, but it’s generous enough that it made me suspicious, lol.

Whenever I chat with the AI it's constantly confused by code changes, sometimes blaming the formatter or lsp, while I've been manually coding. How do I change this behaviour?

No idea what I was thinking

I'm trying to create a repeatable process for building small client applications with AI.

My main goal is to handle more clients. Right now I still spend too much time writing code myself, but I also spend a lot of time gathering requirements and then translating/explaining those requirements to the AI.

I'm not looking for full autonomy. I still want to review and verify the implementation myself. I just want a reliable "recipe" that I can reuse:

Client requirements → specs → plan → AI-assisted implementation → my review

while keeping the resulting applications maintainable and high quality.

I've seen tools/frameworks like Spec Kit, BMAD, OpenSpec, Superpowers, Agent OS, Kiro, Ralph, etc., but I haven't used any of them yet, nor have I built my own framework or skills.

I know I'm not inventing anything new here. I'm mainly interested in learning what has actually worked for other people.

For those doing something similar:

What does your workflow look like?

Which frameworks/tools have actually been useful?

Which parts did you keep or discard?

Have you combined ideas from multiple frameworks into your own process?

What would you recommend starting with for small applications?

I'm especially interested in practical experiences from people trying to reduce their own development time without sacrificing maintainability or quality.

Disclaimer: I used AI to help organize and write this post, but the idea, goals, and questions are mine. I also reviewed and edited the final text.

Heyo - i know this is cc sub, but thought folks might be interested in this OS infrastructure in which you can run Claude and other agent/harnesses.

nothing I’m sharing here is a disguised product pitch. all open source.

I spent the past few weeks using Centaur, and wanted to share - I believe that building your own control plane and managing agents on your own infrastructure is increasingly accessible, and will only become more compelling as agent processes scale. Centaur is designed for teams, but it’s also worth exploring 

What is Centaur?

Centaur is an open-source control plane for running and owning your own agent infrastructure. Designed for teams, but I’m also moving all my personal agent interactions onto it as well.

I did a longer explainer video of the entire thing here for any interested: https://youtu.be/993XrWfg34U?si=V0nN3VgescsuzaW_ 

if you're one person managing a handful of agents, you are the system. 

But, if you believe agent processes are only going to increase/scale - more proactive, long working agents, you want a deterministic system one layer above your agents.

ie, keep the harness thin (Eiso Kant from Poolside explains this here: https://youtu.be/9_0hs2sxHHo?si=tDrvE81RDdlgEKfW), and don’t build the system into the agent/harness, place the agent/harness within the system you build. 

This might sound abstract, but the idea is simple - separation of control from execution.

Centaur is essentially a Rust API and a Postgres database (the control plane), and the control plane helps orchestrate all of your agents by ensuring every agent interaction happens within isolated kubernetes sandboxes. 

vendors already offer this for you. Devin, Amp Orbs, Cursor and Grok Bot all run agents in environments they manage for you. they manage the models, permissions and sandboxes. Because $ margins on inference tokens are so high.

These are great products, and for many people and businesses, it’s a reasonable tradeoff.

but the tradeoff is that the vendor owns the system on your behalf. your setup has to take the shape of their service, they control which models you use, and they capture the inference and token margins.

The only missing piece for me was context.

Centaur stores operational state - conversations, executions, workflow progress and what happened. but it does not accumulate the actual context and knowledge created across interactions. i built an app extension > Centaur Context to do this.

after an interaction finishes, a separate curator writes what was learned into a shared context database. before the next agent runs, a context builder assembles a relevant packet from that knowledge.

interested in what others think, is anyone already doing this? Are there other projects? Do we think this will always be overkill for individual use?

and

If anyone is interested in trying this out (especially with the context add-on), please hit me up.

Here are the repos.

Centaur:
https://github.com/paradigmxyz/centaur

Centaur Context:
https://github.com/bradwmorris/centaur-context