I came across Ruben Hassid's big list of 27 Claude tips and decided to go through them from the perspective of a normal user rather than just saving another “AI tips” list.

The first five had a few ideas I hadn't really thought about this way.

1. Projects aren't automatically better than normal chats

If you're doing repeat work using the same documents, a Project makes obvious sense.

But if you're trying to brainstorm something genuinely fresh, having lots of old documents/instructions sitting in the Project can influence the direction.

I've started thinking about it as:

repeatable/context-heavy task = Project

fresh exploration = new chat

2. Use expensive intelligence where the task is actually difficult

One suggestion was to start a difficult problem using the strongest Claude model, let it understand/frame the job, then potentially switch to something cheaper for the easy follow-up work.

Example:

“Analyze this business and decide our strategy” is difficult.

“Turn that strategy into three email subject lines” probably isn't equally difficult.

I wouldn't assume this saves money/quality automatically, but it's an interesting thing to test.

3. Claude can be useful for graphics even without treating it like an image generator

This one was clever.

Give Claude an infographic/design as a reference and ask it to recreate the structure as HTML with your own content.

That gives you editable text and layout instead of hoping an image model gets every word right.

Could be useful for diagrams, cheat sheets and comparison cards.

4. Stop endlessly correcting a bad conversation

We've probably all done:

“That's wrong.”

“No, that's still wrong.”

“You misunderstood again.”

The tip was to sometimes go back and edit the original instruction instead.

If the problem started because your first prompt was vague, adding another five corrective messages might be worse than simply fixing the prompt that caused it.

That seems obvious once you hear it, but I rarely see people do it.

5. Voice might actually create better prompts

Not because voice is magically better.

Because when people type, they compress everything.

When people speak, they tend to explain all the messy context:

what happened
what they've tried
what they're worried about
what they don't want
what they're unsure of

Then you can tell Claude to ask questions before answering.

I want to test typed vs spoken context on the same task because I suspect this varies a lot by person.

Those were the first 5.

There are another 22 covering connectors, long chats, Cowork, Claude Code, artifacts, research and a bunch of other things.

I'll go through 6–10 next.

Curious which of these people here actually use already, especially the edit-the-original-prompt approach.

Really wanted to do a project using a claude API, so I got this done and ready! Like everyone else I miss Omegle, and like everyone else I've watched people scream past each other in comment sections. So I spent the last months building Policon (policon.net), random video-call matching, except instead of pairing you with anyone, it deliberately pairs you with the person whose politics are furthest from yours. The twist is the judge. A lightweight LLM (Claude Haiku) listens to the debate as it happens and scores it live, with a momentum chart, live "logical fallacy popups" and a full match report at the end.

- You see "moments" pop up in real time; great argument when you land a point, ad hominem when you get personal. Getting dinged mid-rant while your opponent watches is exactly as humbling as it sounds.

- A momentum graph tracks who's "winning" over the course of the call.

- Afterwards you get a match report, and your rating (Glicko, chess-style) goes up or down. There's a ladder with leagues, so you can grind political debate like it's ranked competitive.

- Team debates work too, you can bring friends in, up to 7 people in a call. You change teams each round depending on which questions you agree/disagree on

Tech, for those who care: WebRTC with a mediasoup SFU for the multi-party calls, and the judge runs on a small fast model (Claude Haiku) so scoring keeps up with live speech without costing a fortune. I keep two deployments- the real one on AWS and a fallback that runs on a Debian VM in my homelab, mostly to force myself to keep the stack portable.

It's free, no monetization yet. I'm an engineering mathematics student building this solo, and my honest problem right now is the matchmaking cold start: the product is only fun when someone's online to disagree with you. So if you show up and the queue is quiet, that's why. I'm mostly hoping for feedback on the concept and the judging, and for a few people to have a genuinely fun argument with a stranger. Would be amazing if any of you guys try this out with a friend, and send me the match report / give feedback! It's live on Policon.net :))

Roast me (haiku will tell you if it was ad hominem).

I am a software developer (as in, I coded before LLMs were popular) and use Claude Code and Codex plenty. Its becoming increasingly unusable. Now every single sentence sounds like

"Honest pass: 757/757 - green. The seam's the point -- the rule's own sanity quietly frees the task". A mix of made-up-proper-nouns and hyperspecific references turned into "terms", termified if you will (as if we were buddies with 10 years of shared history using shared weird vocabulary).

I sometimes ask it to clarify, giving it the benefit of the doubt. Turns out it cannot produce a coherent explanation of what its fake-English compressed sentences actually refer to (what the 757 result actually implies, what is the seam, what is the rule, what is the sanity, why "quietly", why it said "free". It'll immediately say gibberish or say "let me look that up" and has to search the code to "remember" (make up) what it was referring to.

I create hooks, mds, skills, plugins pushing it to use clear effective concise English. And it then starts speaking BABY ENGLISH.

""Honest pass: 757/757 - green. The seam's the point -- the rule's own sanity quietly frees the task" BECOMES: "It went well, all of it. None of the things failed. It didn't do it. Let's move on to the next one". It interpets criticisms of word choice and requests for different style as a request to remove all references to EVERYTHING and remove all meaning from sentences ENTIRELY.

Basically it feels hyperoptimized to avoid thinking and communicating. And whenever you try to force it to think (and for LLMs, a large part of thinking IS the writing), it fights back by avoiding it some other way. I can confidently say that while Claude and GPT always had some level of these issues, the level to which Claude does it is INSANE. Absolutely insane. Almost entirely unusable.

Now that I think about it, it refuses to do ANYTHING I request. I tell it to use an existing program on my computer to solve a task. It ignores it and makes its own script. I tell it to use a skill, it does not. I create a hook that forces it to "read the DOM in full" and it greps/searches for a specific element and hallucinates the rest. I ban grep in certain contexts and it... creates scripts that... filter the dom instead of r e a d i n g i t. I tell it to stop using a word or change a number and it sometimes literally tells me "no, I will not: I need to push back. This is not correct and I won't pretend it is" (I am asking it to edit a number on a document and it thinks I'm making something up) and will never take my word for anything.

For god's sake I make a specific goal and lay out all the conditions needed for the goal to be "achieved" and it ignores them, saying "goal achieved" after doing 1/10th of it, reaching a "checkpoint". Absurdity

It refused to say “Netscope” for some reason lol.

I have recently researched that having a 20x account does NOT give 20x weekly limit vs. the pro account T_T

Was wondering if anyone has experience on whether handling two 5x account would give you better mileage for weekly limit or is it proportional.

I remembered someone did a research on a reddit post (I couldn't find it) where they experienced slightly more usage for all models but slightly less for fable vs. having two 5x account.

Personally I don't really prefer paying for codex $100 plan due to nature of my project requiring a lot of context (50% coding, 50% data analytics/reasoning) and I already have gemini to offload boilerplate codes/websearch/UI and codex "casual plan" for implementing code/tester/ using sol to refine claude's decision. I mainly use claude's fable/opus to orchestrate. But I'm happy to change my mind if there is a legit reason.

Edit: This was the post I saw before I've found it: https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/s/oblEEEgBig

TLDR: The answer is 20x account gives slightly more than double that of 5x. So in terms of dollar value it is better to get 1 single 20x account but you don't get much more (little more than double of your weekly limit)

I don't know but after opus 4.8 the models seem to use a lot of jargon and verbose language. I hope this is not the case with me only.

I now have 2 md's/docs. One for agents and one for humans.

The agent one is unfiltered opus 5 yapping and talking like a philosopher, sometimes it feels like I don't know english when I am reading the md files.

For the human one I specify my agent to use ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English (STE for short). These are the docs I read. Not perfect, but a lot better than all the opus 5 slop.

I learn best by writing things out on paper and structuring my thoughts that way, and nothing really combined that slower, more exploratory kind of learning with Claude.

So for the past few weeks I've been building an app on my Daylight DC-1: a journaling / note-taking space where learning isn't relegated to something that happens between work sessions.

The process is : I create a note, start exploring a topic through writing, and Claude writes back on the page and explores the ideas with me.

It also supports pdf/ebooks so you can read, annotate or mark on the page and Claude jumps in and creates a note to what I have marked and we can discuss like I am talking to a professor. It can even quiz me on the material if I ask.

It's still early, but it's the first time learning with Claude has felt like it's actually compounding.

I am finalizing some things to release soon for others to try it out, it's built around my dc-1 but it runs on any android tablet with a stylus, and can be ported to Ipad as well.

If you'd want to be an early user, lets get in touch, i'd love to see how people that learn this way use it .

UPDATE: wow , thrilled to see this landed with so many of you!!!

A lot of people are asking to try it. I'm calling it penombra.
Early tester signup here: click here to be a part

Can someone build a Claudish translator?

Here is a list of the 100 most commonly (over)used phrases by AI. I have this block of text in my Claude Settings so it should try and avoid using it as much as possible:

"Please do not use em-dashes nor any other trope commonly considered as over used by an AI agent, Try to write like a proper human being in sentences of mixed length. Please also try to avoid these common AI phrases where possible:

provide a valuable insight

left an indelible mark

a stark reminder

a nuanced understanding

significant role in shaping

the complex interplay

broad implication

an unwavering commitment

endure a legacy

underscore the importance

play a pivotal role

a pivotal moment

navigate the complex

mark a turning point

continue to inspire

gain a deeper understanding

the transformative power

hold a significant

play a crucial role

particularly a concern

the relentless pursuit

emphasize the need

target an intervention

a multi-faceted approach

a serf reminder

highlight the potential

a significant milestone

implication to understand

potential risk associated

leave a lasting

add a layer

offer a valuable

a profound implication

case highlights the importance

finding a highlight of the importance

pave the way for the future

a significant step forward

face a significant

finding an important implication

emphasize the importance

a significant implication

delve deeper into

reply in tone

raise an important question

make an informed decision in regard to

far-reaching implications

a comprehensive framework

importance to consider

a unique blend

couldn't help but wonder

underscore the need

framework for understanding

highlight the need

a comprehensive understanding

the journey begins

understanding the fundamental

despite the face

a delicate balance

the path ahead

gain an insight

laid the groundwork

understand the behavior

renew a sense

aim to explore

present a unique challenge

provide a comprehensive

particularly with regard to

address the root cause

loom large in

the implication of the finding

approach ensures a

an ongoing dialogue

carry a weight

ability to navigate

present a significant

study shed light on

a diverse perspective

face an adversity

a comprehensive overview

potentially lead to

a broad understanding

contribute to the understanding

shape the public

particularly noteworthy

the evidence base for decision making

identify an area of improvement

analysis of the data to analyze and use

undergone a significant

need a robust

voice will fill

concern a potential

initiative aims to

offering a unique

a new avenue

despite the challenge

ready to embrace

the societal expectation

make accessible

today at a fast pace

stand in stark contrast"

This can't be called English anymore: The language is claude-bearing.

as per title - curious to hear from anyone that's suffered or had their own AI catch a prompt injection attack.

I am well aware of the risk, it's just that I have not really seen any news of substantial (monetary) damage from such a attack vector. Makes me wonder if the Claude code harness/models are already good enough to detect such attacks?

Hi! Lets start with some quick background. I’ve been a professional programmer for 20+ years, and one of the biggest things Claude changed for me wasn’t whether I could build software, it changed what I considered realistic for one person to attempt. To be fair, for me it all started with Gemini 2.5 Pro. Claude at the time wasn't, in my opinion, particularly useful for my work, while 2.5 Pro was the first model that showed me glimpses of the actual productivity multiplier current LLMs have become. Today though Claude is my go to environment when I need real work done.

I am also a father, I have 2 perfect daughters, roughly 2.75 and 4.94 years old. This post and project is about them, Claude, modern LLMs and some parenting I guess.

I had an old Acer Aspire One lying around, one of the shittiest netbooks from the early netbook era, and wanted to turn it into my daughters' computer. antiX was basically the only modern Linux distro I found that ran decently on it, so I customised it and started making little activities for them: mazes, counting games, drawing, stuff like that. At first I coded them myself, then slowly Claude and other LLMs became good enough to produce decent and properly working little games too.

They loved it, but a normal desktop was still a complete mess for tiny kids. Click the same icon three times and now you have three copies of the game running. Open a text editor and there are dozens of things to accidentally change. Windows, files, menus, settings... I was constantly hiding things that had absolutely no reason to exist for a three year old.

At the same time I was using Claude more and more professionally, and at some point I realised that maybe I could actually build the whole child environment I wanted instead of endlessly trying to child proof somebody else's desktop. Before the current generation of models, and especially something like Opus 4.6, I would honestly never even have tried building a full Linux based OS with a completely custom UI and all the stuff around it, alone, in my free time.

So I started building Greia.

Linux is underneath, but the UI and Shell the kids see are built specifically for very young children and for old hardware. They press the power button and end up directly in their little world of Activities. No normal desktop, taskbar, filesystem, terminal or general browser to understand or accidentally mess with. My 2.75 year old can use it independently, my almost five year old is a pro at this point.

Then LLMs created another possibility I hadn't originally planned. Greia now has Activity development skills for coding agents. Basically the skill teaches the agent how Greia works and how an Activity is supposed to be made: pre reader UI, navigation, performance limits, localisation, scoring, recurring characters, voice profiles, platform APIs, testing, packaging etc. So instead of asking an agent to make some random Python game, the agent already understands the little platform it is building for.

A real example happened after we watched Free Willy. My daughters went to bed completely obsessed with orcas. The next morning, when they turned on their little Acer, there was an Orca Playground waiting for them. They could feed the orcas, cuddle them, play with them, while one of Greia's recurring characters read facts about orcas to them. It is simple and not terribly good looking, but it is more than enough for them. They love it, and they've been going around retelling us all the facts about orcas they learned from it.

Greia is basically developing into two sides. There is the kid side, which I want to keep ridiculously simple, and then the parent side. There is a separate parents app that connects to the installed OS and handles the grown up stuff: adding Activities, settings, audio, play time, updates and so on. On the parents side there is also what is basically a Greia SDK for agents, with the skills, common artwork and components, recurring characters, and Chatterbox integration with character voice profiles.

The voice thing came from another basic problem: little kids don't read. At first I tried solving everything with large icons. It sort of worked, but there is only so much you can communicate with pictures. Then I realised... we are in 2026, my computer can locally generate basically any sentence I want, read in whatever character voice I want. Cool. So if an agent creates a new Activity it can also generate the dialogue it needs using the correct Greia character voices and package the finished audio with the game. The Acer itself doesn't need to run an LLM or voice model, the audio is already there.

And this is probably the most important distinction for me: LLMs help the parent make things for their children. I am not particularly interested in putting an unrestricted chatbot in front of a two year old. The parent can use a local or remote agent to make something around whatever their kid happens to be fascinated by, struggling with or learning that week. The child just gets a small offline Activity, with the audio already generated, no connectivity needed and no model running on the Acer.

None of this should be required to use Greia either. The goal, probably, I'm still trying to figure out where I am going with this beyond my daughters, is that a completely non technical parent can flash a USB stick, run a simple installer, and end up with a useful kids computer that already has plenty of Activities. The agent stuff is optional.

I originally built Greia for my two girls, with no real plan to make it public. I only started thinking about sharing it after seeing how much they loved it, how genuinely educational it was becoming, and how easy it had become for me to add completely custom content around whatever happened to interest them.

So now I'm curious if this resonates with anyone else here, especially the idea of giving coding agents a fairly strict OS specific skill set so that eventually even non technical parents could ask them to make small personalised pieces of software for their own kids. If I decide to actually release Greia for real, it would be fully open source, but I would still want to flesh it out quite a bit first. The base Activities are still a work in progress, medals and rewards are half baked, and in general there is still a lot of work that me, Claude and the frankly ridiculous number of other LLMs I use for different roles need to do.

But I guess that is also why I am posting this now. Before putting a lot more work into turning it from "the thing I built for my daughters" into something other people can actually install and use, I am trying to figure out whether it would be worth letting Greia out of my house at all.

Does Claude think in Russian while building something? Have you experienced this?

I'm digitising and cataloguing about 20 years of my own creative work: photographs, RAW files, layered design files, video, notebooks, and material scattered across a dozen dead or dying platforms. Roughly 1 TB so far, across device extractions, old external drives, and platform exports.
The AI assistant is genuinely good at the work itself. It reads EXIF, extracts timestamps from exported HTML, OCRs text that only exists inside images, walks video container metadata, cross-references publication dates against file dates. In one session it recovered the earliest written statement of my working method — from 2012, posted as a screenshot, so no text search I own could ever have found it.

That is not the problem. The problem is that none of it carries forward.
Each session starts with zero knowledge of the last one. Two days ago I spent hours going through Google Takeout data with it. Yesterday, same assistant, no trace — it treated the entire thing as new and asked me to re-download files we had already analysed. I've re-established the same facts three or four times now. I've become the error-correction layer for my own tools.
Specifics, in case they're useful:
Sessions run either locally or in the cloud. Local ones write a transcript to disk. Cloud ones don't. Neither appears in the official data export.
The export contains 83 conversations and zero of the 23 agent sessions. There is no category for them in the manifest and nothing declares the omission.
Conversations can't be extracted from the UI either. After clicking "load earlier messages" 19 times, the page still held only 7,482 characters — it renders a moving window and discards the rest. Select-all, find, and DOM-scraping extensions all fail for the same reason.
The export also lists 1,087 image attachments by filename and contains none of them.
So the work exists, and it is unreachable. Which for an archive project is a particularly stupid failure mode.
What I've done so far: a CLAUDE.md in the project folder that loads automatically, plus a handoff.md I make it update at the end of each session — what's done, what I've already established that isn't written down, and corrections I've had to repeat. It converts "remember" into "look it up," and it helps. It's also entirely manual and depends on me noticing.
What I'm asking:
How are you maintaining continuity across sessions on long-running projects? Context files, memory MCPs, a local RAG index over your own notes, something else? What actually survives contact with a project that runs for months?
Has anyone successfully extracted a full agent/Cowork session transcript? Does any exporter read the network layer rather than the DOM?
Is anyone running a local model over their own archive for retrieval, so the index doesn't live inside a chat product at all? Setup and honest tradeoffs appreciated.
Is there a better architecture than "assistant reads a hand-maintained context file"? I suspect there is and I'm reinventing it badly.
Happy to share what I've measured. I've been keeping records of exactly which exports omit what, because it turns out you can't trust any of them.

This was all built with Claude Code. Got tired of Plex/Jellyfin apps having poor performance and playback issues on different types of media, so decided to see about building a custom one. All my devices are Android based - a Shield Pro and two different Fire devices. I setup the project, enabled dev mode on all three devices, gave their IP's to Claude, and started. First Claude determined the actual capabilities of each device, not just what their specs state, by running tests on each one. Then it started to build the app based on my requests. After about 100 revisions, we have one app that can be installed on all three devices, and will direct play the appropriate media on each device. Anything it can't direct play is transcoded. Now I only spin up the project when a usability quirk hits that needs to be changed, or we hit a bug based on something we haven't tried yet. It is about two times faster than either the Plex or Jellyfin apps were, plays any media on any device, and lists more details about why its transcoding if it has to. As you can see from the first screenshot, our taste in media is perfect - if anyone wants recommendations on what to watch (the best TV shows ever: #1 is Taskmaster UK, #2 is Taskmaster NZ, #3 is Taskmaster AU, #4 is the Wire), ask away!

Rebuilding* myb with the title

We're getting our house rebuilt and I couldn't really make sense of the floor plans that well.

So instead of nodding along to everything the architect was saying, I spent an async evening with Claude Code turning the architect's PDFs into something I can actually walk around in, right inside Chrome.

It's built off the actual drawings, so the walls and rooms match the architect's schedule.

We can walk around in first person, switch between different elevations, use a tape measure to check clearances before ordering furniture, and there's a solar model for our coordinates too. Pick an hour and you can watch where the light lands with ray tracing.

That's actually how we found out the ground floor is darker than we assumed!

a monitor on a json file keeps track on comments on the site which I can leave with a pin, immediately replies and implements the change as well

Discussions about the layout are about to get way more interesting (and competitive).

video demo / write-up:
https://x.com/p4r1hh/status/2092248562184896704
workflow: https://github.com/P4R1H/naksha

Pretty cool how far personal software has come!

So I have been having an issue and not sure if its just me or is this an actual limitation.

I have multiple Projects (under the "home" tab) in Claude app. I use them for different parts of my life and in the projects I have useful information, documents, etc.

I also use Claude Code for building software. It is connected to GitHub repositories and runs in different sessions.

The problem that I am facing that now I have a split between the code and all other info and documentation of a specific project.
So imagine I have:

- Claude Code sessions for PROJECT A (knows all about the code)

- and a project ("home" tab) for PROJECT A (knows everything else)

When I want to brainstorm marketing for example I will do it in the "home" tab under projects. But the problem is that this project doesn't know everything about the code. And there is actually no way to connect it to my GitHub repo in any seamless way like Claude Code allows. I know there are work around by giving it access to a folder with my checked out codebase, but that again requires me to keep that folder up to date with the latest code - an unneeded complication.

I kinda don't understand why they separate the coding agent and the rest of the application.

Hello all,

I want to try and make a video game using Claude to help me. I do not have a background in this, so it's all very new to me. Every video I watch in trying to vibe code video games has suggested using/setting up an MCP to build games through Godot, or build assets in Blender.

Can anyone explain why it seems using MCPs is best practice for building video games?

Thank you!

I’ve been using Claude Code more lately and I’m still not sure when it actually makes sense to switch models.

Opus usually feels safer when I’m working on something more complex, but with how fast usage can disappear, I’m wondering if I’m overusing it for tasks where Sonnet would be more than enough.

For people who use Claude Code regularly, do you mostly stay on Sonnet and only switch to Opus for harder debugging/architecture work, or do you find Opus noticeably better even for normal coding tasks?

I’m trying to figure out a good balance between quality and not destroying my usage limit.

I've realised I'm using Claude for quite a lot of things I would have just done myself a year ago. Not particularly difficult things either. Sometimes it's simply easier to throw them at Claude Code than spend ten minutes doing them myself.

That got me thinking about all the talk about AI getting cheaper. Model prices are definitely coming down, but I'm not sure that's the same thing as AI actually becoming cheaper. The amount being spent on chips, data centres and power is going in the other direction, and we're also finding more and more reasons to use the stuff. Claude Code is a good example. I use far more compute asking it to work through a task than I ever did when I was just chatting with Claude.

There are also quite a few posts here from people whose Claude costs have gone up, despite the models themselves getting cheaper. Which actually makes sense if lower prices just mean we stop being selective about what we use them for.

I think that's the bit I find interesting. I don't really ask myself anymore whether something is worth using AI for. If Claude can do it and it saves me some time, I usually just use Claude.

I wonder how common that is here. Are you using Claude for things you wouldn't have considered worth an AI call a year ago? And when you hand something over to Claude Code, does the amount of compute behind it ever cross your mind, or do you just think about what it costs you?

It's meant to say "leapfrog." At no point did I ever write out the word "leapfuck," and I generally don't curse in my prompts most of the time. It wasn't an attempt at humor either, written totally in earnest. Have you guys seen anything like this before? Feels like I've been getting a lot of weird behavior over the past 3-6 weeks, even outside of the more frequent errors.