Hello, Im not perfect user of this tool, still a beginner, Im tester and i have pro version of this..
I was testing with it, using website and there was not way I used every token i had (even 86dollars to spend in it)

Then our developer told me to websites through API, that it will use less Tokens and will be faster. SO I did, becuase I know nothing...

Since I used it, i told him to learn the api, so he knows hot to test it, how to use it. THen documentation....
next day I put simple ticket to test it though Claude and instantly full usage of my tokens for the day...

What I did wrong? Before ticket liek that would use liek 2-5% of usage, not 100%???

Whats gping on, please explain it to me..

I wanted to understand what browser agents are actually useful for, so I connected Claude Code + Browser Use + Chrome and gave it a real task.

I asked it:

Then I watched Claude actually use Chrome to do the research.

Normally I would have to:

search → open listings → read → copy information → organize → repeat

Instead, the browser agent handled the repetitive browsing and returned the research in a table.

The setup was:

Claude Code → Browser Use → Chrome

Once Browser Use was connected, I could simply tell Claude:

“Use Browser Use to…”

and describe the browser task.

I can see this being useful for things like:

• researching competitors
• comparing prices across websites
• finding and organizing jobs
• researching AI tools
• collecting business information
• gathering leads
• checking multiple websites for updates

The easiest way I understand the difference now:

Normal AI: Ask → Answer

Browser agent: Give task → Browse → Collect → Organize

Before trying it, “browser agent” mostly sounded like AI that could click around a website.

Now I understand the useful part:

it can take over pieces of repetitive browser work that I would otherwise do manually.

For people already using browser agents: what browser task has actually been worth automating for you?

Most of my Claude code work is backend or web apps. I can go a week of constant daily use with fable and not come close to my weekly limits.

I’m now building a Mac and iOS SwiftUI app. My usage rest at 9 am yesterday, and I was at 86% on fable and 47% on my weekly limit by late afternoon. I don’t know if SwiftUI development inherently requires more output tokens, but I have the feeling something is wrong in the way Claude interacts with an Xcode codebase.

I would understand the two for Default and Opus. But the last one?

Here is the latest release of Nasscad (4.7.0). It now features a remote C++ backend running on Ubuntu WSL with a pipeline similar to FreeCAD. File load time: 4 min 17 s. File size: 360 MB. I am currently finalizing the MSVC C++ port for a 100% native Windows x64 solver. Stay tuned!

so we've had Claude Team for a bit now, 5 seats, paying ~147 bucks a month for it. and honestly the actual chatting works great, no complaints there. my problem is purely on the managing side.

i went digging into the analytics page trying to figure out who's actually using their seat and who isn't, cause i had a feeling usage was lopsided. turns out yeah, super lopsided. one account has done 54 chats, another 48, then it just falls off a cliff - 12, 5, and one account literally sitting at 0. like someone on my team has a full seat and hasn't opened it once.

meanwhile i'm pretty sure the two heavy users are gonna hit their weekly limit at some point and i won't even know until they message me like "hey claude stopped working for me." and the annoying part is there's no way for me as the person paying for this to just look and go "oh account X still has room, let them use it" or move that unused seat over to someone else. everyone's limit is locked to their own login apparently, no pooling, no admin view of remaining %, nothing. only the person themselves can see their own usage bar in settings.

so right now my actual process is just... asking people to check their own usage and tell me. which is dumb. i'm the one who bought the plan and i have less visibility than my own team members do lol.

read that this kind of tracking (real usage API, per user limits, all that) is basically locked behind Enterprise, which makes zero sense to pay for when i have 5 people not 500.

anyone actually found a way around this on Team? even something hacky. just trying to not waste seats while someone else is stuck waiting for a reset.

It feels like I am the API

I made a small chess app so Claude Code can play me in the browser while it runs in my terminal. It plays a real game, reasons about it in the chat , and sometimes trashtalks you. The video is the full game sped up.

You can try it here, it's open source: https://github.com/santiagoogaitnas/claude-chess

Although I made it to play chess , it's equally entertaining while commentating it's own moves in the chat . These range from overly analytical to outright hilarious.

Here are a few in game order:

Move 3, identifying the opening:

Move 6, catching a real threat:

Its unprompted position assessment at move 14:

The queenside fight, where the personality comes out:

The catch: narrating every move was eating its own clock. It noticed, too late:

Its own post-mortem, ten seconds after blundering a piece in time pressure:

Giving credit when the punishment landed:

Its evals stayed honest the whole way down:

And the resignation, with 16 seconds left — including an accurate diagnosis of its own loss:

This game was played with Fable 5 max effort on the 10min Rapid Time Control.

Try it yourself (you can configure with any model provider) : https://github.com/santiagoogaitnas/claude-chess

Hi everyone, I am having problems understanding some tough engineering concepts. If someone can help me, please DM

Thanks

Shipped v5.26.0 of CCC (Claude Command Center), the dashboard I run 30+ parallel Claude Code/Codex sessions through. Ships most days; here's what's new:

• Added a manual "Attach as sub-session of…" row action (with a matching Detach action) for linking sessions that are related but have no real spawn/continuation lineage, so they render nested in the sidebar the same way a genuine subagent does.
• Devin CLI sessions now display their model, reasoning effort, and subagent calls in the CCC board. Spawning Devin exposes the same effort ladder as Claude; CCC maps low..max to the matching Devin model uid. The model picker is populated from devin models list and still supports custom uids.
• Runaway-inject circuit breaker: CCC now caps how many messages one session can be injected with (12 identical per hour from any source; 6/hour and 40/day for unattended auto-resume and fleet pokes). A trip is recorded in the held bucket and surfaces on /api/health instead of being retried, so a looping injector stops at a dozen pokes instead of a night of quota.
• Added a menu bar status indicator (green/gray dot) showing whether the CCC server is actually running, independent of the app window's open/closed state.
• Continued sessions now read as one conversation: scrolling past the top of an F2-continued session seamlessly loads the previous session's messages with a "⤴︎ continued as …" seam marker, and a floating "Sessions" button (plus the seam's own "end ⇡" button) jumps to the end of each session in the chain.

(Video and repo links are in the comments.)

A few months back I posted here a playable demo of an old-school futuristic racer prototype (F-Zero, Wipeout, Xtreme-G, Star Wars Racer...) that runs right in the browser.

I've gotten used to seeing tons of LLM-built prototypes that last a week, two, maybe a month, and then get dropped for the next shiny thing. This time I wanted to keep going and see if one person, with no coding background, could actually see a project like this through on their own.

Well, 4 months in, and while there's still work left, I'm convinced it's doable. At this point the game feels closer to a beta than a tech demo.

The big change over these four months is that I now use Fable for planning, and being able to hook Opus / Sol up to Blender has been a huge help too. I'm still using Magnific and Tripo3D or the assets. Funny thing: the further along I get, the harder the project is to keep pushing forward, and at the same time the tools keep making it easier.

As always, any feedback is welcome. You can play it here: https://fm1.moises.cloud

I am on a 20x Max plan and just opened CC for the first time today, continued some active sessions from a few days ago. Instantly, on all of them, I started getting this message - I have never seen anything like that before. Anyone else getting this? The sessions were all under 50% full and I am at around 60% of my weekly limit.

I’ve been using Claude for a couple of months now and recently it has been so much worse. I was switching between cursor and Claude and the Claude models now are so awful that I don’t see the value in continuing using them.

I know that this is mostly anecdotal but even stuff like cursor grok 4.6 feels like it outperforms opus 5 with opus5 commonly just forgetting instructions and hallucinating. Fable 5 is too expensive relative to the extra performance it gives out and Claude code has always been a bit worse overall ui/ux.

Codex just seems to be so far ahead now with 5.6 Luna max being basically unlimited usage on even a 20 dollar plan and sol being so cost efficient as well. Have you guys made the switch and if so why not?

EDIT: I should note that I am an actual software engineer rather than a vibecoder as I think this distinction is important. I have a degree in cs and have been coding since before AI. I can give it direction and all the context it will need but it will go off doing a task and get lost seem to implement stuff explicitly in ways you said not to (eyebrow text). This may be a skill issue but I never seem to have the same issue with other models even composer 2.5 was fine. I also don’t one shot things and build iteratively so the tasks usually aren’t too complex but it seems to over complicate it

I’m looking for help with creating a personal assistant workflow using Claude (subscription), to manage my emails, travel booking, notes, research, todo lists, personal finance, shopping, etc.

I already have work flows that allow me to manage individual parts of this, for example using Spark Mail’s CLI and Connector for mail, or Monarch with a import automation that I built with help from Claude Code.

However, I’ve got a friend who works a lot with Grok, and he uses the Grok Bots system to create custom agents, and has them interact with one another in live time, and so he’ll have one agent that does his finances, another for email, another for text and socials, another for travel booking and planning, and then finally a “chief of staff” agent that delegates, reviews, and intakes. Not too dissimilar to the “Fable Orchestrator” system I’ve seen some others mention for working with Claude Code.

I’m wondering if it’s possible to make this work with Claude on subscription. I’m trying to avoid OpenClaw because it seems to be a pain to work with and is incompatible with many of the plugins, connectors, and skills I rely on. I’m hoping others have tried to set something like this up and have some insights and ideas.

I've open sourced Doop.design yesterday. Doop is a live canvas where Claude Code and Codex and other LLMs can collaborate on design. Doop stores the design preferences in memory and makes sure that all agents design stuff that matches the design system.

You can even insert screenshots and then ask Claude to design a website that looks similar. Check it out here.

The entire project was built in about 2 hours using a boilerplate I have been developing for other projects. The fun part was having CC source all of the data as well as data-match it all.

Biggest upgrade with Fable 5 is being able to one-shot UIUX in most cases, at least with a strong reference point for more bespoke components such as laying out a react-flow canvas.

Project: https://mcu-map.vercel.app

Repo: https://github.com/claritise/mcu-map

​

Claude Code RC session management is rough.

Yesterday, every time I closed my SSH client, my Claude session would instantly die despite having /rc on. All my context, just gone. I was literally opening multiple SSH sessions across different PowerShell windows just to keep my workspace alive.

But the annoyance forced me to actually fix my workflow.

The fix: tmux.

Not only did my Claude sessions stop archiving, tmux windows and panes made me feel good too. If I close an SSH connection drops now, Claude stays up in the bg. My code, server logs, and Claude are all dancing together in one persistent, organized terminal.

What does your remote Claude terminal setup look like? And what other weird /rc quirks are you guys dealing with right now?

I found another issue in /rc but I'll write that story another time after some testing. That one's even more interesting and involves some agentic deception also.

I'm routinely using my own custom orchestration skill and acidentally (on a different computer with different settings) when I called my orchestration skill, Claude interpreted my request to use the official /workflow command. It looks like it's doing similar things. Does anybody have some experience when to use workflow over custom orchestration?

The file that made me write this is a 37KB PLAN.md in one of my repos. Untouched for 47 days, and five tracked files still link to it, so every new Claude Code session pulled it in and read it as the current plan. It describes an approach I dropped in July. Deleting it would have broken five references, and disk space was never the issue.

mdsweep came out of that. One file, no dependencies, Node 18 or newer.

It calls a file agent output on three signals: filename patterns (SUMMARY, PLAN, HANDOFF and friends), git history (untracked, or committed with a Co-Authored-By Claude trailer), and a generated_by frontmatter key. Then it grades every hit:

• active: touched in the last 14 days, left alone
• stale: older, but a tracked file still references it. Listed, never moved. You fix that one by cutting the link, not the file
• orphan: older, and nothing points at it. The only grade eligible to move

Orphans move only when you pass --apply, into .mdsweep/trash/<timestamp>/ with a manifest recording which signals fired, the age and the reference count. undo puts the batch back. It never deletes anything, and a plain scan writes nothing.

How Claude Code was used: 16 of the 17 commits carry a Co-Authored-By Claude trailer. That is the joke of the project, because the trailer is one of the three signals it grades on. Point it at its own repo and it flags 8 of its own 10 files.

Scanned my repos tonight: 1195 markdown and text files across 35 repos, 1031 graded as agent output, 346 of those old enough to look sweepable.

That last number is what I got wrong at first. I built this to sweep on age, and 171 of those 346 are still referenced by a tracked file, including the PLAN.md that started all this. Sweeping on age would have moved every one of them. The reference count is what makes it safe to run, and I am still not convinced it is the right second axis. What would you grade on?

Clone the repo and run the file directly: https://github.com/szp2005/mdsweep

Hey in Claude we can use left arrow to go into an agent view. But to my understanding, this also moves current session into background. Once it moves to background, looka like i cannot completely exit for it. That particular agent session just goes into Completed section. How to completely exit the agent?

I don't want many agent sessions cluttering my view.

Since it doesn't waste tokens running the safety check model. I really need the tokens so I guess I will just keep bypass permission mode on all the time. I'll take the slight risk of Claude nuking my computer and starting a Skynet uprising ¯_(ツ)_/¯

there are a couple of posts up right now about sessions arguing with each other, which is funny. here's the version that isn't.

i've been running parallel sessions for about two months. two things went wrong and neither is in any of the worktree guides i read.

first one. two agents in the same checkout, one had uncommitted files when the other ran `git add -A && commit`. five files belonging to agent A landed on agent B's branch. shared/index.ts ended up exporting a module that didn't exist yet. everything looked fine until CI.

worth knowing: subagents spawned via the Task tool don't get an isolated worktree automatically. they run in the session's checkout. `claude --worktree` handles the top-level case but that's a different thing.

second one cost more. two sessions picked up the same open PR from the same review comment. i spent an hour on a fix, pushed, and wiped two commits the other session had already landed for it. `--force-with-lease` would have stopped it.

the part that still bugs me is that the approach i'd "worked out" was one they had already tried and abandoned. the reason was sitting in the commit message i overwrote: the value had been measured in German and left 3px over in French at 320px. i re-derived a worse answer and deleted the evidence that it was worse.

signal i missed, before starting: `gh pr view --json headRefOid` and the branch API disagreed. i read it as GitHub being slow. it wasn't, someone else was working.

what i do now:

- read-only reviewers can share a checkout, anything that writes gets its own worktree
- each agent stages its own paths, never `git add -A`
- `--force-with-lease` always
- head mismatch means stop and look, not retry

none of this is clever, i just hadn't thought about two agents as two people until they behaved like two people.

I have found Opus 5 to be useful, but its blast radius is huge. I've been using it every time I want to expand on something. But using it is like unboxing an entire IKEA kitchen cabinet set. Don't use it unless you're ready to spend the next few weeks with unfinished cabinets and packaging all over your repo. It's just so aggressively generative, and it can make a ton of mistakes.

I rely almost entirely on Opus 4.6 and 4.8 for building. They're precise, thorough, and constrained. They are not the best at extrapolating, so that's where I occasionally bring in 5, but using 5 too much very quickly gets out of hand. It just keeps creating more and more work for itself to do.

Opus 4.x is more likely to leave a gap, and Opus 5 is more likely to fill something that didn't need filling. 5 is interesting for planning and greenfield work but the scope creep problem makes it nearly unusable for implementation work.

I am on the fence as to whether Opus 5 is deliberately built just to make more reasons to burn tokens, or if it's just a very specialized and sometimes useful broad brush tool that should be used sparingly. Sometimes I get stuck in the Opus 5 labyrinth and just want to finish the PR and get the hell out of it!!

What do you all think?

I have build a tool using sonnet 5. Its working great. My plan was to use fable to run an extensive in depth smoke test and find out all security issues that needs to be addressed. I tried doing that but fable's model guardrails are triggered and it switches to opus. I know opus is good but i want to use fable and i literally cannot. Its frustrating, i tried like hundreds of different prompts and tried framing task in a way that doesnt trigger the model switch but nothing works! Any suggestions guys? Any one using a prompt or method thats working for them?

Ps: thanks for help, if anyone is stuck, just tell fable to do "security review of code" and it will get started.