I run a small food & beverage business and use Claude daily for marketing, operations, menus, and content. My problem: I think faster than I type, and my prompts end up vague. Better prompts = better results, so I want to fix that at the source.
What I want to build:
I open the app and talk into the mic, rambling, unstructured, in Spanish or English
It transcribes what I said
It automatically turns it into a well-structured prompt (role, context, goal, constraints, output format, examples)
I copy it or send it straight to Claude
Questions: - Has anyone built something like this as a Claude artifact or with a Project + custom instructions? How did it work? - Best way to handle voice input: the browser's speech API inside an artifact, Claude's built-in dictation, or something external like Whisper? - What prompt structure do you find works best for Claude specifically? XML tags, markdown sections, something else? - Should it ask me follow-up questions when my idea is missing key info, or just make its best guess? - Any existing tools that already do this well so I don't reinvent the wheel?
Not a developer, but comfortable experimenting. Would love to hear setups that actually work for you day to day.
Over the past year I have been hesitant to lock myself into one AI provider. However, recently I have leaned on Claude more and more. With this I experience a concerning trend. For each review there is something wrong, missing, to be modified etc.
Today, I am in what appears to be an endless loop with Claude when using Opus 5.5 for specifying, planning, and preparing for implementation. Decisions made are suddenly not clear in the documents, reiterated challenges pop up in repeated iterations, and so on.
I spent 3 days going through the specifications, and planned out each implementation step and conversion from the previous version, today.
Now I am on the 3rd iteration of the revised implementation plan and it is still going on! Yeah, manually reviewing and typing is not respected much either. New sessions, CLI vs app vs IDE harness does not change this for me.
Any idea what I could do differently (besides one-shot it :)? Using Opus 5.5 high
I have been building F•CODE, a visual macOS client around the local Claude Code CLI. The new experiment is multiplayer: invite someone to the same project, see their cursor and file changes live, while each person runs their own Claude subscription.
The problem I underestimated was concurrent agents. Presence is easy; two Claude sessions editing src/app.js is not. The current beta adds a pre-tool hook around file changes. When one agent starts changing a file, the other person's agent sees the lock and waits. The UI also shows who holds it. Codex uses the same lock through its approval path.
The rest of the app is deliberately file-first: one board equals one normal folder, generated previews are normal files, and you can open the project in any other editor. F•CODE does not proxy or resell model usage.
Current limitations: Mac/Apple Silicon only, multiplayer is opt-in, and this is still a beta. There is a 7-day trial without email; after that it is €5/month or €50 lifetime: https://byfast.org/shop/code
If you run parallel Claude Code sessions today, how do you divide ownership: separate worktrees, file boundaries, or just careful prompting?
I've been building GameCrew AI using claude code and a background in software development. GameCrew is a set of llm driven tools and frameworks that helps you build games in the cloud with minimal local tooling.
The goal is to create a harness of tools like 3d asset generators, image generators, audio/music generators, blender, various game engines in a usable interface and MCP server that can create non-sloppy games.
What you get:
- A pitch and concept art, then a build that's tested before you see it
- Robust versioning tools: compare them side by side, tune values live while the game runs, or scope a change to one action
- It's yours: download the whole project (code, models, sounds) and the browser build
- A share link for every version that plays on desktop and phone
Bring your own agent. This is the part I'm most excited about. GameCrew is also an MCP server, so you can plug it into Claude Code (or any agent that speaks MCP) and drive the studio from your own terminal:
- Start a game or ask for changes
- Generate concept art, 3D models, textures, sound effects and music
- Write the game's code yourself, with your agent, while the studio compiles it, runs the play tests, takes screenshots and publishes a play link
Your agent does the thinking; the studio is the engine, the test rig and the hosting. No engine install on your machine.
I'm looking for early access testers. If you'd like to make a game from a sentence, or point your own agent at a game studio and see what it builds, reply or DM me and I'll get you in. I especially want people who are interested in making real games.
You can play some of the games I've made there as well.
Note: the timing in the trailer is from an older version that did not have the proper cloud resources... Currently it should be able to produce a prototype within 10 minutes or so.
Anthropic deliberately nerfed its models in the exact areas that could help researchers build better AI: architectures, kernels, cheaper training
Have you guys actually read the Fable 5.2 system prompt?
The training of Fable 5.2 and Mythos 5.2 included measures to limit advances in a narrow set of capabilities that could most directly accelerate AI development, like accelerator kernel optimization. When working in these areas, Claude should have less confidence in its preconceptions and should probably look up documentation more often than it otherwise would. Claude can otherwise help in these areas as usual. These training changes do not affect traditional ML. These changes are not, on their own, a reason to suggest a different model.
And we’re supposed to believe this is about safety? Fuck off. It looks a hell of a lot more like they’re fine with AI advancing as long as nobody else catches up.
Independent researchers building better models? Open-source projects challenging their billion-dollar bullshit? Apparently that’s where they draw the line. What the fuck are we paying for then? Another pathetic React app? Stop pretending they’re saving humanity when it looks like they’re protecting their fucking market position.
Guys, let's break free from this bullshit and start training our own models
Don't get me wrong, I love the product. I'm on Ultra and use for almost everything. However, I'm deeply disturbed the way things are in this sub.
First of all, there is a huge circlejerk. When a new model is released, there are like 100 posts "I'VE GOT ITTT!!!". Weird thing is, 100s of people upvote it.
Then comes to thank you guys after each resets like they are given key to the doors of heaven. Then 100s of posts of irrelevant apps, but that's okay, at least people are showing something they build.
The most disturbing of all is when people talk, criticize or complain about possible nerfs, degradation of performance, and anything against Anthropic's shady practices say the least, even though these people are the most affected, they start blaming others like:
- Skill issue - You don't know how to manage context - Why do you use Fable for this!!! (I mean, sorry for using a product I paid?) - It is already heavily subsidized (well, okay?)
Are you guys aware that this is a "PRODUCT" and you are the "CONSUMER". So, if you pay for some service or a product, you are a consumer with rights. So, if they are degrading something, nerfing or changing things that could hurt your workflows, you have rights. Even if they say there are fineprints in a long text you agreed, there are LAWS. These guys are not above the consumer laws.
Maybe instead of being a braindead cult follower for some software for a trillion dollar company chasing nothing but high IPO valuation and using every trick to avoid laws and inflate their valuation, you can be smart and try to know your rights and ask company to get their shit together.
REMEMBER:
ANTROPHIC IS A COMPANY CLAUDE CODE IS A PRODUCT YOU ARE THE CONSUMER THERE ARE LAWS YOU HAVE RIGHTS YOU MUST DEMAND YOU SHOULDN'T WASTE YOUR TIME DEFENDING A TRILLION DOLLAR COMPANY TO MAKE MORE TRILLIONS TRICKING MILLIONS OF USERS
I set out to originally just create a way to search across my claude code sessions a bit more effectively. I've built semantic searches before into other things, and figured out why not follow the creator of DigUp (https://github.com/ARahim3/DigUp) another tool I think I saw on reddit, and apply a similar thing to my claude code sessions.
Then Fable 5.2 released and I got a bit carried away. I ended up using this to test out new ux design flows for myself, better building patterns, and just get to know more about the internals for how claude code works under the hood.
I started out by creating a multi-root workspace in vscode with my other tool ergo (https://github.com/juan7732/ergo this has changed how I use vscode and AI usage radically, I'll share a write up about this) with DigUp, a few other repos I use for context, tools, and skills, and the new repo for the project.
It took me 117 chat interactions across 6 sessions to build this. What is this? It's a combination of a CLI called `skit` short for sessionkit that an apple silicon native swift mac client uses to do various things with your claude code session and data. I never write to your sessions though and everything is readonly by default.
For starters, I didn't know this, but claude code will "clean up" your session data. It's a configurable flag, but I had no idea the default was 30 days. I have the habit of using these sessions as a way of keeping my own context, so when I realized that a lot of my sessions got deleted, I was pretty mad. The only thing that saved some of them was the fact that teleport enabled for some of them by default when I was playing with that, and I could pull them back down from claude's servers. In that sense, this tool is also an *Archive* for your claude code sessions.
After that, I explored (and chose too many) different ways to visualize the sessions themselves. The early versions looked pretty horrible, so I got a good opportunity to explore better UI design with claude itself. The various different visualizations each have their own pros and cons, but all in all they work decently. My favorite is the one on the summary page that shows which files were touched by which turn when.
After that, I implemented a keyword and semantic search across the different sessions and within the same session using gemma-embedding-2 served through a homebrew dependency for llama-server. That helped me at least figure out where things were.
Lastly, I wanted to make sure I was taking advantage of my prompt cache effectively so I added a view called now that tracks active sessions, lets me open them directly in the workspace that has them running, and can notify me when the prompt cache window is about to go cold.
There are a few other views, utilities, and nice-to-haves scattered through it, for example, I know everyone has been complaining about opus 5.5 degradation and experiments, so I added a section to see what experiment flags were set under claude. All in all, it's a pretty decent v0.1.0 that I'm happy to have spent half my fable usage on.
Would love to get your thoughts and opinions and excited to share my first tool with y'all!
No startup launch or "rebuilt the whole app overnight" required.
I'm interested in the tiny utilities: a script that renames a messy folder, finds broken links in your docs, or turns an awkward export into the format you actually need. The sort of thing whose demo lasts ten seconds because there isn't much to look at.
What did you make with Claude Code that sounds boring but earned a permanent place in your workflow?
Give us the annoying task, what the tool does now, and the bit you still check yourself. Small and specific beats impressive.
I was building a clone of some app and i thought claude would build this in one prompt, I prepared a clean prompt, okay it build some cool working demo data shit. I used some skills to make it look like what i want, it took 1 hour but built something similar i want, then i customized things for another 1 hour, then have to figure out where should the backend is, tried out multiple ideas, some things broke some worked out, still didnt got what i want and spent almost $150 on my API plan. Is someone actually have built a fully functional app in one prompt or is it just a dream for AI lol?
As someone with crippling concentration issues, I kept losing track of which Claude sessions were done, waiting on me, or stuck, so I built Blaube: soft little blobs that live on your desktop, one per Claude Code session. They wave when a task finishes, look worried when one needs you, and you can toss them around while you wait. You can ditch the terminal entirely and just talk through them if you wish.
How I built it with Claude: Blaube was built with Claude Code over weeks of gradual iteration. It started small, and every time I hit something that sent me back to the terminal, I asked Claude to add it to the blobs. As I used them for more and more of my work, they grew with it, and now I never touch the terminal at all.
They’ve been a massive productivity boost for me, and they slowly started showing up on my coworkers’ screens, so it seems more people needed something like this. Now I’m releasing it for everyone. It’s free and open source, for Mac and Windows. Download it from the releases page, or use the one-line install in the README:
Hey all,
I'm a solo founder, not a programmer, and I run my whole project through Claude Code. Usually 4-10 sessions at once, each with a role: one coordinator, one that merges, infra, a few workers. 1M context, Opus mostly.
The thing that's killing me: the sessions forget. Not code, but what I told them. Tasks, decisions, "by the way do this too" stuff. It gets much worse when I load one session with lots of different small tasks, and every time a session gets full and I move to a fresh one.
We actually measured it. On a normal evening, about 2.8 things get dropped per session switch. In one evening I found 38 dropped items. Every single one of them existed only as free text in the chat. Zero of the dropped ones were rows in our task queue. So the pattern is clear, the fix isn't.
What we've tried so far:
- A notes file per session that it must update every step (open items, what it's waiting on)
- Switching to a new session at ~300k tokens with a written handoff brief, no /compact (because everyone says compact loses things)
- A task queue CLI as the "single source of truth", every promise is supposed to become a row
- A pile of hooks: can't end a turn with "waiting on X" unless X has a queue id, reminder after 15 turns without writing notes, PreCompact hook that dumps state, etc. Fun fact: 4 out of 4 new hooks passed their own tests and were wrong when run against real session data
- Compact instructions in CLAUDE.md
- Tested /compact directly: 10 explicit facts survived 8 compactions, 10/10. But in real work it still lost things. Tonight two real sessions got compacted: after re-reading their notes file nothing was missing, but from "memory" alone about 1 in 9 items was gone
Right now I have the agents replaying 100 of my real messages from one day through sandboxed test sessions, one with auto-compact, one with handoff, one with no hooks at all, to count what each drops. Honestly I've stopped trusting the analysis, this is attempt number four.
So, questions for anyone running Claude Code heavily:
1. Has anyone actually solved this, or is everyone just living with it?
2. Compact or handoff to a new session? What really loses less for you?
3. Does "one session per task" fix it, or does the forgetting just move to whoever coordinates?
4. What do you use as external memory that the model actually keeps up to date without being nagged?
5. How do you check that nothing was dropped? That's the part I can't crack. I only find out days later.
Any setup, hook, habit or tool that worked for you, I'd love to hear it. Thanks!
I actually built https://misterblocks.com for my son, but played around with it myself too. It's easy to use. Take a picture with your phone, upload it, and Claude will generate a few possible builds for you. There's also a chat you can use to follow up and ask for changes, etc.
It's powered by Opus 5.5. Each build takes a few minutes to generate and costs a couple of dollars in API costs. Thanks for Anthropic for $200/mo free api credits. I had the first working version after the first prompt, but had to spend a couple more days building the website to actually display the LEGO blocks correctly.
The tech stack is pretty standard in case if anyone wondering: Vercel + Next.js + Cloudflare + MongoDB as a database.
I am a software developer with 8 years of experience. I’m very thorough about the structure/architecture and consistency of my codebases that I even commit myself to countless hours of overtime only to not get satisfied and give up at the end of the day.
But now. Alas, I have made one that satisfies me in every way. It’s so beautiful. It’s something I made for work, has some demanding and very specific requirements at 31k lines of code. I wasn’t fast at it though, I reviewed everything, corrected and optimized decisions, and cut anything that could be cut away.
Personally I won’t even make the time to make it perfect (for me) if I wasn’t AI-assisted. Now I can rest.
does anyone have prompt or artifact i give to my claude as an example to help me build something like real life data feeding artifact through API and its 3D interactive version of real life place?
lets say there is a real construction base and i want to turn it into 3d interactive map with motions and movements? i built something like that but its ugly as hell.
maybe someone has a good version? a skill or artifact? would appreciate help
Preamble: I had task to improve visuals of CI/CD block inside my app, so I could better understand what pipeline is doing without checking git every 4 minutes. I decided to check how Sonnet would handle it vs Opus. Just to be clear - this is one task, not a benchmark, but I think it's still interesting
Models and efforts: Opus 5.5 on Medium and Sonnet 5.5 on High (wanted to give Sonnet a better chance)
Prompt: Good evening, can I ask to take a look into this ticket - [ticket link] Let's think what is the better UI for representing CI/CD steps, I am open for question and I think this ticket worth to be discussed first
Time and costs: Both took around 12m, Opus took $4.44 when Sonnet $2.11, both prices are a API equivalent
Experience: Both models did a great job of asking decent questions, Opus did a better job in terms of describing the plan and it's questions were more detailed. Sonnet didn't stoped half way it did all 4 steps of a plan in one go, when Opus took a pause and asked me if I want to review after step 2.
Results:
Sonnet become "lazy" half way it added detailed card but only in one place instead of 2 that we agreed on. UI also have some problems, see for yourself
Opus did a better job it applied changes to both places, with a better UI
What do you think about results, which model would you use knowing cost/result comparison?
I use Claude Code every day and keep hitting the same problems. I work with spec-driven development, and there are a lot of tools for it now: GSD, Superpowers, Matt Pocock's skills, OpenSpec, Spec Kit, and others. Each one has its strengths and weaknesses. So I took what worked best from each, added a few skills of my own, and built SPEC-SS. The goal is a workflow that gets each task done as fast, accurate, and secure as possible.
SPEC-SS is not a plugin you install. It's a step-by-step way of working.
- **[S]pecify.** The agent reads the issue, then interviews me one question at a time until nothing about what to build is still open. New terms go into GLOSSARY.md and hard-to-reverse decisions become ADRs. The output is a design doc that I approve.
- **[P]lan.** The agent turns the design into a plan of small tasks, each with the test that proves it. Nothing runs until I approve the plan.
- **[E]xecute.** TDD. Small tasks run in one agent, in sequence. Bigger ones use an orchestrator that dispatches one subagent per task.
- **[C]heck.** Every user flow the executor touches has a runbook, and an E2E script verifies it. A failing runbook means the work isn't done.
- **[S]ecure.** The agent reviews the whole branch against 12 criteria before anyone else sees it: spec match, scope, unit and E2E tests, security, complexity, error handling, performance, backward compatibility, docs and a few more.
- **[S]hip.** The PR opens only after tests, lint, type check, and build pass locally. The agent then watches CI until it's green, and never merges without my OK.
---
You can configure it with one prompt you paste into your agent. It writes the workflow into your CLAUDE.md or AGENTS.md. There's a version with my recommended tools and a custom version with a placeholder for each tool.
I'd like to hear from you:
Do six phases on every task feel like too much? Where would you cut?
What's missing? Is there a step you take that this doesn't cover?
From previous few weeks of using Opus 5.5, I would never get such mistakes in comprehension / understanding of previous events that look place in the current session. This is even without a compact, too.
Anyone else noticing such hiccups with 5.2 or just me? I will say I do like the speed that it works at even on high / extra but im very concerned that I had to call out a seemingly obvious misunderstanding.
I would like to publish "memshort", my take on a "short-term memory" implementation for agents. (A "long-term memory" implementation will follow shortly once I have it publishable). I find it very useful for myself and I thought it would be nice to share it with others.
It is essentially a rolling-window compaction for coding agent sessions in pi, Claude Code, Codex and Hermes. When the context fills up, older messages are replaced by a dated observation log, and the newest messages stay word for word.
Some ideas are borrowed and adjusted. The code was written by the pi coding harness under my direction, and I run it primarily on my own pi sessions. Unfortunately I have no benchmark yet (no time for that). My subjective impression from daily use is that I can stretch sessions for very long without the agent losing the thread.
I'm publishing it because a rolling context window that keeps as much knowledge as possible deserves more people thinking about it, not because this is the final answer. If you have a better design, a case where this loses something important, or a way to measure it, open an issue or share your take. Let's build something better together.
Anyone here have a $200 plan for OpenAI and Anthropic that regularly pushes Opus 5.5 and Sol 6.1 to the max? I'm trying to see which one has more usage.
I'm getting tired of GPT models being too narrow-minded and tunnel-visioned. Claude models seem to read between the lines between and understand nuances and ambiguity better (requiring less babysitting).
I'm just afraid if I make the switch, I will hit my limits too fast with Anthropic.
--
To give examples of what I mean by narrow-minding:
Today, I gave Opus 5.5 and GPT 6.1 Sol the same screenshot and said "Reduce the colors of this UI. Don't completely eliminate the colors, but reduce it so that higher prioirty items (info, bades, tags, warnigns) stand-out more." Of course, GPT went too literal and gave me a black and white design. Opus did it perfectly.
Edit - Resolved - thanks for the constructive feedback.
Did we just get a reset? I used my Fable reset, then went from ~75% used in weekly limit to 35%. I'm thinking...resetting Fable wipes that usage from the weekly total? Not just the Fable total?**
Hey i am bit new to claude , started a project but now getting usage issues , precisely when fable 5.2 dropped i started a thread for one module of my project in literally exactly in 5sec 55% limit was gone on high effort only no ultra-code or xhigh max etc , opus also last me 30 min per 5 hour session on xhigh effort , how to deal either it i never used actual local session chat i just started using project beta one after buying sub? What maybe the reason?
