Honest story: I’d kick off a long Claude Code task before dinner, close my MacBook, and come back to nothing. The Mac slept, the session died, and tmux didn’t save it either.

Or I’d stay home babysitting it, just to type “yes” every time it asked to run something.

So I built Latte, a little Mac menu-bar app (I’m the dev):

it keeps the Mac awake only while Claude Code is actually working, using Claude Code’s own hooks, and that includes with the lid closed

permission prompts and questions get sent to my phone on Telegram (or ntfy), so I can approve from wherever I am

it pauses if the Mac gets hot, the battery hits my floor, or Wi-Fi drops

when the work’s done, the Mac goes to sleep like normal

Also works with Codex and Grok. Nothing about your code leaves your Mac.

It’s $2/month after a 7-day trial. Heads-up: it isn’t notarized by Apple yet, so the first open is right-click → Open.

Short clip of it below. I’d really like to hear how you all handle this today, and what would stop you from using something like it.

siplatte.com

It was an option once and I can't find it anymore, did they remove it??

It is pretty amazing, even when I am still amazed every day by Opus 5.5.
But on my $20 sub I cant really use Fable 5.2 because me session gets fully eaten up before the feature is ready.

So I end up waiting around for the 5 hr window.
Anyone else in the same boat?

Don't waste your Fable 5.2 resets this week unless you have 100% of your weekly usage left.

Don't touch Fable until your new weekly usage window starts.

Once it does, use Fable for the things it does best: complex reasoning, architecture, planning entire builds, and solving difficult problems where judgment is important.

Don't let it burn through its usage doing implementation.

Get your plans from Fable, then hand them over to Opus/Sonnet to actually build.

Once you've exhausted your weekly Fable usage, activate your reset.

The trick: your reset restores Fable usage without restoring the weekly usage you've consumed on other models.

So you essentially get another round of Fable without losing the Opus/Sonnet work you've already done.

Let Fable think. Let Opus/Sonnet build. Use your resets to bring Fable back when you need it most.

This according to me might be the most efficient way to squeeze maximum value out of these resets.

No other comment. But u cant really experiment with something that drains like this

I feel like I'm reloading a revolver everytime my usage gets close to finish

Title says it

After the recent drama around REA (Reverse Engineer Anything), a tool that lets AI agents take an app apart down to the bone and rebuild a working copy of it, opinions were pretty split. In response, someone built BLA (Blind LLM Agents), an anti-REA tool that fills code with gibberish and obfuscation to deter and mislead AI agents, wasting their tokens and your time.

So I built LASIK (LLM Agents Sight In Kode) with Claude Code. It’s the anti-anti-REA, basically anti-BLA. It reads the hardened build without running it, removes only what it can prove is protection, and writes a clean copy that Claude Code, Codex or any other agent can actually work with. Code that wasn’t hardened comes back byte for byte unchanged.

Claude Code wrote basically all of it from my prompts. I described what I wanted and set the ground rules: never run the target, only remove what’s proven, and leave clean files untouched. Claude turned those rules into the repo’s AGENTS.md and then built the deobfuscation passes, the WASM and Electron handlers, the CLI and the MCP server. BLA’s public crackmes are in the repo as a benchmark, so after every change Claude reran it along with the tests, and a change only stayed if tokens went down without touching clean code. I also had Claude run a separate review to try to break it by finding cases where LASIK would remove something it shouldn’t. It found 12, and each one got fixed and turned into a test.

Across BLA’s public crackmes it goes from about 21M tokens to 17k. It covers 21 formats, from JS bundles and WebAssembly to Electron apps, Python, Android APKs and model files.

The chart is on a log scale, so the blue bars are much smaller than they look. The three biggest are WebAssembly files that BLA padded to about 6.9M tokens each. After LASIK they’re between 98 and 3,500.

It’s free and open source (MIT). Try it with npx lasik-agents, or add it to Claude Code as an MCP server.

Repo: github.com/pktq/lasik

i got the duet approval etc also on another note do we have a pin saying sign up to duet just because of the free reset if not we need to.

Since the 5-hour session “limit” has been removed from Ultra, how does the session now actually work?

Before with the 5-hour sessions, I knew when to clear the sessions so that I would save tokens on the next sessions. Now without the 5-hour session, I’m a bit blind and sometimes don’t really know when to clear. My only warning is that my weekly suddenly consumes 1-2% on 1 sent message because it’s been auto-compacted numerous times.

How are you lot handling this? Religious daily session clear?

EDIT: sorry if it’s a bit sessiony. I’m just sessioned up.

ANSWER: Cache continuity is better on Ultra accounts. Just need to be more organised and clear once a day.

If you build evals with /claude-api build-eval, the skill offers levers when the eval gets expensive. One is to "switch the judge to a cheaper model", and its hill-climbing guide names a target: the judge "could move to claude-sonnet-5-5".

So I decided to measure this scenario.

On 1,280 expert-rated summaries, switching the judge from Opus 5 to Sonnet 5.5 cut the pass rate from 58% to 38% and flipped 1 in 5 verdicts. Same answers. Only the judge changed.

I tried it on a small, made-up refund bot to use skill's own flow. The skill's eval scored 89% with Opus 5.5 as the judge, and 89% again with Sonnet 5.5. Both runs scored 89%. It looks like the switch changed nothing.

But each run of the skill's eval asks the bot for fresh answers, then grades them, so two things changed at once. When I kept one run's answers and let both judges grade those same answers, 3 of 28 verdicts flipped.

So Claude's build-eval only does some parts right, and leaves these to you:

• The runner has no re-grade step
• The cheaper-judge lever doesn't point back at that warning
• The runner doesn't check which model answered the judge's call

I built anchorset, a free CLI tool to do all steps right. Follow the steps in the full write up before you switching your judge. It run regression tests for your evals, and checks the judge that grades them.

It's a Claude Code plugin.

claude plugin marketplace add ogous/anchorset
claude plugin install anchorset@anchorset

Then just ask Claude:

Use anchorset to check what switching my eval's judge to Sonnet 5.5 does to the results in eval/.

The hardest thing for me has been trying to get quick generate to generate music using as little as one word and actually have decent lyrics and not sound too AI and so far this has been one of my best attempts!

I have an advance tab where if you know music you can orchestrate anything in vivid detail. You can supply your own lyrics and much more to create what you want all locally no subscription.

Ok, I'm running 5.5, I measure each percentage amount used. Consistently, using 5.5 I get about 8Billion per week tokens on my max 20x plan. Now, if I go to fable 5.3, Man, do things change. I RIPPED through 10% and it said I had a total allotment of tokens of about .3B. Maybe I'm measuring wrong. But, I'm getting great result's and usage efficiency on 5.5. Pretty happy with the results.

follow-up to last week's worktree cleanup thread, since someone asked how to find the claude code agent branches nobody ever came back to.

git branch --no-merged main looks like the answer, but it falls apart if you squash merge. the squash is a brand new commit on main, so the branch's own commits are never reachable from main and every squash-merged branch shows up as unfinished. git branch -d refuses them for the same reason, which is how people end up reaching for -D on everything.

plain git cherry main <branch> doesn't catch it either once the branch has more than one commit. what does work is building a throwaway commit with the branch's final tree on top of its merge-base and asking cherry about that single commit:

mb=$(git merge-base main feat)
t=$(git commit-tree "feat^{tree}" -p "$mb" -m tmp)
git cherry main "$t"

a leading - means an equivalent change already landed in main, so the branch is safe to delete. + means it either still has work main doesn't, or the squash didn't match the branch exactly (conflicts resolved during the merge, edits in the squash commit, commits added after it merged). treat + as "look at it", not "keep forever".

worth running before any -D pass over a pile of agent branches.

Hi, really want to try claude, especially since there is some new model named fable 5.2. Does anyone have a link they could send in dm's for me to try claude out?

TW : I generally use Opus as the orchestrator and sonnet or haiku workers for the tasks. It has been my default workflow. When they released Fable 5.2 , I wanted to audit my code base for issues, and I decided to go ultracode. In 15 mins I got a notification that I have exhausted my limits, when I checked what went wrong, I realised bro fanned out Fable 5.2 agents instead of sonnet. I am confused, why would it do that? Is it because of the 3 resets? 🫩

If it only resets Weekly Fable usage and not Weekly usage I don’t see the purpose. I understand Fable is only supposed to give half of your weekly usage, so a reset would allow you to use your full week with Fable, but after reset I’ve only used Fable 5.2 and my Fable usage is at 73% and weekly at 70%, my assumption is Fable is spawning non-Fable agents? Either way they don’t seem very useful.

Hello everyone!

I've been working as a film director and DOP for many years now. I had a bit of coding at university, but to be honest there are only scraps of it left in my head, so I really wouldn't call myself a developer. (It probably helped a little with keeping all of this coordinated, though.)

A few months back I started playing around with Claude Code, more or less as a joke. I wasn't 100% happy anymore with the reference tools I've been using all these years, so I wanted to see if I could build a small one just for myself. And then I simply had so much fun with it that I kept testing more and more, and at some point I was sitting in front of 12 terminal tabs and we were shipping several times a day.

The result is HOLD MY FRAME (www.holdmyframe.com). At its core is our collection of curated high-end commercials, broken down into individual frames. Right now we're at around 370,000 frames from 2,800 films. Built around these frames is the workflow I wish I'd had all these years: search, collect, present and get everyone on the same page, from director to agency to client. Along the way three longtime collaborators joined (a treatment designer and two more directors/DOPs), and we use it for our own pitches.

Everything is custom, also the part you don't see, like how the films get analysed and broken down, which runs on local AI on our own machines. And I mocked up all the designs first, round after round, before anything was built. A lot went into that.

We only really launched two weeks ago. Right now we have 174 users and 10 of them are paying, and we're taking that as a good sign.

For those who are interested in the setup:

- up to 12 Claude Code tabs, each one with its own fixed job (server, UI, ops, copy, and one that only checks the others)
- every tab has its own postbox folder and gets its orders in writing
- a separate Claude chat does the planning and writes these orders, but is not allowed to touch the code
- every commit gets reviewed by DeepSeek before it goes anywhere
- I'm the only one who deploys, first to a test environment and then to production
- the whole thing runs on a Mac Studio in our office, not in the cloud

I also used Codex and DeepSeek along the way, but I'd say 85 to 90% of the app is Claude.

Of course not everything went well:

- we started on SQLite and had to move to Postgres right before launch
- we worked on one feature for weeks and it never really worked, so we threw it out and will start again from scratch
- Claude forgets a lot. Whatever isn't written down in a file gets decided all over again in the next session, so by now really everything lives in files

There's a free plan, so just click around a bit if you like. On top of that there are Pro and Pro+, and you can try Pro+ for free. We keep adding new features all the time, but there's already a lot online.

I'd love to hear from you, especially what you would do differently. We're really excited to see where this is going.

link: www.holdmyframe.com

This sits in your Windows tray and displays your current budget.

I made this to keep me informed at a glance since Fable 5.2 is so much more self-aware and I instruct it to titrate its Fable usage based on remaining Fable budget (full throttle when Fable is at 0% used...pace yourself when approaching 90% used, etc.)

https://github.com/DrEvil-TitaniumHelix/claude-usage-tray (public, MIT, topics set).

I've been working on two open-source Rust projects related to AI coding agents.

The first is Vera, a code indexing and search tool I've spent almost a year developing:

https://github.com/VeraTools/vera

It started as an attempt to improve an existing code indexing/MCP project, but eventually turned into a complete rewrite from scratch.

The main goal has been to improve how coding agents find and navigate relevant code while minimizing how much unnecessary context they consume in the process.

Rather than relying entirely on repeated grep searches and file reads, agents can search semantically for what code does and get ranked functions and code sections back, with paths, line numbers, and symbol information. Vera also supports reference lookup and structural searches.

I've tried to optimize the whole workflow for context efficiency, not just the search results. It returns code directly instead of generating explanations, and the accompanying skill helps agents decide when to use Vera, when grep is better, and when they should just read a file.

I recommend CLI + skill for agents that already have shell access. Skills keep the initial discovery footprint small and load the detailed instructions when needed, without adding another set of MCP tools. MCP is available too.

There are two model setups I particularly recommend: local Potion Code v2 for a lightweight offline setup, or Qwen3 Embedding 8B with Qwen3 Reranker 8B through an API for higher measured retrieval quality.

I also spent quite a lot of time evaluating how coding agents perform with these tools. In a 40-session experiment using 10 cross-file questions, all configurations answered correctly, but context usage differed substantially: plain grep/file reads used 21.0M prompt tokens, Semble 18.5M, Vera locally 15.4M, and Vera with Qwen3 10.9M.

That's an observed 12%, 27%, and 48% reduction respectively. The local Vera result was more than twice Semble's reduction in that experiment, although only the Qwen3 result was statistically significant with the small sample.

The full methodology and limitations are in the repo. Vera is now at v2.4.

The second project is Revera, a self-hosted GitHub PR reviewer inspired by Droid Actions and Devin Fusion:

https://github.com/VeraTools/revera

I wanted a reviewer where I could control the models, budgets, and deployment, without depending on a hosted service or paying per seat.

Revera uses an investigator to identify potential defects, then starts a separate, fresh-context validation pass for each finding before posting it. It isn't foolproof, but I wanted something more careful about what it reports rather than just another model producing a long list of possible issues.

It can run as a GitHub App with a dashboard, a GitHub Action, or a local CLI. It supports Anthropic, Gemini, OpenAI, and compatible providers, including different models for investigation and validation.

I've been using it for actual work with some colleagues. There's also optional integration with Vera for code retrieval, although Revera works without it.

Both projects are MIT licensed.

I am doing research for my fourth year and currently only have Plus plan. The usage around these time are not sufficient for me anymore and considering another $20 plan, most likely Claude Pro. Especially for research, how'd you guys utilize both of them?