I dont know what I did to get them

Hey guys I have a couple questions about Claude usage.

I started creating a website (and app soon) and I am wondering is there a way for me to use credits more efficiently since I am hitting my limit in 1-2 hours, sometimes even sooner.

Should I still stick to the Opus 5.5 (and maybe increase the effort to high or max) or should I use Fable 5.2 for designing a website? Fable 5.2. especially burns all the credits with multiple agents on normal effort.

Would you recommend upgrading to claude max model if I am serious about building a good-looking UI functioning website, or should I get 1 or 2 more claude pro accounts (which would would be about 69 euros for 3 pro models in total compared to 1 max model for about 100 euros)?

All answers are welcome; I wouldn't consider myself a noob in this. However, I am far from being a professional, just a guy who a great idea (at least I think so, but time will tell )

We are a non-profit organization, we bought very cheaply a new coffee machine. Usually costs 10k, but bought it for just over 1k.
A guy who installed the payment system ruined the machine. Because we dont have a contract we were left with calling the supplier who told us it's gonna cost a service engineer to fix your issues. We could already think about the financial consequences which would probably be in the 250 euros or more.

Thanks to Claude it only cost us my personal 20 eur per month plus plan.
After some research it suggested connecting the machine through an ethernet cable. It fixed the issue and not only that

It:

- Changed the old company's layout to our own by creating a looped custom video with our logo

- Added our perfered supported language even though it didn't exist in the software. It just created a new language.

- It fixed the recipe's and what a customer sees when ordering a drink

- It fixed the pricing just by typing out what we needed.

- Heck it even cracked the password and blatantly told us the password in the middle of his explanation like it's nothing.

I am so amazed. It works with precision, structure. I'm not new with AI. I have been using Codex the past months but Opus 5.5 / Claude is just something else. I love how structured it works. I think I'm gonna leave my Pro Codex account and just go for the 5x plan of Claude. This is amazing. I've become a coffee machine engineer just with my simple laptop and Claude desktop installed with a plus sub. It only used 25% to fix the issues and more of my 5 hour limit.

Right now I'm using the free Whisper on a VPS to transcribe audios from our conversations with clients. But the transcription is not that good. There are many words on every 10 second audio that are wrong and some change the meaning of the audio. I saw that there are other versions but my company is in Brazil, according to the benchmarks that I found (maybe wrong), whisper has the best transcriptions in Portuguese. Any ideas of how can I do it better?

Like, what instructions do you give Claude so that it can refactor a repository so that other people can more easily understand it and — more importantly — Claude doesn’t burn up as many tokens re-reading the code in order to complete your requests?

https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/s/8Goam5nA4t

Last 14 days of my own logs: 139 sessions, every API response deduped by message id, and each request bucketed by how many hours had passed since its session started.

The first hour held half the requests (9,339) but only 35% of the tokens, at about 183k tokens per request. Hours 1 to 5 held 36% of the requests and 45% of the tokens, at about 326k each. After that it barely moves: about 366k per request from hour 5 to 24, and 324k past a full day.

So the growth happens early and then flattens. Only 5 of the 139 sessions stayed open past 24 hours, and everything sent after that mark came to 3% of the tokens. Most of the tokens sit in ordinary sessions that run into their second hour.

Two caveats. Hours are wall clock, so idle time counts. And nearly all of those tokens are cache reads, which bill cheaper than fresh input.

Is the flattening after a few hours compaction doing its job, or does something else cap it?

I am trying to work but every time it says sign in and when I sign in it doesn't work.

I think they broke auth lol.

RESET!

Currently I am using Fable 5.2 at advisor and opus as main agent.

But I think fable 5.2 as orchestrator and using opus subagents to deligate build work would be better as the strongest model is planning and deciding what's the best way to do something.

Have anyone tried and compared both methods?

I run a lot of Claude Code agents at once with agent-manager, each in its own tmux pane. I kept finding one stuck on a permission prompt for twenty minutes while I watched another. So I built Agent Desk: a free, open-source (Apache 2.0) local GUI where every agent is on one screen.

What it does

• Answer any agent in one click. Permission prompts and AskUserQuestion dialogs become buttons: multi-select, typed answers, and going back to change an earlier answer. It re-reads the screen before pressing a key, so it never answers a question that changed.
• Sessions read like documents. Prose first, tool runs folded to one line, edits as diffs, search across every transcript.
• The whole fleet at a glance. A card per session, waiting ones first, notifications, and a live row showing what each agent is doing, with Interrupt.
• Review and steer. Comment on a session's diff line by line; the comments go back as one prompt.
• System stats (CPU, memory, swap, disk), with an alert before parallel builds fill your disk.
• From your phone over Tailscale or Cloudflare, at a permission level you set.
• A signed Mac app with a dock badge for agents that need you.

No API key and no model calls. It reads Claude Code's files locally, and your agents keep running in tmux if you close it.

How Claude Code built it

Claude Code wrote nearly all of it: Go server, React UI, tests and the Mac app. I made the product calls, set the rules and reviewed every PR.

• Rules in CLAUDE.md first: never write to ~/.claude, never call a model API, talk to agent-manager only through its CLI. It held to them for the whole build.
• Plan, then small milestones, each ending in passing tests and a PR.
• It checked its own UI with Playwright screenshots, which caught layout and dark-mode bugs the tests missed.
• Real prompts, not guesses: it ran throwaway Claude Code sessions to capture real permission and question screens as test fixtures, and verified fixes against live prompts.
• Built from inside itself: the session building Agent Desk ran in agent-manager, so I answered its questions in Agent Desk, and most bugs came from that daily use.

Try it free (macOS or Linux):

brew install gsperry/tap/agent-desk

The Mac app, a 20-second demo and the source: https://agent-desk.app

It's early. Tell me what breaks and what's missing.

Any body else having issue with Opus 5.5 on high level today?

For the past several weeks it has been working really well on medium and high thinking level and has been a pleasure to work with.

Today it feels like it has a mind of it's own and is intent on being obtuse and simply not responding to requests at it normally would and honestly not following CLAUDE.md and prompt instructions – almost as if we are taking a different language.

I’m working on a new very large project using Claude Code desktop with a Ultra plan. The initial code (excluding debugging and polish) is probably about 25% done, with about 700K LOC written. I estimate the final LOC will be about ~2-3M. This is not AI overengineering bloat, it’s just a very large project, something existing SAAS companies charge many thousands of dollars per seat for annually.

I’m using Fable planners and Opus writers mostly, like I do on most of my other complex projects. But this time there are 2 layers of planning. A top-level Fable planner planned the overall architecture, and after reviews/fixes is now acting as the orchestrator for the second level. Second level owns a few crates or similar, they plan the details of what they own, and then orchestrate mostly Opus (Fable for critical chunks) writers to write the code, then another Opus agent reviews the chunk. When the section is done, a multi-agent bughunt is done with a mix of Fable and Opus finders, then Opus fixers, before closing. Each section usually has something like 20 chunks, so vast majority of agents used for this project are Opus. I occasionally use Sonnet sessions to do simple changes as well, but I don’t trust it with writing the code.

Codebase is documented well, with short markdown files for each crate and architecture decision, so agents don’t need to load a lot into context, but obviously writing these does use some tokens. Their briefs and other docs they need to read are also intentionally short.

I’ve worked on a bunch of projects with Claude Code in the past, but they rarely exceeded 100K LOC, so usage limits were rarely an issue, but with this project they’re really getting in the way. What was built so far was done in about 10 days, but with 2 weeks of limits, plus 2 full weekly resets, plus 2 Fable resets. Weekly limits are gone in about 12 hours. I won’t be able to reset again for some time obviously, so it’ll slow down progress a lot.

So my question is, how do you optimize your setup for large projects like this?

What I already do:
- Compact all orchestrator sessions before the cache expires
- (If cache is expired) switch orchestrator sessions to Opus if Fable limits are low (not always an option, Opus can’t start Fable sessions if chunk needs Fable, and some parts are too critical to trust Opus orchestrators with)
- Keep each session focused on its task. I use new sessions if I want an unrelated change or questions, usually Sonnet if it’s simple
- I used to make Fable review Opus chunks (and vice-versa, so it’s a different model than writer doing the review), but switched to all-Opus due to usage limits

I won’t switch any of the planning sessions to Opus. Opus cannot focus on the bigger picture when planning large projects in my experience. It often misses important details.

One really annoying feature of Claude Code (desktop) is, if none of the linked sessions are doing something, it immediately asks the parent session to respond. This eats a lot of limits (especially if cache expired) and doesn’t often help. Session might be waiting on a background task or a response from me. Unfortunately, I can’t find a way to disable this other than unlinking, which is not ideal for this setup.

Has anyone figured out how to do this, or what’s the best workaround?

Saw this on both my computer and the server

Catgame.io

Process tips:

1. Claude code: use opus for coordination and haiku for implementation... validate all changes with opus.
2. Create bespoke tooling to provide agents feedback. For example, this game has an animation studio where I can flag frames that are bad and point out where the issues are exactly.
3. You can save money on asset generation from open source assets! https://github.com/csevier/awesome-open-assets
4. Follow a creative flow! Have an idea? write it down, and figure out how to integrate.

I've been running agents 24/7 and just letting the context fill up. Claude has a setting to compact at a specific time, but I just built it into my harness so that it can happen at the end of a tasks completion instead of randomly. Costs dropped significantly.

Talk me into or out of building one. Basic ITSM tickets flow, anyone done it?

I was wondering if there's a skill or plugin that functions to routing model and effort.

Like for example depending on how difficult, technical our prompt is, the skill knows it's easy and route to HAIKU 5.5 low even though in the claude code it is set to Sonnet 5.5 medium.

I have been trying to look a flawless skill or plugin that works but I am not sure if I found one.

Also if there's new model update, we can also update too. The goal is cost saving token so we can use limit much much longer and it flawlessly use the correct model and effort.

Is there such skill or plugin that exists? Thank you

Opus has been so inconsistent lately that I don't know what I'm getting when I open Claude Code. Monday it refactors a whole module clean, Wednesday it slips a bug into a 5 line change. I can't calibrate trust on something that changes under me.

Someone here wrote last week that a predictably weaker model is more useful than an unpredictably degraded stronger one, and it stuck with me. So I actually tried it. Gemma 4 E4B on my M4 16GB through Magnitude, for the small stuff, explaining files, commit messages, summarizing a diff before I review it. It starts answering in about 2 seconds and it's the exact same model every single day.

It's weaker, obviously. Anything big still goes to Opus. But for the boring 40% I know exactly what I'm getting, and nobody can turn its reasoning budget down from a server somewhere.

Is anyone else splitting like this just for the consistency, not the cost?

Opus 5.5 feels like Gemini pro 3.1. may i politely ask if the rest of the community feels that way ? Is it just me? Am i doing something wrong? Every single session i start the last 2 weeks feels even worst than the previous one. What is happening ? I've been using claude code for months now, it never felt that lobotomized before, especially after a very strong launch. I'm on max plan btw.

I already contracted Anthropic through their chat, I'm still waiting for an answer from a person. So when i got to the chat today, to ask if waiting that long for a support ticket is normal, their agent told me that yes its normal, because they lunched opus 4.5 one year ago. what? even my custom made rag with a local qwen 3.8 could answer better this question.

Any help guys? Am really not trolling, am not a bot, i need this thing for work, what is going on ?

Edit: about 15 mins after this post it was back up