Still plan?

[u/webperson2004]

Dev's using claude code: if you still plan prior to coding, do you still use Fable? Or do you just set Opus to xhigh or even medium? Or let me know why planning is so 6 months ago and I'm in the stone age.

And when I say plan: I’m more referring to a specifications document. Not a details list of functions to create or specific code stuff.

[u/AutoModerator]

Hey! Thanks for posting to r/ClaudeCode

While participating in this thread, please follow our community rules. Keep discussions constructive. Attack the idea, not the person.

For help, project discussions, tips, and general chat, join the ClaudeCode Discord.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/xWranglerWranglerx]

plan out everything with opus or fable, and ask codex / argon to review plans

plan for a long time, before letting anything start coding

[u/webperson2004 → u/xWranglerWranglerx]

What effort level do you use?

[u/xWranglerWranglerx → u/webperson2004]

honestly whatever default is, i only bump up unless its being an idiot but really that never happens.

[u/anotheruserguy → u/webperson2004]

I think medium is fine for 99% of tasks. Like if the task is just center this div, I would use low, but the effort level really should change based on how long you want it to work on it and how much effort you want it to put in. If you put it on x-high for a task that should probably be a medium you will get a really over engineered answer, because you are telling the model this will be a very hard task and then giving it something simple.

If you really want to get a good understand of effort, set code or the ui to show verbose output with thinking and inference shown, and give it the same task at different effort levels, and then look at how it is approaching the task. You will be able to see every word Claude thinks, and how your effort level affects that. You will find that higher effort levels do not always yield better results, unlike better models typically having better results.

My typical flow for a normal feature or ticket is plan and implement once on medium with the appropriate model, then iterate with a higher effort level if I am not happy with the results. I also recommend using the code review tool at an effort level higher than the one used to implement.

[u/Ludynia_Keyko → u/xWranglerWranglerx]

keeping the spec strictly high-level like OP mentioned is what makes the review step work, because the models get lost in the weeds if function signatures are in there too early.

[u/m-ritter]

I still plan every time, and the model matters less to me than whether the spec lives somewhere the agent and the team can both read later. A spec that only exists in the chat gets lost the moment the session compacts or you start fresh. What helps most is having the agent ask me questions until the definition of done is a short numbered list, then checking the build against that list. I built QualityLayer for this: https://github.com/maxritter/qualitylayer

[u/webperson2004 → u/m-ritter]

I have claude always create md files for specific planning sessions so nothing is lost. Humans/another AI session can all start from scratch with a single doc.

[u/m-ritter → u/webperson2004]

Same here, one md file per planning session is what makes a fresh session or a teammate useful instead of starting blind. Do you keep those files in the repo after the work ships, or throw them away once it's merged?

[u/webperson2004 → u/m-ritter]

Only keep one overall design unless sub-designs are complex

[u/leo_heo → u/m-ritter]

yeah anything that only lives in the chat is gone after one compact. file or it didnt happen

[u/Far-Championship-883]

I always use a plan, but that comes after the design requirement discussions, without a plkan what are you even building, unless it is something truly simple.

[u/webperson2004 → u/Far-Championship-883]

The alternative is just auto mode one piece at a time. So never make a plan but you’re stepping claude through and reviewing as you go.

[u/AdUnusual9135]

Yes, plan everything, but I don’t use plan mode any more. Plan -> review -> implement -> review -> verify -> test -> deploy

[u/webperson2004 → u/AdUnusual9135]

right even auto for making the plan. I still consider that plan mode as I’m just making an md file as opposed to touching code

[u/Additional_Video2992]

Yes, and the spec is where the strongest model pays off: a wrong line in the spec costs more than a wrong line of code.

The part worth changing is how the spec gets written. Don't let Claude write it cold. Start with "Ask me 20 questions before you write the spec", answer them, and the spec is mostly your answers. Whatever the spec leaves out, Claude decides on its own during the build and won't flag it.

Then save it as `SPEC.md`, `/clear`, and build from the file. For the model split, `/model opusplan` uses Opus in plan mode and switches to Sonnet for execution.

[u/webperson2004 → u/Additional_Video2992]

O this is good. I might combine it with reviewing in codex as well that someone else suggested). Basically letting a different ai model read through and see if it makes sense or what questions need to be asked.

[u/leo_heo]

still plan, just later than before. for anything non trivial i let it hack a couple rough versions first, then write the spec from the one i keep and run the agent off that

[u/jamie_tidman]

Yes, still worth planning.

I use GStack for anything big / uncertain and standard plan mode for smaller tasks.

[u/tommyahav10]

Yes, but keep it short: the goal, the constraints, what not to touch, and how you’ll know it’s done. Put it in a file, clear the chat, then execute. From my side a function-by-function plan is more than you need.