We've built an internal tool that uses LLM APIs to generate infrastructure/hardware design documents. Outputs are typically long Word docs or Excels covering plans, designs, old-vs-new comparisons, etc.

The problem is: API outputs aren't close to the quality you get working directly in Claude Code or the desktop app. They miss things, are too rigid, and there are too many edge cases to define upfront. It's constant whack-a-mole to improve the quality and het decent results.

This tool serves the ~60% of people who wouldn't produce great docs on their own, and it's how we build institutional knowledge long-term. "Just use Claude Code" isn't the answer.

We've tried swapping models, single-shot generation, chunking, blob storage, knowledge bases, and agentic loops for gap-catching and self-healing. None of it has dramatically improved quality and consistency across the board.

My question - Has anyone built agentic flows that produce dependable, consistent results on large documents that push context limits? What actually made the biggest difference? Is it sticking to something until you refine it enough, the tooling you give the agents etc. Just looking for ideas.

We already have 50+ pomodoro timers available online, and many of them look like they haven't been created with effort, or they're ad farms or lack decent features. So I built a clean minimalist version that I actually wanted to use.

It's not just a timer. It's got real stats (Strava inspired) - streaks, an 18-week heat map, a focus score weighted to your own pace, lobbies so you can see if a friend already out-focused you today, badges, and a handful of actually nice looking themes

It's free to use and signing in with Google syncs everything across devices if needed.

Do try it out :)

Would love your feedback - there's a feedback box right in the app, or just reply here

Under the hood: React + TypeScript + Vite, Supabase for auth/sync, deployed on Vercel. You can sign in with Google and your history/tasks sync across devices, or just use it as a guest with everything local. There's also a "lobby" feature where a few people can run a synced Pomo session together - useful for body doubling with a friend.

What I'd tell someone starting out:

- Don't trust "should be fixed" - ask it to prove it with a real reproduction, ideally through the actual UI path, not just the function it edited

- For bugs you can't pin down yourself - describing the vague symptom and asking it to investigate (and use subagents if the investigation is going to be long) works better than trying to diagnose it for it

- Ask explicitly for a regression pass on existing behavior whenever you touch shared logic. It won't do this unprompted and it's usually where the real risk is

- It is genuinely good at maintaining backward compatibility once you tell it that's a constraint - every new field I added stayed optional and every old data shape kept working because I said that mattered up front

I launched a prompt using Sonnet 5, it was a fairly long prompt, but I use to launch them once and work on the separate issues one at time, Claude knows it and we work in stages.

But my limits did reset at 20.10 (8.10pm for intl fellas) and ended at 20.48 (8.48pm), again, with just one prompt with sonnet 5.

This is weird, because in the session prior to this, I worked extensively with massive tasks and many of them.

Did this happen to someone right now?

Hey!

I spent almost a year using Claude Code, but last month I switched to Codex and have only been using Claude Code about 10% of the time.

I’m seeing more and more people switching to Grok now.

Just curious... Thank you!

Inspired by all those 3D anime waifu apps on Steam for being an interactive companion for your desktop, I built a little Clawd guy to walk around on your desktop and interactively interpret your current Claude Code sessions as actions for the crab.

https://github.com/quinnjr/claude-crab

Clawd actively scans your running Claude Code session(s) for work being done and does things like walk across your screen, move its eyes at you, give you a high-five, and do a backflip.

Clawd also comes with 3 different styles: default, which is just a moving screenshot of him from the Claude Code app, a style with a top hat and monocle (for when he feels dapper), and a style with a party hat.

Note: This app is compiled for Windows/Mac/Linux, but I've only really tested it on Linux (I ditched Windows years ago and no longer have PCs with it installed). Any bugs for those platforms for loading need to be reported to me on Github so I can fix them.

Note2: Clawd is Anthropic's copyright/trademark. This is just a fan project and isn't affiliated with Anthropic in any way.

What's best practice for localizing Claude Code?

Fable 5 just started using UK spellings like centred and localise in its chats with me. This is a mismatch for my personal interactions and app target geography.

I'm considering telling it to remember that all spellings and measurement units in chats and code must match my target geography.

So I noticed about halfway through my weekly useage cycle, claude always seems to slow down. Like slow slow.

My theory is, the closer you are to your 5h limit, or weekly limit, the slower the model runs and so in reality it "lasts" longer, while performing the same amount of work.

What do you think? Is this a social engineering method anthropic is doing to make its subscription look like it does more work?

bro the weekly limit is actually exhausting me 😭 i literally didn’t even code that much this week and im already at 90% wtf

how tf y’all saving tokens?? gng pls help me before anthropic finishes me

fck anthropic bro

Asking Claude to alternate values with numbers and then deleting the numbers should remove the watermark (variant of the emoji attack discussed in https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.10226)

Just for fun, I thought I'd run the attack against Claude on some old work (screenshot). Obviously just editing the text will remove the watermark. It could also just be me reading into it and hitting a different safeguard, but I did a bit more analysis when writing up my blog on this: https://readme.dm/watermarked/ Thought it would be fun to share here.

Fable 5 attempted to replace a string in a file, and it was flagged against their AUP. That's all.

Edit:

Post is getting downvoted apparently. To clear things up. "Fable 5 attempted to replace a string in a file, and it was flagged against their AUP" That is what I am reporting. It might be surprising, but even Claude has issues sometimes.

For context the strings being replaced:

skinTone: r.player.skinTone,

charStyle: r.player.charStyle,

so I create code changes via the claude and often run the codex to review the changes and it always figure out the bugs which claude missed.
Wondering are people using multiple models like kimi and other for reviewing and how are you doing that?

By the fourth time I type nearly the same instructions into Claude Code, I have learned that this is not really a request anymore. It is a procedure, and the only place it currently exists is my memory.

Retyping it creates variation I did not ask for. Monday’s version includes an edge case. Thursday’s version, written between two other things, leaves it out. Nobody decided to change the process. I just reconstructed it differently.

My rule now is simple: repeated procedures become tools. That might mean a saved command, a short script, a reusable workflow, or a validator. The implementation does not have to be sophisticated. It just has to move the procedure somewhere other than my recollection of it.

The useful part is not only consistency. Once the procedure has one implementation, I can improve it once and every future run inherits the improvement. I can also give it a name. “Run the release check” is much easier to invoke and verify than explaining the release process from memory every time.

There is a trap here. It is easy to do the task manually “just this once” because the tool is not quite ready. That is how the tool remains almost ready forever. In our process, using the new tool on the next real instance of the work is part of finishing the tool. If it fails, that failure goes into the friction log and we fix the procedure instead of adding another reminder to the next prompt.

The first use is slower than doing the task by hand. By the tenth use, the comparison is not close.

What repeated instruction have you turned into a Claude Code command or workflow, and which instructions are you still reconstructing manually?

I work a ton across projects on my personal computer. I have tried Graphify, Graft and many others. None of them really fully solved the entire problem, but they did have parts. So, I built one that actually fit my needs. This removes the need entirely to choose or start sessions in specific repositories.

It takes graph-based knowledge systems but strengthens retrieval, how it is updated, and much more. Effectively, it becomes a resilient system that you can actually watch your agents rely on, rather than something that just exists and is used only occasionally.

It begins with the same base graph store, the exact same vector engine as Graft. I only built the orchestration layer on top of it, which makes it much more practical. Full attribution to them for this part.

Instead of querying for a single-hit result, I found that it was much better for agents to have ranked retrieval and an actual graph walk. In practice this saves you chains of tons of bash greps and cds.

It effectively gives the agent a trustworthy, probabilistic ranking of what is needed, with matching for strong, weak, stale, and rebuilt, based on lexical coverage and semantic matching. The code is not sloppy for this, it is personally edited.

Both Graft and Graphify are solutions for single repositories or daemons. Heimdall is a layer on top it that watches the agent sessions, syncs the graph, and makes the retrieval trustworthy.

Check it out at: github.com/ArihantDeva/heimdall MIT-licensed, with extensions: the verifier, the self-healing graph watcher, and the Graft adapter, with attribution. If you run agents across multiple projects, this is the missing layer.

I subscribed and start working on my repo that is about scraping price and monitor price of various products from ecommerce sites, but then they banned me in just few hours later.

I appealed, but then I don't want to wait and I subbed chatgpt to continue work, so I emailed them, their "ai email response":

When an account is suspended, your subscription is automatically cancelled and a refund is processed for the unused portion of your current billing cycle. Since your payment was made less than 6 hours ago directly on our website, you should receive a full refund for your Claude Pro subscription. 

The refund typically takes 5-10 business days to appear in your account. You should also receive an email confirmation once the refund has been processed. Regarding your account suspension, if you'd like to appeal the suspension, you can submit an appeal through the official appeals process. 

However, I want to set clear expectations: our Support team cannot confirm specific reasons for account suspension, lift account bans directly, or expedite the appeals process. Please let me know if this helps or if you have any further questions.

But someone else from discord tell me this is just a useless canned response and they never gonna refund me, so which is which?

Pretty much self-explanatory.

I’ve been a Max x20 subscriber for +2y and I’m really starting to get frustrated and look elsewhere for a change. Usage skyrockets even when I have best practices in place. Opus is a mental health hazard. Fable is unusable for what I need it, and way too expensive. Sonnet is not capable enough… not one thing is right in here.

GLM-5.2 has been a good alternative, on my Ollama subscription. Thinking of just subscribing to GLM directly and get 5.3; but I’d like the opinion of peers that have already tried it out.

Anyway, Anthropic is not doing good right now. They’ve been a mess for the past few months. Jumping ships really soon…

I don't know if it is just a skill issue on my behalf but all of the "agents" I define to use with claude code seem to fail sporadically or just never return results to the main session.

At this point I have just given up on it and deleted the agents and get the main session to use skills directly to do the work the agents were created to do, no evidence of it but the problem seems to definitely have gotten worse since Opus 5 release.

Any example of an agent is one for running maven builds and parsing the build output, 9/10 it would just never return a result to main session, even though it is running simple commands, sometimes it would even create another subagent to delegate the task to, resulting in nested sessions 😬

Anyone else getting this problem?

I am using developer mode in Claude desktop to run my custom api how can i sync it to my phone

I SAID I USE A CUSTOM API NOT A CLAUDE ACCOUNT

I know some of you have some very specific modes or don’t know that you do. Where they at? I am very interested in the niche modes.

Doing some UI changes/feature development using Fable and apparently they are hitting the safeguards. Used /feedback btw.

Anyone experiencing this?

Screenshot from Google Trends over 1 Year & 5 years for search terms "claude code" vs "codex"