Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Kimi K2 is so good at tool calling and agentic loops, can call multiple tools in parallel and reliably, and knows "when to stop", which is another important property. It's the first model I feel comfortable using in production since Claude 3.5 Sonnet.

174,490 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)

10 Yorum

Karim Chaanine profil fotoğrafı
Karim Chaanine1 yıl önce

been testing kimi k2 for mario (my sales agent) and honestly? the tool calling is chef's kissswitched from claude for one specific workflow where we needed 3 parallel api calls conditional logic. kimi just... handles it. no weird loops, knows when to stopstill claude for most things but kimi's nailing the complex agentic stuff

javi profil fotoğrafı
javi1 yıl önce

you don’t feel comfortable using Opus 4 in prod? 🤯 hype!!!

Pietro Schirano profil fotoğrafı
Pietro Schirano1 yıl önce

More so the first non-Anthropic model

Jesse Merrigan profil fotoğrafı
Jesse Merrigan1 yıl önce

Agreed - given it a proper go today and am astounded by the quality. General vibe checks have it providing better answers than o3 pro and Grok 4 on a bunch of tasks

Sturgis Steele profil fotoğrafı
Sturgis Steele1 yıl önce

When you say the last model you were comfortable using in production was Claude 3.5 sonnet, does that mean you did not use Claude 4 for production?

Pietro Schirano profil fotoğrafı
Pietro Schirano1 yıl önce

I didn’t word it properly, I meant it's the first non-Anthropic model I feel I can use for agentic loops.

Oscar Le profil fotoğrafı
Oscar Le1 yıl önce

The "call multiple tools in parallel" that is done on the server side of Kimi, not your own implementation, right? This means that when 3rd parties host Kimi K2, we will not have that tool calling capability?

Pietro Schirano profil fotoğrafı
Pietro Schirano1 yıl önce

You just build that

🐧 lalo adrian morales 𝕏 profil fotoğrafı
🐧 lalo adrian morales 𝕏1 yıl önce

what are you using to run it? is it local?

Pietro Schirano profil fotoğrafı
Pietro Schirano1 yıl önce

No @OpenRouterAI. You can't really run this locally unless you have insane specs.

Benzer Videolar

This is f*cking insane. This Claude Code tip saved me thousands of dollars. once Opus 5.5 is your main model, stop burning it on work Sonnet 5.5 can do, while Fable 5.1 sits idle hand the grunt work to Sonnet 5.5 subagents and put Fable 5.1 on call run /advisor fable Opus 5.5 plans and ships the final code Sonnet 5.5 subagents read, edit and run the tests Fable 5.1 reads the full session, every tool call included, and only speaks up at three points: → before a plan: is this the right approach? → when the same error comes back: am I digging in the wrong place? → before "done": what did I miss? Sonnet 5.5 builds. Fable 5.1 reviews. Opus 5.5 ships Jev engineering is the same move one layer down: the forks that need no thinker (which file, which tool, retry or stop) go to Jev in under half a second, and the big models only see the ones that split anyone still running one model for everything is paying Opus prices to decide whether a file exists - the full tree > Opus 5.5 on high runs the main session > explorer reads the code on Sonnet 5.5 > worker edits and runs tests on Sonnet 5.5 > researcher pulls the docs on Sonnet 5.5 > all three on medium > Fable 5.1 on call for main and every subagent paste the tree and this prompt into Claude Code ↓ "Rebuild my Claude Code setup around this tree: 1. Check ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents for subagents that already fit explorer, worker and researcher. > Draft new ones only for missing roles > Give each model: sonnet, effort: medium > Skip any that pin a different model and list them 2. Set the main session to high via effortLevel in ~/.claude/settings.json, and set advisorModel to fable 3. Find anything that keeps the advisor off (CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY) plus CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which overrides subagent effort. Report them, change nothing 4. Add one rule to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: consult the advisor before a large plan, when an error repeats, and before calling a long task done Show me every change as a diff first. No edits until I say go." ↳

delost

48,238 görüntüleme • 5 gün önce

Claude Code tip, and it's absolute free f*cking gold: run Opus 5.5, Sonnet 5.5 and Fable 5.1 as one team and stop burning Opus tokens on routine work the setup in one line: plan on high, delegate on medium, keep Fable on call • who does what > Opus 5.5 on high - plans and ships the code > Sonnet 5.5 on medium - explorer reads code, worker edits and runs tests, researcher pulls docs > Fable 5.1 via /advisor fable - reads the whole session and speaks up only when it matters • when Fable 5.1 steps in -> before a plan: is this the right approach? -> when an error repeats: am I digging in the wrong place? -> before "done": what did I miss? Jev engineering takes it one layer lower: which file, which tool, retry or stop all go to Jev in under half a second, so the big models only see the real forks paste this into Claude Code ↓ "Rebuild my Claude Code setup: 1. Find subagents in ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents that fit explorer, worker and researcher. Draft only the missing ones. Set each to model: sonnet, effort: medium. List any that pin a different model and leave them 2. In ~/.claude/settings.json set effortLevel to high and advisorModel to fable. 3. Report anything that disables the advisor (CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY, flag-fetching blockers) and CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL. Change nothing. 4. Add to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: consult the advisor before a large plan, when an error repeats, and before calling a long task done. Show every change as a diff. No edits until I say go." ↳

Mr. Buzzoni

142,491 görüntüleme • 7 gün önce

Official Anthropic tip for Claude Code: stop burning Opus 5.5 on work Sonnet 5.5 can do, while Fable 5.1 sits idle hand the grunt work to Sonnet 5.5 subagents and put Fable 5.1 on call run /advisor fable Opus 5.5 plans and merges Sonnet 5.5 subagents read, edit and run the tests Fable 5.1 reads the full session and only speaks up at three points: → before a plan: is this the right approach? → when the same error comes back: am I digging in the wrong place? → before "done": what did I miss? Sonnet 5.5 builds. Fable 5.1 reviews. Opus 5.5 ships Jev engineering is the same move one layer down: the forks that need no thinker (which file, which tool, retry or stop) go to Jev in under half a second, and the big models only see the ones that split - the full tree > Opus 5.5 on high runs the main session > explorer reads the code on Sonnet 5.5 > worker edits and runs tests on Sonnet 5.5 > researcher pulls the docs on Sonnet 5.5 > all three on medium > Fable 5.1 on call for main and every subagent paste the tree and this prompt into Claude Code ↓ "Rebuild my Claude Code setup around this tree: 1. Check ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents for subagents that already fit explorer, worker and researcher. > Draft new ones only for missing roles > Give each model: sonnet, effort: medium > Skip any that pin a different model and list them 2. Set the main session to high via effortLevel in ~/.claude/settings.json, and set advisorModel to fable 3. Find anything that keeps the advisor off (CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY) plus CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which overrides subagent effort. Report them, change nothing 4. Add one rule to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: consult the advisor before a large plan, when an error repeats, and before calling a long task done Show me every change as a diff first. No edits until I say go." ↳

delost

43,704 görüntüleme • 6 gün önce