Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

OPUS 5.5 SHOULDN'T BE DOING THE WORK. It should be writing the PLAN. Claude Code workflows let Opus write a script that runs a whole swarm of agents in the background. Opus plans. Haiku 5.5 scans every file in parallel. Sonnet 5.5 makes the fixes. A verifier checks every...

21,334 Aufrufe • vor 9 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

By tomorrow, everyone will be using this: Anthropic just revealed the ultimate power move for Claude Code The concept: have Opus 5.5 design the master plan as a script, then deploy parallel swarms of the new Haiku 5.5 Massive scale operations with zero wasted Opus compute: the script manages the execution loop so Opus only reviews the final diff Simply boot up Claude Code with these parameters: claude --model opus --effort ultracode Here is the task distribution: -> Opus 5.5 translates your target into a fully runnable workflow script -> Haiku 5.5 scans all files concurrently at 340 tokens/sec to spot candidates -> Sonnet 5.5 applies each patch and validates findings within an isolated workspace -> You eliminate wasting Opus context on dozens of agent log transcripts Opus is involved at only three specific steps: -> writing the initial workflow script before execution -> analyzing verified results once the swarm wraps up -> giving final approval prior to committing any code to git Opus architects | Haiku audits | Sonnet delivers JEV engineering applies the exact same principle a level deeper: logic paths that require no deep reasoning (choosing files, picking tools, handling retries/stops) pass through JEV in milliseconds, leaving heavy models to focus only on complex branches The complete architecture: Opus 5.5 orchestrates the core session and generates workflow.js pipeline() fans out instances of Haiku 5.5 to inspect every file parallel() schema validators eliminate false alarms directly in V8 Sonnet 5.5 applies fixes within dedicated, isolated worktrees verify double-checks all code diffs prior to summary generation Opus 5.5 processes exclusively the results that survived validation JEV routes lightweight micro-decisions in milliseconds Feed this architecture and prompt directly into Claude Code Reconfigure my Claude Code setup following this tree: 1. Execute the primary session using Opus 5.5 with ultracode enabled 2. Assign read-only scanning phases to Haiku 5.5 across all workflows, while routing code modification steps to Sonnet 5.5, running each edit inside its own isolated copy 3. Update CLAUDE.md with a new rule: assign a separate verifier agent to every issue before reporting, and terminate fix loops after two iterations without progress 4. Route fast, deterministic branching (tool selection, path routing, retry logic) via JEV Present every modification as a diff upfront do not execute changes until approved Bookmark this to stay one step ahead

Bober_smart

32,522 Aufrufe • vor 9 Tagen

THIS IS F*CKING BRILLIANT. Anthropic’s docs describe one of the smartest ways to run Opus three models work on one task and each does only the part it’s cheapest at. start Claude Code like this: claude -> model sonnet -> advisor opus you stop paying Opus prices for work that doesn’t need Opus > Sonnet runs the session and edits the code > Haiku 5.5 searches the repo and docs, at up to 40x less per token than Opus 5.5 > Opus waits as the advisor and reads the whole session, tool calls included Claude usually calls Opus at three points: > before it locks a plan > when the same error comes back > right before it says it’s done Sonnet drives. Haiku scouts. Opus signs off and if you go one step lower, most of an agent’s day is tiny choices like picking a file or a tool, or deciding whether to retry. Jev takes those first, so Sonnet and Opus only see the moments that are really open the whole setup Sonnet runs the main session Explore on Haiku 5.5 searches and pulls docs, read-only Opus on call as the advisor give Claude Code this setup and the prompt below ↓ “Set up my Claude Code exactly like this: Main model Sonnet, advisor Opus, saved as advisorModel in my settings. One read-only subagent named exactly Explore, on claude-haiku-5-5, to replace the built-in one. One line in CLAUDE.md: ask the advisor before locking a plan, after the same error twice, and before calling a task done, not more often. Check what could turn the advisor off (CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY) and only report it. Show every change as a diff first. Don’t edit anything until I say go.” before you turn it on: every advisor call re-reads the whole transcript with no cache. on a 200k session that’s about $0.80 in input, against $0.04 for a normal request. keep it to a few calls the built-in Explore agent runs on your main model unless a subagent is named exactly Explore. any other name does nothing turning the advisor on or off keeps your prompt cache. switching models rebuilds it it needs the Anthropic API, and it stays off if telemetry is disabled bookmark it before your next long session

rvaniaaa

62,223 Aufrufe • vor 14 Tagen

THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE GOLDMINE The team at Anthropic just revealed one of the most effective techniques for Claude Code The core concept: run Sonnet, Haiku 5.5, and Opus 5.5 simultaneously, letting each model focus strictly on what it does best You get higher quality output while dramatically reducing token consumption, since every specific job gets routed to the optimal model To spin up Claude Code with this setup, simply execute: ⁠claude --model sonnet --advisor opus⁠ Here is how the workload is split: > Sonnet 5.5 handles the primary session, writes code, and applies bug fixes > Haiku 5.5 scans the codebase in parallel: performing searches, running grep queries, exploring docs, and auditing diffs > Opus 5.5 acts as an on-demand advisor for critical decisions and approves final code diffs > You stop burning expensive Opus context on routine tasks that don't require high-level reasoning Opus intervenes exclusively during three specific scenarios: > Right before locking in an execution plan > Whenever the exact same error triggers twice in a row > Prior to marking a task as complete Sonnet builds. Haiku scans and explores. Opus reviews JEV engineering applies the exact same principle one layer deeper: routine execution forks that don't need high-level reasoning (determining which file to inspect, which tool to trigger, or whether to retry or stop) are processed by JEV in sub-milliseconds, leaving big models to handle only complex decision splits The full architectural tree: Sonnet 5.5 manages the primary session and modifies code Search maps out the repository structure via Haiku 5.5 Grep locates call references using Haiku 5.5 Docs fetches API specifications through Haiku 5.5 Opus 5.5 serves as an advisor, reading the complete conversation history whenever consulted JEV routes lightning-fast micro-forks in milliseconds Feed this tree structure alongside the prompt below into Claude Code Reconfigure my Claude Code workspace based on this architecture: 1. Run the primary session utilizing Sonnet 5.5, with Opus 5.5 designated as the advisor 2. Set up three read-only Haiku 5.5 subagents: search (maps out the repo), grep (locates call sites), and docs (retrieves API documentation) 3. Insert a single rule into CLAUDE.md: consult the advisor prior to committing to a plan, after encountering an identical error twice, and before marking a task as done 4. Direct rapid, deterministic decisions (tool selections, file paths, retries) through JEV. Show all modifications as a diff first. Do not execute any edits until I grant permission Bookmark this setup: it will become a daily driver in your workflow

Bober_smart

24,276 Aufrufe • vor 2 Tagen

THIS IS A PURE F*CKING GOLDMINE the best REA trick almost nobody runs yet. The idea: REA takes the app apart, Jev keeps only what's proven, and a fresh Opus 5.5 rebuilds the feature from that alone. Nothing gets copied and no guess makes it into the code, because the builder never sees the original, only the spec Jev signed off on. You just connect REA like this: npx rea-agents setup here's the split: → REA reads the feature down to the binary and writes every rule into SPEC.md → Jev checks each rule against REA's evidence and sends back anything unproven → a fresh Opus 5.5 session gets only SPEC.md and rebuilds the feature → Haiku 5.5 runs the tests against 3 intentionally broken versions Opus only shows up at three moments: → rebuilding from the approved spec → the checks Jev marks as unclear → signing off before anything ships REA reads. Jev judges. Opus rebuilds. That's the clean-room rule in one line: the model that saw the original never writes the code, and the model that writes the code never sees the original. the full tree > REA reads the app and writes SPEC.md with evidence for every rule > Jev approves or returns each rule > Opus 5.5 rebuilds from the approved SPEC.md in a fresh session > Haiku 5.5 runs the tests and the 3 broken versions > Jev routes unclear checks back to Opus > /goal keeps going until all 3 broken versions fail paste the tree and this prompt into Claude Code ↓ "Set up a clean-room rebuild around this tree: 1. Use REA to investigate [FEATURE] in [APP]. Write every behavior and rule into SPEC.md, each with the evidence REA found. 2. Send each rule to Jev. Any rule without evidence goes back to REA. 3. Start a fresh session with only SPEC.md. Rebuild the feature on Opus 5.5 without opening the original. 4. Write tests on Haiku 5.5 plus 3 intentionally broken versions. Use /goal until the rebuild passes and all 3 broken versions fail. Show me SPEC.md first. Nothing gets built until I say go." ↳ save it, it'll come in handy.

Archive

59,706 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen