Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

THIS IS PURE F*CKING PLATINUM Anthropic just shared a Claude Code setup that stops you from wasting expensive models on work cheaper ones can handle idea: let Sonnet write the code, Haiku handle the exploration, and Opus review the decisions that actually matter you just start Claude Code like... this: `claude --model sonnet --advisor opus` here's how it splits: → Sonnet 5 runs the session and writes the code → Haiku 5.5 explores files and docs in parallel → Opus 5.5 stays on call as advisor for the big decisions → you stop burning Opus context on tasks that don't need it Opus only steps in at three moments: → before a plan locks → when the same error hits twice → before calling it done Sonnet builds. Haiku explores. Opus reviews. 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 milliseconds, and the big models only see the ones that split full tree > Sonnet 5 runs the main session and edits code > search maps the repo on Haiku 5.5 > grep finds call sites on Haiku 5.5 > docs pulls the API reference on Haiku 5.5 > Opus 5.5 on call as advisor, reads the full transcript when consulted > JEV routes micro-forks in milliseconds paste the tree and this prompt into Claude Code ↓ "Reconfigure my Claude Code setup around this tree: 1. Run the main session on Sonnet 5 with Opus 5.5 as advisor. 2. Create three read-only Haiku 5.5 subagents: search (maps the repo), grep (finds call sites), docs (pulls the API reference). 3. Add one rule to CLAUDE.md: consult the advisor before locking a plan, after the same error twice, and before calling a task done. 4. Route fast deterministic forks (tool choice, path selection, retries) through JEV. Show me every change as a diff first. No edits until I say go." ↳ save it, it'll come in handyshow more

Livsun

6,452 subscribers

12,296 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

Wissenschaft & Technologie

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

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

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

26,907 Aufrufe • vor 9 Tagen

it's f*cking insane.. Anthropic just dropped a Claude Code setup that makes tokens up to 97% cheaper Opus brains, Sonnet bill: > Sonnet runs your session and writes the code > Haiku subagents grab the small tasks > Opus steps in only when Sonnet gets stuck > it checks the work, digs into the problem and puts Sonnet back on track $19.50 saved on every 1M tokens a Haiku 5.5 subagent writes, compared with Opus 5.5 one command sets it up: npx claude-code-templates@latest --setting model/sonnet-opus-advisor-haiku-subagents the easiest money you'll save on Claude Code this year

it's f*cking insane.. Anthropic just dropped a Claude Code setup that makes tokens up to 97% cheaper Opus brains, Sonnet bill: > Sonnet runs your session and writes the code > Haiku subagents grab the small tasks > Opus steps in only when Sonnet gets stuck > it checks the work, digs into the problem and puts Sonnet back on track $19.50 saved on every 1M tokens a Haiku 5.5 subagent writes, compared with Opus 5.5 one command sets it up: npx claude-code-templates@latest --setting model/sonnet-opus-advisor-haiku-subagents the easiest money you'll save on Claude Code this year

Mnimiy

55,980 Aufrufe • vor 24 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

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 21 Tagen

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

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 16 Tagen

Sonnet as the main model, Opus as an advisor, and Haiku for subagents Save this and try it with one of your sessions Install: npx claude-code-templates@latest --setting model/sonnet-opus-advisor-haiku-subagents This command installs the settings required to configure your Claude Code sessions with this model distribution Select the appropriate configuration scope: User, Project, or Local

Sonnet as the main model, Opus as an advisor, and Haiku for subagents Save this and try it with one of your sessions Install: npx claude-code-templates@latest --setting model/sonnet-opus-advisor-haiku-subagents This command installs the settings required to configure your Claude Code sessions with this model distribution Select the appropriate configuration scope: User, Project, or Local

Daniel San

29,053 Aufrufe • vor 25 Tagen

Claude Code tip: if Opus 5.5 is already your main model, Fable 5.1 has been sitting idle this whole time. wire it in with /advisor start it with /advisor fable Opus 5.5 writes every line. Fable 5.1 reads the whole session, every tool call, and says nothing until one of three moments: → a plan gets proposed: is this actually the right move, or just the first one? → the same error comes back twice: is the search stuck, or is this a dead end? → the task gets marked done: what got missed while it was moving fast? Opus 5.5 ships. Fable 5.1 catches what would've shipped broken. Jev engineering makes the same move one layer down: forks that don't need a real thinker, which file, which tool, retry or give up, get routed to Jev and answered in under half a second. the expensive model only ever sees the forks that genuinely split. the tree this runs on: > Opus 5.5, high effort, owns the main session > explorer, medium effort, reads the code > worker, medium effort, edits and runs tests > researcher, medium effort, pulls the docs > Fable 5.1 outside all of it, on call, never writing a line itself drop the tree and this prompt into Claude Code: "Rebuild my Claude Code setup around this tree: 1. Look in ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents for subagents that already cover explorer, worker and researcher. Draft new ones only for roles that are missing. Set each to model: opus, effort: medium. If an existing subagent is pinned to a different model, list it, don't touch it. 2. Set the main session's effortLevel to high in ~/.claude/settings.json, and set advisorModel to fable. 3. Check for anything disabling the advisor: CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY, any variable blocking feature-flag fetches, and CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which overrides subagent effort. Report what you find. Change nothing yet. 4. Add one line to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: consult the advisor before a large plan, when an error repeats, and before marking a long task done. Show every change as a diff first. Don't touch anything until I say go."

Claude Code tip: if Opus 5.5 is already your main model, Fable 5.1 has been sitting idle this whole time. wire it in with /advisor start it with /advisor fable Opus 5.5 writes every line. Fable 5.1 reads the whole session, every tool call, and says nothing until one of three moments: → a plan gets proposed: is this actually the right move, or just the first one? → the same error comes back twice: is the search stuck, or is this a dead end? → the task gets marked done: what got missed while it was moving fast? Opus 5.5 ships. Fable 5.1 catches what would've shipped broken. Jev engineering makes the same move one layer down: forks that don't need a real thinker, which file, which tool, retry or give up, get routed to Jev and answered in under half a second. the expensive model only ever sees the forks that genuinely split. the tree this runs on: > Opus 5.5, high effort, owns the main session > explorer, medium effort, reads the code > worker, medium effort, edits and runs tests > researcher, medium effort, pulls the docs > Fable 5.1 outside all of it, on call, never writing a line itself drop the tree and this prompt into Claude Code: "Rebuild my Claude Code setup around this tree: 1. Look in ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents for subagents that already cover explorer, worker and researcher. Draft new ones only for roles that are missing. Set each to model: opus, effort: medium. If an existing subagent is pinned to a different model, list it, don't touch it. 2. Set the main session's effortLevel to high in ~/.claude/settings.json, and set advisorModel to fable. 3. Check for anything disabling the advisor: CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY, any variable blocking feature-flag fetches, and CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which overrides subagent effort. Report what you find. Change nothing yet. 4. Add one line to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: consult the advisor before a large plan, when an error repeats, and before marking a long task done. Show every change as a diff first. Don't touch anything until I say go."

Ryven

36,283 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Claude Coders: Pair Haiku 5.5 with an Opus advisor *NOW*. Opus 5.5 checks Haiku's work. Take advantage of the speed and cost-efficiency of Haiku with the intelligence of Opus. Copy this into settings.json (or ask Claude to): {"model":"haiku","advisorModel":"opus"}

Claude Coders: Pair Haiku 5.5 with an Opus advisor NOW. Opus 5.5 checks Haiku's work. Take advantage of the speed and cost-efficiency of Haiku with the intelligence of Opus. Copy this into settings.json (or ask Claude to): {"model":"haiku","advisorModel":"opus"}

Dan McAteer

115,828 Aufrufe • vor 26 Tagen

This is f*cking insane. This tip saved me thousands of dollars. run Opus 5.5, Sonnet 5.5, and Fable 5.1 together, and stop burning Opus on work it was never needed for. the whole idea in one line: the strong model plans, the mid-tier model executes, Fable stays quiet until it's actually needed. roles, broken down: Opus 5.5, high effort, owns the plan and ships the final code Sonnet 5.5, medium effort, splits into explorer (reads the codebase), worker (edits files, runs tests), researcher (pulls docs) Fable 5.1, called through /advisor fable, reads everything happening in the session but stays silent unless something's actually wrong three moments where Fable speaks: → a plan goes out: is this actually the right call? → the same failure shows up again: is the search going nowhere? → the task gets marked finished: did something get skipped? Jev engineering does the same thing one level down. the forks that don't need real thought, which file, which tool, keep going or stop, go straight to Jev and come back in under half a second. the big models only ever see the forks that genuinely need a decision. anyone still running one model for everything is paying Opus prices to decide whether a file exists. drop this into Claude Code: "Rebuild my Claude Code setup around this structure: Look through ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents for subagents already covering explorer, worker, and researcher. Only create new ones for roles that are missing. Set model: sonnet, effort: medium on each. If an existing subagent is locked to a different model, leave it as is and just list it. In ~/.claude/settings.json, set effortLevel to high and advisorModel to fable. Check for anything disabling the advisor, CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY, or anything blocking feature-flag fetches, plus CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which can override subagent effort settings. Report what you find. Don't change any of it yet. Add one line to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: check in with the advisor before a big plan, when the same error shows up twice, and before marking a long task done. Show every change as a diff first. Wait for my go-ahead before touching anything."

This is f*cking insane. This tip saved me thousands of dollars. run Opus 5.5, Sonnet 5.5, and Fable 5.1 together, and stop burning Opus on work it was never needed for. the whole idea in one line: the strong model plans, the mid-tier model executes, Fable stays quiet until it's actually needed. roles, broken down: Opus 5.5, high effort, owns the plan and ships the final code Sonnet 5.5, medium effort, splits into explorer (reads the codebase), worker (edits files, runs tests), researcher (pulls docs) Fable 5.1, called through /advisor fable, reads everything happening in the session but stays silent unless something's actually wrong three moments where Fable speaks: → a plan goes out: is this actually the right call? → the same failure shows up again: is the search going nowhere? → the task gets marked finished: did something get skipped? Jev engineering does the same thing one level down. the forks that don't need real thought, which file, which tool, keep going or stop, go straight to Jev and come back in under half a second. the big models only ever see the forks that genuinely need a decision. anyone still running one model for everything is paying Opus prices to decide whether a file exists. drop this into Claude Code: "Rebuild my Claude Code setup around this structure: Look through ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents for subagents already covering explorer, worker, and researcher. Only create new ones for roles that are missing. Set model: sonnet, effort: medium on each. If an existing subagent is locked to a different model, leave it as is and just list it. In ~/.claude/settings.json, set effortLevel to high and advisorModel to fable. Check for anything disabling the advisor, CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY, or anything blocking feature-flag fetches, plus CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which can override subagent effort settings. Report what you find. Don't change any of it yet. Add one line to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: check in with the advisor before a big plan, when the same error shows up twice, and before marking a long task done. Show every change as a diff first. Wait for my go-ahead before touching anything."

rvaniaaa

255,188 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

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.

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 18 Tagen

I used Opus 5.5 to make a motion design video about Haiku This is 100% motion graphics and code Short story about Opus delegating small tasks to Haiku Prompt in the comments

I used Opus 5.5 to make a motion design video about Haiku This is 100% motion graphics and code Short story about Opus delegating small tasks to Haiku Prompt in the comments

Baptiste (Kelano)

25,720 Aufrufe • vor 26 Tagen

an Anthropic engineer just showed a cleaner way to run Sonnet 5.5 + Opus 5.5 without wasting turns the expensive mistake is letting the wrong model stay in the loop too long. so I turned the routing logic into a prompt: → clear, scoped work stays on Sonnet 5.5 → failed checks trigger escalation → Opus gets a clean handoff, not the full transcript → cache stays warm whenever possible the numbers get weird fast: → 20K context: Opus is 1.88x per turn → 150K: 1.49x → 400K: 1.26x a late 300K switch costs $1.50 just to rebuild cache. the same handoff at 20K costs $0.10. the point is not to use Opus more. it is to make Claude prove when Opus is actually needed ↓ ↳

an Anthropic engineer just showed a cleaner way to run Sonnet 5.5 + Opus 5.5 without wasting turns the expensive mistake is letting the wrong model stay in the loop too long. so I turned the routing logic into a prompt: → clear, scoped work stays on Sonnet 5.5 → failed checks trigger escalation → Opus gets a clean handoff, not the full transcript → cache stays warm whenever possible the numbers get weird fast: → 20K context: Opus is 1.88x per turn → 150K: 1.49x → 400K: 1.26x a late 300K switch costs $1.50 just to rebuild cache. the same handoff at 20K costs $0.10. the point is not to use Opus more. it is to make Claude prove when Opus is actually needed ↓ ↳

fleyta

14,951 Aufrufe • vor 28 Tagen

Jev + Opus 5.5 is the most underrated setup in AI right now, and i don't get why nobody's talking about it. I stopped letting Opus make every small decision in my agents. Jev makes them now. My Opus bill dropped ~500% on the same tasks, same results. Here's what Jev handles: - which files and notes to load before Opus sees anything - which effort level each task actually needs - what to do when a tool fails - which tests to run, and when to stop Opus only gets called for the hard reasoning. Every decision is a typed result the host checks before it runs. The exact prompt to set this up in your workflow is below.

Jev + Opus 5.5 is the most underrated setup in AI right now, and i don't get why nobody's talking about it. I stopped letting Opus make every small decision in my agents. Jev makes them now. My Opus bill dropped ~500% on the same tasks, same results. Here's what Jev handles: - which files and notes to load before Opus sees anything - which effort level each task actually needs - what to do when a tool fails - which tests to run, and when to stop Opus only gets called for the hard reasoning. Every decision is a typed result the host checks before it runs. The exact prompt to set this up in your workflow is below.

Anatoli Kopadze

77,128 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

$35 OF FREE CLAUDE OPUS 5 CREDITS FOR A WEEK, NO CARD ANYWHERE • the credit > Sign up with Google and the trial activates on its own, nothing to claim manually: > Opus 5 sits alongside Opus 4.8, Sonnet 4.6 and Haiku on the same key. > The window runs a week from activation. • wiring it up > base url: > model id: claude-opus-5 > In OpenCode Desktop hit Ctrl+, and add a custom provider with the id aerolink. > The same key drops into Codex, Cursor and Claude Code with nothing else changed. One key, not locked to one client -> every tool that takes a custom OpenAI-compatible endpoint reads it the same way. It routes through a third-party proxy rather than an official Anthropic channel, so keep client work off it ↓

$35 OF FREE CLAUDE OPUS 5 CREDITS FOR A WEEK, NO CARD ANYWHERE • the credit > Sign up with Google and the trial activates on its own, nothing to claim manually: > Opus 5 sits alongside Opus 4.8, Sonnet 4.6 and Haiku on the same key. > The window runs a week from activation. • wiring it up > base url: > model id: claude-opus-5 > In OpenCode Desktop hit Ctrl+, and add a custom provider with the id aerolink. > The same key drops into Codex, Cursor and Claude Code with nothing else changed. One key, not locked to one client -> every tool that takes a custom OpenAI-compatible endpoint reads it the same way. It routes through a third-party proxy rather than an official Anthropic channel, so keep client work off it ↓

slash1s

21,129 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

New Claude Sonnet 5 performs at GPT 5.5 level 6x cheaper! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics crash demos Prompts: - A car crashes into a brick wall - A wrecking ball destroys a house - A catapult throws a rock at a castle wall Outputs: Sonnet 5: 15,047 tokens, $0.15 Opus 4.8: 23,063 tokens, $0.58 Sonnet 4.6: 25,824 tokens, $0.39 GPT 5.5: 31,152 tokens, $0.94 Sonnet 5 did as well as Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5 on all three tests. In the wrecking ball test, it beat Opus 4.8. The cable moves smoothly and every hit connects. In the catapult test, it beat GPT 5.5. The rock always lands inside the wall. Sonnet 5 still needs better detail and graphics. But it used fewer tokens than every other model

New Claude Sonnet 5 performs at GPT 5.5 level 6x cheaper! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics crash demos Prompts: - A car crashes into a brick wall - A wrecking ball destroys a house - A catapult throws a rock at a castle wall Outputs: Sonnet 5: 15,047 tokens, $0.15 Opus 4.8: 23,063 tokens, $0.58 Sonnet 4.6: 25,824 tokens, $0.39 GPT 5.5: 31,152 tokens, $0.94 Sonnet 5 did as well as Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5 on all three tests. In the wrecking ball test, it beat Opus 4.8. The cable moves smoothly and every hit connects. In the catapult test, it beat GPT 5.5. The rock always lands inside the wall. Sonnet 5 still needs better detail and graphics. But it used fewer tokens than every other model

atomic.chat

730,766 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Antigravity is now quite insane You can use Claude Opus 5.5 and Sonnet 5.5 directly inside it... in addition to Gemini 3.8 Flash. So basically my workflow is now: - Opus 5.5 for planning - Sonnet 5.5 for frontend - Gemini 3.8 Flash to execute Everything in the same place and without paying an additional subscription.

Antigravity is now quite insane You can use Claude Opus 5.5 and Sonnet 5.5 directly inside it... in addition to Gemini 3.8 Flash. So basically my workflow is now: - Opus 5.5 for planning - Sonnet 5.5 for frontend - Gemini 3.8 Flash to execute Everything in the same place and without paying an additional subscription.

Paul Couvert

47,987 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Introducing Claude Opus 5.5, the first model in our new Claude 5.5 family. It performs at the level of Claude Fable 5.1 for most tasks, and costs 40% less to run than Opus 5.

Introducing Claude Opus 5.5, the first model in our new Claude 5.5 family. It performs at the level of Claude Fable 5.1 for most tasks, and costs 40% less to run than Opus 5.

Claude

29,584,168 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Opus 5.5, Sonnet 5.5, Haiku 5.5 ve GPT-6 Luna'ya Türkiye haritasını ezberden, kodla çizdirdim. İnternet yok, referans yok, 81 il sınırıyla. Gerçek sınırlarla örtüşme: Opus %79,3 · $14,96 Sonnet %74,0 · $8,30 Haiku %53,8 · $0,87 Luna %47,7 · $0,036 Luna, Opus'tan 418 kat ucuz.

Opus 5.5, Sonnet 5.5, Haiku 5.5 ve GPT-6 Luna'ya Türkiye haritasını ezberden, kodla çizdirdim. İnternet yok, referans yok, 81 il sınırıyla. Gerçek sınırlarla örtüşme: Opus %79,3 · $14,96 Sonnet %74,0 · $8,30 Haiku %53,8 · $0,87 Luna %47,7 · $0,036 Luna, Opus'tan 418 kat ucuz.

Avenox

21,040 Aufrufe • vor 27 Tagen

This is f*cking insane, this GitHub repo + Opus 5.5 turns any Android phone into a hands-free agent An Android phone, reverse-engineered with Opus 5.5... 1 sentence out loud = the phone opens Telegram, finds the app and installs it by itself. No taps, no swipes, nobody touches the screen. here's the full guide step by step: step 1 → put the phone and a laptop on the same Wi-Fi step 2 → turn on wireless debugging on the phone: Settings → About phone → tap Build number 7 times → Developer options → Wireless debugging step 3 → paste the prompt below into Claude Code on Opus 5.5 with the GitHub repo and a screenshot of the phone's About screen step 4 → Opus reads the repo and finds the loophole: every Android phone takes orders over ADB on a home network. The same door developers use to test apps step 5 → it checks the phone first: model, Android version, installed apps, and saves a restore point so nothing breaks step 6 → it writes a tiny agent with exactly 3 tools: see the screen, tap, type. Nothing else step 7 → it plugs that agent into Claude Code as an MCP. Claude is the brain, the phone is the hands step 8 → press Allow on the phone once, the last tap ever needed. Then say "open Telegram and install ChatGPT" and watch it tap through by itself the result: you talk, the phone does it, hands stay in pockets... p.s: the repo works on 300+ Android models from 40 brands, no root needed Find GitHub repo + full prompt below Then read the full guide on reverse engineering with Opus 5.5 in the article.

This is f*cking insane, this GitHub repo + Opus 5.5 turns any Android phone into a hands-free agent An Android phone, reverse-engineered with Opus 5.5... 1 sentence out loud = the phone opens Telegram, finds the app and installs it by itself. No taps, no swipes, nobody touches the screen. here's the full guide step by step: step 1 → put the phone and a laptop on the same Wi-Fi step 2 → turn on wireless debugging on the phone: Settings → About phone → tap Build number 7 times → Developer options → Wireless debugging step 3 → paste the prompt below into Claude Code on Opus 5.5 with the GitHub repo and a screenshot of the phone's About screen step 4 → Opus reads the repo and finds the loophole: every Android phone takes orders over ADB on a home network. The same door developers use to test apps step 5 → it checks the phone first: model, Android version, installed apps, and saves a restore point so nothing breaks step 6 → it writes a tiny agent with exactly 3 tools: see the screen, tap, type. Nothing else step 7 → it plugs that agent into Claude Code as an MCP. Claude is the brain, the phone is the hands step 8 → press Allow on the phone once, the last tap ever needed. Then say "open Telegram and install ChatGPT" and watch it tap through by itself the result: you talk, the phone does it, hands stay in pockets... p.s: the repo works on 300+ Android models from 40 brands, no root needed Find GitHub repo + full prompt below Then read the full guide on reverse engineering with Opus 5.5 in the article.

NO1ennn

36,867 Aufrufe • vor 10 Tagen

haiku 5.5 vs deepseek v4.1 flash tested both models with same prompt at highest reasoning available > haiku took 90 mins and cost $3.4 via claude code > v4.1 flash took 50 mins and cost $0.67 via aihubmix api haiku failed to make the game on the first try cuz of claude code bug, then spent over 30 mins just thinking on second try which one did better here?

haiku 5.5 vs deepseek v4.1 flash tested both models with same prompt at highest reasoning available > haiku took 90 mins and cost $3.4 via claude code > v4.1 flash took 50 mins and cost $0.67 via aihubmix api haiku failed to make the game on the first try cuz of claude code bug, then spent over 30 mins just thinking on second try which one did better here?

J A Z I I

23,010 Aufrufe • vor 26 Tagen

Sonnet 5 is here. It's worse than Opus 4.8 on nearly every benchmark... Does that mean it's useless? Absolutely not. Use it with Claude Code Dynamic Workflows! 1. /model set to Sonnet 5 2. /effort set to Ultracode 3. Any complex task will kick off a dynamic workflow This will only become more powerful when Fable is back. You'll use Fable 5 as the superintelligent advisor and Sonnet 5 as the fast and efficient implementer.

Sonnet 5 is here. It's worse than Opus 4.8 on nearly every benchmark... Does that mean it's useless? Absolutely not. Use it with Claude Code Dynamic Workflows! 1. /model set to Sonnet 5 2. /effort set to Ultracode 3. Any complex task will kick off a dynamic workflow This will only become more powerful when Fable is back. You'll use Fable 5 as the superintelligent advisor and Sonnet 5 as the fast and efficient implementer.

Dan McAteer

666,124 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten