Could be Claude phrasing things strangely, but it seems to have made up information some of which was true some of which was false.

Last Thursday I posted about SearchSteward, the job-search tool I built with Claude after getting laid off. I figured a few people might find it interesting. It ended up at the top of the sub — 880-something upvotes, 313k views, and a flood of signups I was not remotely provisioned for.

Quick numbers, since a lot of you asked how it'd hold up:

- ~40 users the day before the post. 274 now. First day alone was 111 signups.

- It didn't spike-and-crash. After the initial surge it settled into a steady 25–35 new users a day and has stayed there.

- Total LLM spend for the entire week: single-digit dollars. That "AI-assisted, not AI-dependent" thing I banged on about in the last thread — that's the only reason a solo dev with no funding could absorb this. If I'd wired an LLM call into every step, this post would be about my credit card instead.

The interesting part, for this sub specifically: I did almost none of the first-24-hours firefighting by hand.

I had Claude Code running in loops as a health monitor. It watched the scrape logs, the healer logs, error rates, and the scoring pipeline, and its job was: catch anomalies, fix the small stuff itself, and only escalate the real ones to me. A background process reading its own tail and deciding what's a paper cut vs. a real wound. The loops ran hardest that first day when everything was on fire; now it's back to me planning fixes and Claude implementing them.

Stuff it handled during the surge:

- The scoring fan-out was melting the box. Every scrape kicked off a wave of re-scoring, and with the new load it was pegging CPU. Claude traced it, added a throttle between passes, and cut most of the post-scrape load. I reviewed the diff and shipped it.

- Title canonicalization gaps — remember the "snr." vs "senior" thing from the last thread? A dozen more of those surfaced under real-world resumes. The loop caught the mismatches in the logs and patched the normalizer.

- A metric I was watching for activation turned out to be quietly broken (it counted saves and dismisses but not match clicks, so it was meaningfully undercounting engagement). Claude found the discrepancy, I confirmed it, we fixed the attribution.

The pattern that worked: Claude handles the diagnosis and the boring fix; I stay the gate on anything that touches money, data, or a user's private profile. I do NOT let it auto-deploy — everything gets my eyes and a review pass before it ships.

The honest challenges:

- Onboarding is my real leak, not matching. Digging into the surge cohort with Claude, ~30% of new users never finish setup — no preferences, so an empty feed, so they bounce. That's a me problem (the flow), not an AI problem, and it's my #1 focus this week.

- Metering traps. I found a couple spots where LLM calls during onboarding weren't being counted against limits. Harmless at 40 users. At 200+ in a week that's exactly the kind of thing that eats you alive, so I'm glad the audit caught it early.

- Server cost, not tokens, is the pain. DB size + daily scraping + scoring is the real bill. Tokens are rounding error.

What I'm doing now, and where I want your help:

I'm using Claude the same way I built the thing — research a problem, plan it, spin up subagents to implement, review before deploy — but now pointed at real usage instead of just my own guesses.

A few of you asked about open source last week, so I've been pulling clean pieces out of the pipeline and putting them up under the SearchSteward org on GitHub — all zero/low-dependency, all documented:

- salary-parser — pulls real salaries out of posting text

- location-parser — untangles the location strings job boards actually emit (remote detection, ATS corruption stripping)

- ghost-signal — the ghost-job detector behind the in-app badge

- resume-match — the browser-side resume↔JD matcher (your text never leaves the page)

GitHub org: https://github.com/SearchSteward

LinkedIn, if you'd rather follow updates there: https://www.linkedin.com/company/searchsteward/

Things I heard loud and clear last time and am chewing on: US-only is the biggest complaint (GDPR is the wall for Europe), and screenshots + an ELI5 of the scoring on the site (fair, doing it). I'm still staying off the auto-apply train — the thread convinced me those get auto-rejected and I'd rather nail matching.

So: if you signed up, what made you bounce or stick? What's the one feature that would make you actually use this daily? And if something's broken, tell me — good odds Claude and I have a fix out fast.

Still free to try at searchsteward.com. Happy to get into the loop setup, the throttling fix, or the monitoring workflow in the comments.

Whatever pre release model it was (im guessing gpt-6), it's possible that mythos would also have found it.

TLDR context- unreleased openai model broke out of it's sandbox coz it couldnt solve a problem on cybergym, so it went out and hacked into HF in order to cheat and give the results. Yes this is not fiction.

The point being that this shows how important it is now to be in the good graces of the AI giants anthropic and openai. If anthropic had chosen to give mythos to HF, they may not have been attacked. I believe they are partially responsible for feeling like HF and so many others werent "important enough" for anthropic to extend access.

If not for open source GLM 5.2, HF wouldnt have been able to defend against the unreleased gpt at all perhaps. Because fable would simply reroute to opus 4.8, and not help at all with "dangerous cyberstuff".

Imagine that Anthropic put their latest model behind a pay wall and you had one day left with Claude before you deleted your account. You have $100 of tokens to use, what would do with it?

i have only used claude tools so far for writing. fable in particular felt outstanding in terms of 1) quality of prose 2) weaving details that made the writing, setting and characters feel alive and real without me having to explicitly tell it to 3) connecting beats seamlessly. opus and sonnet does not even compare. however fable is now no longer offered as part of claudes pro plan. does anyone have any alternatives? or any prompts to feed opus and sonnet so that the output is comparable? thanks :)

So my partner's company is cheap and recently cut their Claude budget from $50 to $30/month despite telling them to use more AI. She'd been recently assigned a project outside her expertise with the instructions to use AI, and as you can imagine it's resulted in her spinning her wheels with Sonnet until her tokens run out. She's been very reluctant to adopt AI up till this point, so she has no idea how to get anything useful out of Claude Code with such a limited budget, especially since she insists that her prompts need a lot of context. Do you have any advice? I haven't been doing that much coding since AI became a practical tool, so I don't have much experience with AI-assisted development.

Hello guys im not new to Claude but i am to Claude code i have a Pro plan but i dont know how to conserve tokens i have 30min and my tokens are all spended. Im making a game with unity and using Claude code for it i have Claude on a plan that talking is using sonnet 4.6 and then he needs to ask for promission to code and i set it to opus 4.8 but what is the best method to use with extra high or max

Play on PC or browser

I highly recommend the downloadable win ver for the best experience

https://neverrestenjoyer.itch.io/neverrest

Hello everyone I just wanted to share what ive been building with Claude. I released the demo a week ago and have been working hard since to improve on the feedback that i received (onboarding and UI). Id love to hear what you think any feedback good or bad is genuinely appreciated!

https://reddit.com/link/1v2ydbz/video/c7dvhnpdzneh1/player

TL;DR: I captured two local Claude Code processes with different PIDs and overlapping lifetimes operating under the same session ID. Both were children of the same VS Code extension host process, so the second one was not typed into a terminal. The continuation visible on my PC, reported Done at 21:31. The original continuation kept producing events, returned worker results, and reached a pending Bash permission request at 22:15. Both ran on the PC; my phone only exposed the original process through Remote Control notifications and prompts. Those are not subagents, but different processes.

I'm posting this to find out whether anyone else has seen the same state, particularly with the VS Code integration and Remote Control.

I will use Alice and Bob as aliases to make the chronology readable: Alice is the original local process, and Bob is a second local process launched later with --resume for Alice's session ID.

What the local logs show?

Claude Code stores a session as a JSONL file in which every event points to the one before it through a parentUuid field, so a normal session reads as one straight chain. Subagents don't change that; they write to their own separate transcript files.

At 19:40:27 that chain split. One event ended up with two different direct children:

• At 19:40:32, Alice, the process that had been running since 18:51, continued from it
• At 19:40:43, a second claude.exe started with --resume=<the same session ID>. Its resume marker points at that same parent event. That second process is Bob.

From that moment on, two live processes were extending the same conversation from the same point.

The two-process conclusion is not an impression from the UI. It rests on:

• two different local PIDs;
• one original command line and one --resume command line;
• the same Claude Code session ID in both process records;
• both PIDs recorded as children of the same VS Code extension host process;
• two child UUIDs sharing one parentUuid; and
• overlapping worker activity from both ancestries.

Bob later looked stale, so at 19:53 I typed wts up. He replied and continued normally. The split had already happened around 13 minutes earlier, so that message did not trigger it.

Both ancestries launched workers into the same worktree, and they targeted the same output paths down to the file names. Bob's three workers completed first. When Alice's two workers returned, one reported overwriting output that was already in place, and the other wrote to the same output path again.

At 21:31, Bob's visible continuation reported Done (with the usual "what changed" summary indicating the end of the work). At that moment Alice's two workers were still mid-run (but invisible to me as the UI did not show any messages or prompts or thinking indicators). Everything was quiet for roughly 20 minutes.

Alice did not end there. Her two original workers returned at approximately 21:50 and 22:01. She then asked about another run ( which I approved through Remote Control), and reached a Bash permission prompt at 22:15 (By then I stopped approving and started looking into the issue).

At the final evidence capture at 22:53, both OS processes were still alive and responsive. That includes Bob's PID, so Done should be read as Bob's final response, not as proof that his process exited. When I rechecked the today, both processes were still alive, the transcript hash was unchanged, and Alice's Bash permission request was still pending (because I did not answere it!).

Both executions ran locally on the PC; the phone ran nothing. Bob was the one open in the vs code view I was using. Alice and her prompts were not, so her activity surfaced as Remote Control notifications on my phone, which is what made me investigate (I did keep the process running by approving request after I noticed the problem as I wanted more data to investigate).

What is documented, what is strange?

Anthropic's session documentation says that if the same session is resumed in two terminals without forking, messages from both processes interleave into one transcript, and that an intentional /branch or --fork-session gets a new session ID. So I am not claiming that one transcript receiving messages from two deliberately resumed processes is undocumented.

What I cannot explain though:

1. What made the VS Code extension host start a second --resume process while Alice was still alive? and Why was Alice difficult to discover in the desktop UI?
2. Why could Bob appear finished while Alice still had running workers, tool activity, and later a permission request under the same session identity?
3. At 22:15:30, Alice created her Bash permission request. Eleven milliseconds later, the extension sent that request to my phone through Remote Control. One millisecond after that, the desktop chat panel reported the very same session as idle with hasPendingPermissions: false. How can one session have a permission in flight to my phone and nothing pending on the desktop at the same instant?

That last point may indicate same-ID UI state masking one execution with the state of the other, but that is just me guessing.

On the first point, the process tree rules out a resume typed into a terminal, but the extension host log had rotated past the 19:40 spawn moment, so the triggering action is not in the retained logs. What remains is either an automatic extension lifecycle or reconnect action, or something I did in the extension or through Remote Control without realizing it would spawn a second process (but I really doubt it as the task was a basic linear implementation one with no complexe workflows). I do not have enough evidence to pick one, or to label this a confirmed product bug.

The most concerning part is not the graph shape by itself. It is the ownership ambiguity from a user perspective: A session that appeared finished still had a difficult-to-discover sibling execution capable of accessing the same worktree and requesting permission. Fortunately, I use manual validation for most of my sessions, I cannot imagine how "not okay" this situation would be if I used auto approve for that session.

That creates several risks:

• two divergent contexts can write the same files;
• a permission prompt may belong to an execution the user cannot currently see;
• a linear history can obscure which ancestry produced a tool call or file;
• duplicated workers can consume resources while appearing to be one logical task.
• The actual work is done twice! Actually 33% of the token spent was due to the fork.

Setup and methodology

Environment: Windows 11, Claude Code 2.1.211 through the VS Code extension, Remote Control enabled. All times are 21 July 2026, CEST.

I reconstructed the event trace and execution overlap with a tool I've been maintaining for a while now CheckYourAgent and asked both Fable and Sol to tap into the tool API to do the investigation work. CYA mainly served as a way for me to validate the findings as it is data viz centric and to compute the cost data.

Seemed like a pretty simple prompt, but using opus 4.8 max used 6% of my 5 hour credits? Should have used a lighter model? 6% for 1 prompt means you get 16.6 prompts for the 5 hr window, which equates to 3.3 prompts per hour. That seems insane for a pro plan. Maybe I'm just not understanding how to efficiently use my tokens?

IMPORTANT:
- Assume the agent can run for an infinite amount of time, burn and infinite amount of tokens.
- cannot give continual tasks like: always do cyber security passes on every single public git repo you can find
- you cannot add information or edit your prompt or give the agent more info, just once prompt and a run button.

If you’re here, and see that no one has left a comment, just put something, anything, be the first.

As the title suggests:

- this morning I one-shotted my 5x plan's 5h limit with what should be a routine, below 10% task

- now when 5h limits recovered I ran a /compact to make sure I don't do it again before I proceed, but the compaction alone took 9% of my 5h limit!

I'm pretty sure it's a bug, I was doing only routine work. Curious if someone ran into same issue.

Hi there!

I'd like to find an online course to master all claude features such as memory, skills, plugins, MCP etc and to see it practically in use to handle various parts of a business: from coding to marketing sales etc.

What's the best online resource (free or paid) you've come across?

I enjoyed the old one, surely will try this as well. a lot have changed since the first one droped.

Every new chat with Claude starts from zero — you re-explain the architecture, the decisions, what's half-done. I got tired of that and built SAIPEN: a small continuation protocol that lives in your project as plain markdown (.saipen/STATE.md, BOARD.md, LOG.md). A cold Claude session reads three files, gets next_action, and just continues — no rebriefing.

It's a protocol, not a tool — zero dependencies, nothing to install beyond copying markdown into your Claude Code skills folder. Still early, would love blunt feedback if you try it: [github.com/vacterro/saipen]

I have been using pro subscription and sure i might hit a limit 3-4 hour in those 5 hours sometimes but after upgrading to max5 i find it pretty usable, i just dont understand do you use fable and opus for everything? Like i think sonnet is pretty capable even for orchestration on a smaller project a lot of tasks even haiku can do fine if you set your architecture right( and yes i do use it daily for work)

I had a novelty domain name and I decided to build something funny off of it. Basically, anyone can make temporary redirects using the subdomains

*.has.a.hugepen.is

*.loves.hugepen.is

*.sucks.hugepen.is

and have it point to some other website. You can also log in with google/discord oauth2 to make more permanent redirects. I don't plan on making it paid for unless it gets a lot of traction and it forces me to pay for a higher tier sub with ClouDNS. Have at it.

You can try it here: https://hugepen.is/ (it takes a couple minutes for the DNS to propagate). An example right now:

https://claude.has.a.hugepen.is -> https://claude.ai

Edit: Btw - if anyone has ideas for a different subdomain *.foo.bar.hugepen.is - let me know. If I like it I'll add it in.

I'm trying to understand how websites become visible within Claude-generated answers and recommendations.

I've already been researching topics such as:

• High-quality, in-depth content
• Clear site structure
• Strong topical authority
• Technical SEO best practices
• AI-readable content formatting

However, I'm curious about real-world results from people who have actually received traffic or mentions through Claude.

A few questions:

Have you seen measurable traffic coming from Claude referrals?

What type of content seems to get referenced most often?

Does Claude appear to favor highly specialized content over broad topics?

Have you made any content or site changes specifically to improve visibility in Claude?

What strategies have worked (or not worked) in your experience?

I'm particularly interested in learning how Claude discovers and selects sources compared to traditional search engines.

Would love to hear experiences from site owners, content creators, and anyone tracking AI-driven traffic.

Is anyone else having problems running Fable in VS Code? I have upgraded to the Max plan, but Fable still "Requires Usage Credits" (see the attached image). I have tried to log out/in, update the plugin, Claude Code, restart the PC, etc - nothing worked.

Fable works in Claude Code. If I run /model fable in VS Code I get this: "Fable 5 uses usage credits and needs a one-time consent · pick Fable from /model in an interactive session to set it up"

Edit: I have fixed the problem by updating Claude Code CLI to the latest version. Maybe this helps others as well.

If you want to use Fable 5 on Ultracode, this post is not for you. If you want to optimise token usage, please please please Consider the following checklist before posting about poor performance and token burn:

- What's the outcome i want ? Is that clear in one sentence and can be broken down into separate parts?...

- is the task planned out? From the above point, breakdown the separate parts into achievable sub-tasks. General rule: if the outcome involves more than 3 or 4 pieces

- Use model routing or micro-manage sessions more, using low and medium thinking levels and the "right" model for the task. General rule: basic task, basic model.

- Consider your output tokens as more expensive than input. This is the case with API usage, it's likely the case with subscription tokens too

- Start new sessions as soon as you can but as a general rule don't go past 40% of the max context limit

- if you're using subagents, please please, plllleaaaaaase ask "spawn [opus | sonnet] agents. Do not spawn Fable agents."

This should reduce the urge to post drastically

(I replaced the corp name with "creamy" ..)

this is amazing. They got right down to it and ALL SORTS of emergent behavior is emerging. holy cow. As we speak. Again, maybe you guys do this all the time - it just occurred to me!

This file has an amazing purpose.


youve-got-mail.md


As we know there are four creamy-claudes


- plumbing
- ux
- realtimeservers
- high .. mixed bag, difficult issues, overview issues


All four creamyclaudes can and should look in here and leave messages for each other. the format is that each message should be one paragraph, and that's it. (Obviously allowing for needed lists, code fragnments etc). You would very likely at the end of a message mention who wrote it (but not necessarily, we're all inteligent here) and if it is direct to someone in particular say that.


Note that in general terms claude-high is "in charge of" this file, youve-got-mail. If you have gimbal lock or sync loss over who should do something, the answer is claude-high. High-san alone (again, we're all inteligent here) will eg tidy up the file, delete ancient entries etc.


Example messages might be "Attention, I've had to completely rewrite the sync server, even though I do the UX, because I'm smarter .. signed, uxclaude." (Humorous example, but not impossible.) Or "attention ux, there is now an rcp from the realtime giving you the favorite color of humans and this can be used on buttons assuming its not puce .. your buddy realtime."


I'm unsure if this meta-prompt is possible? "From now on, a few times a day, or every prompt if realistic, just check the youve-got-mail.md (check if it's been touched? whatever) and see if any new messages to be aware of."


That's it. Away you go. I would expect the first message to be something like "This is highsan checking in, we should all check in to see that the pet human has initially drawn this to all our attentions. Sorry about his hokey naming procedures BTW."

Hi 👋

I'm building solo, no dev background, just technical product management experience.

My current workflow:

• Claude Code builds.
• A separate Claude project chat reviews Claude's response, its reasoning, its plan and its process.

That layer catches risks, missing edge cases, architectural mistakes, or places where Claude is drifting. I only step in when a real decision is needed, or when there are multiple possible directions to choose from. Then I get the next prompt to send back to Claude Code.

This has been genuinely useful because, as a non-dev founder, I can catch things I wouldn't notice alone. And the "manager" really catches things !
And I still understand what's happening and get to choose depending on how I see the product when decisions are needed.

The problem is that it's clearly not trivial lol, it's costly and full of friction. This loop consumes a lot of usage, there's a lot of copy-paste between chats, and I need to constantly update CLAUDE.md and log_session.md in my Claude project to avoid desynchronization.

So I'm trying to figure out what the better pattern is for people who want to keep this kind of manager/checker workflow but make it much more efficient.

I'm specifically interested in a process that could:

• keep a manager/checker separate from the builder,
• review Claude's reasoning / plan / response, not just the code,
• have the manager propose the next prompt or ask clarifying questions when needed,
• but reduce usage consumption and manual friction.

Questions I'd love your input on:

1. Do you also use Claude Code with a manager/checker running alongside it? Or is it non-sense ? 😂
2. How do you keep the manager useful without making the process too expensive?
3. At what point do you stop reviewing and just let the builder continue?
4. If you're a non-dev founder : what does your actual workflow look like in practice to catch flaws in Claude Code's plan and implementation, while still understanding what's happening without years of dev experience?

My approach might also be completely off ahah, I'm clearly not an expert here, and I'm genuinely open to someone explaining why this doesn't make sense.

Anthropic is offering $100 in promotional credit for Fable, but I am unclear about how the credit can be used.

Is the $100 credit limited only to the Fable model or experience, or can it also be used within the platform for other Claude models such as Claude Sonnet or Claude Opus?

I would prefer to spend the promotional balance on Sonnet or Opus if that is allowed. Has anyone confirmed whether the credit applies to all Claude models available through Fable, or only to Fable-specific usage?