[gcau]

Yea, I don't want something trying to emulate emotions. I don't want it to even speak a single word, I just want code, unless I explicitly ask it to speak on something, and even in that scenario I want raw bullet points, with concise useful information and no fluff. I don't want to have a conversation with it.

However, being more humanlike, even if it results in an inferior tool, is the top priority because appearances matter more than actual function.

[cmrdporcupine]

To be fair, of all the LLM coding agents, I find Codex+GPT5 to be closest to this.

It doesn't really offer any commentary or personality. It's concise and doesn't engage in praise or "You're absolutely right". It's a little pedantic though.

I keep meaning to re-point Codex at DeepSeek V3.2 to see if it's a product of the prompting only, or a product of the model as well.

[Tiberium]

It is absolutely a product of the model, GPT-5 behaves like this over API even without any extra prompts.

[cmrdporcupine]

I prefer its personality (or lack of it) over Sonnet. And tends to produce less... sloppy code. But it's far slower, and Codex + it suffers from context degradation very badly. If you run a session too long, even with compaction, it starts to really lose the plot.