[simonw]

Are you on the $100/month subscription?

[joshstrange]

I am, and I used up the entire 5 hour window in 8min using the highest thinking setting. It also ate up $15 of extra usage before I noticed.

I’ve done the same thing with opus multiple times with no issue. According to ccusage I racked up just shy of $100 of tokens using Fable.

It spun up subagents or workflows or whatever so obviously that contributed but “double opus” was not my experience. I’ve done the exact same prompt with opus on the highest setting and only once before (not even while using this prompt) hit my limits.

My prompt? I’m not a prompt wizard or anything but it was literally:

> Please review the uncommitted code in this repo for bugs/issues/code smells.

I use variations on that all the time with opus and never had issues. I figured it was a good one to kick the tires with Fable. Little did I know it would mean no more Claude Code for the next 4.5hrs (unless I wanted to pay) after this being the first time I had used CC that day (yesterday).

All in all, a pretty crappy first experience.

[simonw]

Try running this command: and see what it thinks you spent at API prices:

  uvx agentsview usage daily

Then edit the config file to add Fable pricing as described here: https://til.simonwillison.net/llms/agentsview-custom-model-p...

And run the command again. I get $126.89 for yesterday.

[joshstrange]

Hmm, I tried that and made the config file change but it didn't work for me. I just see:

    DATE        INPUT    OUTPUT   CACHE_CR  CACHE_RD   COST     MODELS
    ----        -----    ------   --------  --------   ----     ------
    2026-06-09  142015   85315    321224    6880110    $10.96   claude-fable-5, gpt-5.5, claude-haiku-4-5-20251001

I tried to filter down to just fable (or 5.5 so I could deduct it) but the `--agent` flag doesn't seem to work how I'd expect...

I think the $10.96 is coming from gpt-5.5 since I switched to it once I exhausted all my usage on CC. CCusage reports completely different numbers so I don't know which one of those is right.

Thanks for trying, for yesterday ccusage says "$92.02" for claude, which I assumed was the Fable usage.

[simonw]

If you run this:

  uvx agentsview serve

You'll get a localhost web application which makes it much easier to filter by model.

[joshstrange]

That's very interesting, I had not used agentsview at all before today and I'll have to keep that in my back pocket.

Unfortunately it's not telling the whole story. The last message from the _only_ Fable session it monitored was:

> The data layer looks clean — <REDACTED>. Now waiting on the 11-angle workflow — verification and the gap sweep run after the finders; I'll compile the full ranked findings list when it completes.

And my memory jives with that, I could see in the footer that it had spun up 11 agents (though agentsview says it used 0 subagents, don't know if it was "actually" workflows that it spun up?). It's like it didn't record the sub-sessions/sub-agents info?

I'm still shocked that my prompt (which I now can see thanks to this tool) of:

> Please review all the uncommitted work in this repo and identify any issues.

was able to burn so much, so quickly, and, most frustratingly, without actually doing anything useful because killing it was my only option lest it spend even more of "extra usage".

Overview of usage: https://cs.joshstrange.com/RjGzWVXy

Stats for that 1 session: https://cs.joshstrange.com/Fj5qv1wl

[simonw]

Can you tell in AgentsView if Fable spun up a bunch of Opus/Haiku/etc subagents that burned tokens as well?

[jsw97]

simonw, if you are not bumping up against the same false-positive guardrail problems and budget consumption that everyone else is, then that is something worth digging into. I would normally say that's crazy but IPOs put weird pressure on companies.

[simonw]

I've had a couple of guardrail blocks.

I've been watching my usage quota bars drop as I use the model, so I don't think I have a weird quota issue going on here.