[mikeocool]

I apparently use Claude differently the most people who talk about using Claude on the internet.

I’ll typically have a bunch of short sessions over the course of a day. Anytime I start a task that isn’t going to very directly benefit from the existing context I start fresh.

I don’t find a lot of benefit in explaining the project overall to Claude — I’ve deleted a lot of that explanation from my Claude.md because it didn’t seem to impact much.

I typically start a task by pointing it to 1-2 files and giving it some explanation of what I want done, and it figures it out.

Basically never hit context window limits or compactions, and can’t remember the last time I hit a 5 hour or a weekly limit.

[egamirorrim]

I'm the same. Every time I see people talking about explaining the project every session I'm puzzled. I've just never had to do that.

[majormajor]

I do something similar. I've recently started having a few "starting point" files to re-explain common context (less than thirty lines per markdown file, usually) that I can point the agent at at the start of a new session, each tightly scoped to a certain domain and/or task type. That's been nice to avoid repeating myself, without the side-tracking or over-aggressive biasing-towards-previous-conversations that I've seen happen if I use long sessions or let it try to decide on its own what to pull in from larger files or trees of files. Sometimes I'll tell it to update that file based on new info from a current task, but I keep tight control over what gets pulled into task start context.

They aren't really "explaining the project" either, but more module- or task-specific preferences, hand reference pointers, or other things like "there are mixed examples of how to do certain things in this project, prefer X to Y." I use a write-everything-twice approach. After I find myself having to correct an implementation because it didn't figure out one of these things on its own from the existing code, I'll add an entry. That also avoids bloating things with "I think this is relevant" compared to "I have noticed that this is necessary."

I keep doing this because it lets me experiment with different approaches to problems without risk of it fixating on things from a previous abandoned attempt, and particularly because sometimes I'm wrong and I haven't found the agent harnesses particularly reliable at taking my word for it from a POV of "yes I know I said we need xyz earlier, but let's please entirely forget about that."

[bengotow]

This is my usage pattern and I agree it works really well. I start almost every conversation by asking Claude to read, not write. Then once it's explored a particular slice I let it rip.

This takes a couple minutes (and I suppose I'm spending tokens each time), but sessions rarely reach compaction length and I like that I'm not trying to keep a whole separate pile of docs in sync.

[smt88]

Claude seems to read when it needs to when I ask it to do something. Did you have a different experience?

[mock-possum]

I keep a plan file that records what I’m doing, how I’m doing it, and what I’ve done so far - every time I sit down to have another session, I feed Claude the plan file first, then tell it to begin on the next unchecked todo. Every time I run into something new, I tell it to add it to the todos in the plan file.

It basically takes care of itself, or at least as close as it can.

[blitzar]

In some sessions I find claude to be incredibly dumb - other times we are on the same wavelength and everything flows.

I guess I need to do some claude.md work or find other ways to prime the session so i get the good personality and not the evil twin.

[andai]

Claude Code has a big system prompt, most of which isn't necessary for the more recent models. (Codex too.)

I've been running Claude and GPT in my own agent harness. The main difference I notice is that tasks take about 7x longer to complete if they're run in the official Claude or Codex harness (and cost me 7x more).

You would think this would lead to increased correctness, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Today I tested both side by side. They both resulted in data loss. (I had a backup obviously.)

GPT running in the official harness did a bunch of extra tests and double checking, and ended up with the same result regardless (it permanently deleted a bunch of documentation).

All else being equal, I like getting my data loss 7x faster and cheaper ;)

[jack_pp]

So you are using the API directly in your own harness without the subscription?

[andai]

Yeah, I made a simple agent based on this tutorial:

https://minimal-agent.com/

It's slightly bigger now, but here's a ~50 line version for reference. I added the missing outer while-loop, so it takes user input etc.

https://gist.github.com/a-n-d-a-i/bd50aaa4bdb15f9a4cc8176ee3...

I mostly use it with GLM via their coding plan, I got a year for like $20 when it was on sale. But I also hooked it up to Sonnet, Opus, GPT, etc.

[canpan]

I work similar, but still have architecture mds for a few selected cross cutting features. As useful for human readers as for AI.

Normally I do it exactly as you say, point at a few files, but if I know these features are involved I point at the corresponding mds instead. Its a shortcut for me to type less.

[whalesalad]

Honestly sounds like you’re not doing anything difficult. If I’m doing easy tasks it’s fine but if you need to do a major architectural project that spans 3 codebases and 2 clouds you’re gonna have a hard time without substantial context/memory management.

[theshrike79]

But that's an anomaly. I'm pretty sure you're not doing major architectural changes over 3 codebases and 2 clouds daily?

[whalesalad]

you'd be surprised.

[computerex]

I work in a completely different manner. I have a chief of staff agent, which is one Claude code instance that orchestrates work across all my projects simultaneously with sub agents. In this way the agent helps me context switch and drive work towards everything I’m working on. I only use 1 session, I compact when necessary with todos and on file system files to track wip

[nibbleyou]

Mind sharing details of your setup?

[computerex]

It's very simple. I have told Claude that it's my chief of staff and that it must delegate all tasks to subagents. That as my COS it must show initiative and only come to me for vision/decision making. I have hooks further enforcing this. It works really well because I am usually working on like 12 things at once. Feels like playing simultaneous chess. The COS agent helps me context switch/orchestrate everything. Subagents have their own context window so the COS context does not get polluted/filled up with low level subtask details. COS can effectively prompt the subagents. My main session does grow and I compact it from time to time. But since all the WIP is already captured in external state, compaction of the main session does not degrade performance.

I have used this same pattern in my own harness and it works well there too. https://github.com/computerex/z

I hooked an instance of my harness up to telegram and now I talk to it from everywhere it and dispatches work out to subagents.