[drdexebtjl]

If you want to proxy Claude for a legitimate reason, you’ll have potentially nerfed responses.

edit:

Legitimate reasons include:

- analyzing what Claude Code is sending to Anthropic to verify its not exfiltrating data;

- selecting a model dynamically based on prompt difficulty, or enforcing a particular model;

- switching between multiple Anthropic accounts based on the project;

- filtering out credentials, PII and company secrets.

and many more.

[NewsaHackO]

Half of those don't actually require proxying Claude. Also, Claude has made it apparent time and time again that it does not want people using Claude Code as a "tool" in a workflow. If you want to select a model dynamically based on the prompt difficulty, Anthropic wants people to use the API for this. It was the whole issue Claude had with OpenClaw.

[drdexebtjl]

This forum is called Hacker News. I would expect most users not to limit themselves to using tools precisely how they were intended to be used.

[nonethewiser]

Irrelevant in terms of what sort of usage Anthropic will enforce.

[JCharante]

I mean go do it but don't complain about the company adding countermeasures when they don't want you to do it

[gunapologist99]

> Also, Claude has made it apparent time and time again that it does not want people using Claude Code as a "tool" in a workflow.

Why would Anthropic get to dictate how someone uses a "tool" (that's literally what Claude Code is... a tool in a workflow)

They're swimming upstream. Trying to maintain a rapidly shrinking moat and not being very creative about it. Making enemies of your users is often a failing strategy.

[AnIrishDuck]

> Why would Anthropic get to dictate how someone uses a "tool" (that's literally what Claude Code is... a tool in a workflow)

This is a direct conflict in framing. They clearly do not see Claude Code as a "tool in a workflow" but instead as a service that will eventually replace all programmers.

I think the self-evident quality of the various parts of the Claude Code universe is a pretty obvious indicator of the problems with that approach. It is still important to understand a party's thinking if you want to understand their position.

> They're swimming upstream. Trying to maintain a rapidly shrinking moat and not being very creative about it. Making enemies of your users is often a failing strategy.

Time will tell, but I agree that they are indeed in a tough spot. Probably not for the reasons that they think.

[NewsaHackO]

I agree, my wording was a bit off. What I meant was a tool call in a harness. Claude Code should itself be the harness.

[arkits]

Why does the Agent SDK or even claude -p exist then?

[theptip]

I guess I can see why they might nerf detected clients server side, but without evidence I would not assume it. Could also be so that 1) they can identify sus client IPs, 2) do a statistical analysis on distilled models to prove that their system prompts were clearly using unique tokens from Anthropic’s API.