For months, I've read all blog posts by anthropic and used Claude code for couple of big projects.
I used every single trick in the books. I went all way to organise and measure. For somethings I measured how I felt the experience was and how much money I spent after adopting a set of techniques.
So far, it appears to me that the only thing that makes sense is to have few hooks and scripts that mitigate the stupid token consumption like using code indexers instead of grep. And this is only cost related, I saw it fluctuate so much I couldn't distinguish a single thing that really made the code better that was consistent.
And to be clear Claude 4.7 is bad. double the money daily and it has been the one experiment where I consistently ended my day frustrated on how it developed poor code. It did follow the instructions, in the worst and most expensive way.
Man... It almost seems that it spits more token on purpose....
Oh yeah. And whenever you say "add openai integration it kinda keeps strongly suggesting to actually use anthropic models...
F annoying. How do I don't it does not force libraries based on commercial agreements rather than best specification for the case.
This last week I switched to use Deepseek V4 pro, and heck yeah, that's better experience
> So far, it appears to me that the only thing that makes sense is to have few hooks and scripts that mitigate the stupid token consumption like using code indexers instead of grep
Do you have any specific recommendations for this? Is it providing lists of code-related files or is there something more in depth?
Instead of telling llm the full command line to do the tests, add a script run_tests.sh, same for linting or whatever. Output errors to a file and only output the filename when there are errors to check.
Add a hook of your preference to run those items when task is over.
To be honest, I also have a skill for Claude for that but not because Claude needs it but so it avoid trying to figuring out how to run.
On claude.md I instruct it to leave the execution to the hooks instead (unless debugging)
I use rtk and caveman when in the mood but mostly to remove the obnoxious verbosity of Claude. I tested both for weeks and they didn't really saved that much money for Opus model.
I have zero base to prove but reading the thinking output, when you set the effort to high or more, it start repeating stuff over and over...
Opus 4.7 seems geared towards taking the most money possible.
Tasks that opus 4.6 and sonnet 4.6 did in X tokens, opus will take 2X to 3X and the final cold isn't much better.
For months, I've read all blog posts by anthropic and used Claude code for couple of big projects.
I used every single trick in the books. I went all way to organise and measure. For somethings I measured how I felt the experience was and how much money I spent after adopting a set of techniques.
So far, it appears to me that the only thing that makes sense is to have few hooks and scripts that mitigate the stupid token consumption like using code indexers instead of grep. And this is only cost related, I saw it fluctuate so much I couldn't distinguish a single thing that really made the code better that was consistent.
And to be clear Claude 4.7 is bad. double the money daily and it has been the one experiment where I consistently ended my day frustrated on how it developed poor code. It did follow the instructions, in the worst and most expensive way. Man... It almost seems that it spits more token on purpose....
Oh yeah. And whenever you say "add openai integration it kinda keeps strongly suggesting to actually use anthropic models... F annoying. How do I don't it does not force libraries based on commercial agreements rather than best specification for the case.
This last week I switched to use Deepseek V4 pro, and heck yeah, that's better experience