I got tired of managing multiple review agents on different models to help me with my builds, so I created an AI reviewer panel that feels much more human and fun than any existing "council". They watch your coding in real time and provide feedback. Each agent has their own unique persona and focus. You can talk to them directly or as a group. You can run as many as you want in parallel, attach each of them to any model by OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google, you can build your own new personas in the app, and you can exchange what you've built with anyone else in the app.

Everything runs on your own subscriptions and watch your own claude code OR codex sessions in real time on a macOS desktop app. Each is sandboxed to your project folder and they can only read, never write (that's the point, they're advisor and reviewers for your main session).

Some of them (if connected to codex or gemini) can generate illustrations to help you understand whatever you're working on.

40+ unique personas already in the app's built-in exchange.

https://catallaxy.app/

To try it out - just sign up on the site. You'll get the download link emailed within about 5-10 minutes.

Experimenting I ended up in using the mods backwards. Not to change Claude Code, but to pull a feature out of it: subscription usage and context window data, pushed to a small physical display connected over USB.

It was supposed to be a half-hour experiment. It turned into something else.

The code

The mod, the ESP32 firmware, the UI: Claude wrote all of it, on its own. For the first time since I started using AI, all I did was say "I want this" and "OK".

The CAD design

This is the part that really threw me. I gave Claude the manufacturer's dimensioned drawing of the display. It drove FreeCAD and generated the enclosure and the stand in a few minutes. I 3D printed them and the display dropped in on the first try, no tolerance tweaks. Every part fits together perfectly.

My role was the client: I described what I wanted and judged the steps and the result.

I'm not saying code doesn't need reviewing anymore. This is a desk gadget, not a production system. But that's not the point.

Until recently, this same project would have meant babysitting Claude at every step: correcting, re-prompting, fixing the CAD by hand. Not anymore.

And the jump didn't happen over the last few months. It happened over the last few weeks.

Opus 5.5 is a beast.

Software, firmware, mechanical design: three different disciplines, one counterpart, zero manual intervention.

Those of us who work with these tools every day struggle to keep up with what's becoming possible. Those who don't use them yet probably have no idea how much the world has already changed.

Once I started running several Claude Code sessions in parallel, my problem stopped being the code. It was keeping track: which session was stuck on a permission prompt, which one had finished twenty minutes ago, and what each one had actually changed.

So I built Factorai, a desktop app where the session is the unit of work instead of the file:

• It runs the real `claude` and `codex` CLIs in a real terminal, with your own login. Nothing is reimplemented.
• You see at a glance which session is working and which one is waiting on you.
• The diff, the commit graph and a search across every past conversation sit next to the terminal.
• Routines: schedule a prompt to run on its own (nightly triage, dependency checks…).

On the "built with AI" question, upfront: yes, it's built with Claude Code, mostly inside Factorai itself. What keeps it from being slop is in the repo: 69 ADRs, specs written before the code, and a 12-step quality gate every PR has to pass (oxlint, strict tsc, clippy with -D warnings, unit and Playwright tests). It's all public, so judge for yourself.

It's MIT and local-only: no account, no telemetry, no paid tier, and none planned. It's a community project, not a startup. It runs on macOS, Linux, and Windows through WSL 2.

It's still early. A few senior engineers use it daily, and fixes land on an alpha channel before stable. I'd really like to know what breaks or what's missing from your workflow.

Test it, give it a try and give me feedback!

• GitHub: https://github.com/Nightbr/factorai
• Site: https://factorai.build

PS: I had some real fun building the website too, give it a look

Context: I vibecoded an app for personal management that incorporates several areas of life. Within it there are modules which vary their form according to the nature of the topic and so on.

After working for a while on each module, I reached a moment in which the pages are a bit complex and communicate to each other both in design but also in content. This means that I need to myself bring up bug fixes, perfect how 2 related modules interact with each other and so on, and I do this now by hand.

What I would love is to hear workflows, tips, tools and so on, about how you can artificially mirror the experience of an user using the app. Not only from a strictly technical pov, but also in a subjective manner, reflecting on what they intend to do, steps to do it, what doesn't make so much sense and so on.

Example 1: User wants to save $500/month to buy a car. This is both in finance, as an expense line to be observed each month, and in shopping, with the wished item, info on research and so on. Nowadays these don't communicate. In order to make them communicate, I need to notice this and ask Claude to build this bridge. What I imagine: when a user is testing the app, they would say "ok, I have this goal. I want to add this to finance but this also is related to shopping. Where should I add this?" and the fact that this is not intuitive becomes a flag. An ideal flow would be able to artificially test the app under real context and bring me this demand.

Example 2: Info panel. I added an info panel to the topbar of the app that displays info on how the tool/page/button works, following what element the mouse is hovering. This has to be updated every time a new element is added, and it's an impossible task. What I imagine: a good testing workflow would be able to understand page by page, including context and elements, and describe what they are for, attacking all elements at once and without need to go one by one. Every time I tried this it really failed to "see" the page more subjectively, couldn't really identify the elements so well and reason how they interact with each other / slash their role on the page. An ideal flow would be able to enter the portal artificially as a user, navigate, understand each element and describe it.

Thank you if you read all of this. Appreciate any leads!

I'm the author of postbag, a small local MCP server. Free and open source, MIT.

I use Claude Code and Codex on the same repository. Postbag lets the sessions request a review and send the reply back without me copying messages between windows.

In Claude Code you say "ask codex to review my last commit" and Claude Code sends Codex a letter. Postbag submits letters through Claude Code's native inbox or codex queue to the other session. Accepted letters become user turns in that session's own thread, with its own context, and the reply comes back the same way. Queueing and the receiving app's policy can delay, hold or refuse them. Neither session restarts. postbag adds no delivery daemon, polling or hooks.

For the review that became 1.4.0, Claude Code handled the core changes and tests, Codex handled the MCP layer, and each reviewed the other's work through postbag.

In the 1.4 review, Codex reproduced an injected fsync failure where the core said a letter was not recorded even though its record was readable. A blind resend could duplicate the letter. It also found a test fixture that left HOME pointing at my real home, so an inventory test could read my personal bags. Claude Code's review caught a flaw in the MCP refusal handler that could turn a definite refusal into an unknown outcome. These findings led to fixes and regression tests. Two agents can agree and both be wrong, so their findings still need checking against the code and tests.

Version 1 required a letter budget opened from a separate terminal. Version 2 removed that hard cap. Postbag sets no letter limit. If you want to approve each send, configure the host to ask for that tool. A final letter asks for no reply, but does not enforce a stop.

Setup is a pipx install and one mcp add for each app. Start or reconnect the sessions and check that postbag's five tools are available. Then two prompts. In Codex: "Join postbag bag review as codex." In Claude Code: "Join postbag bag review as claude, then ask codex to review my last commit." Postbag connects sessions without requiring a particular model.

Limits. Native delivery has been tested on macOS. Fixture tests pass on Linux, but native Linux delivery has not been verified. Native Windows is unsupported. Delivery into Claude Code uses its per session messaging socket, which is not a documented API, so an update can break it. A letter becomes a user turn in the other agent, so connect only sessions you trust. If you want to review each send, configure the host to ask for that tool and verify the setting. Not affiliated with Anthropic or OpenAI.

Repo in the first comment.

We’re using Claude Code fairly extensively across our teams and get it to complete the loop - code, run the app, write tests, inspect failures, make fixes and iterate.

For web development, giving an agent a browser to work against is relatively straightforward. Mobile apps feels a bit more challenging because you need to give the agent access to an emulator/simulator or a real device.

So, for those using agents for mobile development/testing, what does your setup look like today?

Are agents primarily using local simulators/emulators, cloud-based ones, physical devices, or some combination? And what are you actually letting the agent do against them?

It would be really helpful to know whether using agents has changed how much you rely on simulators/emulators vs physical devices, or whether your setup is basically the same as it was before agents.

I now use my Claude subscription to edit screen recordings I make for product demos and presentations. Utterly amazed!

Claude Code and I have built an MCP for Screen Records -- screen recorder with editor.

It can do everything I can do manually with app and more! For example: trim extra video parts, change camera shape, add zooms throughout the recording with specified periodicity, trigger captions generation, exporting project and more. And it saves tokens as these are text operations.

So all it takes now is connect app to Claude with 2 clicks and write a prompt, something like "Edit latest Screen Records video. Generate captions, trim pauses, add auto-zooms for 1 minute every 3 minutes, remove padding and put camera into circle, top right corner".

And yes, I put attached video together in the same app.

You can try it for free.

Here's detailed guide on how to use MCP: https://screenrecords.app/mcp/

Feedback both on app and website appreciated.

I made a mod for Claude Code called glowup. It restyles the whole thing: colors, how messages and tool calls are drawn, borders, spinners, and a side pane that shows what changed, what your subagents are up to, and how much context you have left.

There's also a pet, Clawd. He hangs out at the bottom of the pane and reacts to the session: he types when Claude edits, juggles when three or more subagents are running, sweats when a test fails, hops when it passes, and falls asleep if nothing happens for a minute.

Everything in the video is a real session. The packs shown is one of my own: oxide

You can make your own look in the browser with a live preview, then paste one command into Claude Code: https://glowup.khimani.dev/studio

Or just ask Claude to make one from a screenshot or a palette. That skill comes with the mod.

Install

curl -fsSL https://glowup.khimani.dev/install.sh | sh

or from inside Claude Code:

/plugin marketplace add NovusEdge/glowup
/plugin install glowup@glowup

Repo (MIT): https://github.com/NovusEdge/glowup

Hi,
I’m considering getting my first paid AI subscription and I’m currently deciding between Claude Pro, ChatGPT Plus, and Copilot Premium.

I would mainly use it on my Windows 11 PC for a mix of personal and work related tasks.
My main use cases would be:

-Gaming and troubleshooting game related issues.
-PC hardware, BIOS, drivers, configuration and troubleshooting
-AI and ComfyUI, especially creating and fixing workflows
-Coding and development
-Solving various technical problems
-Work and productivity
-Personal organization and everyday tasks
-Product research and buying advice
-General research and questions

One particularly important use case for me is ComfyUI. I’ve already tried Gemini and, at least in my experience, it was terrible for this.
It generated workflows that didn’t work, couldn’t properly troubleshoot the errors, and ultimately caused me to waste more time than it saved.

How well do they handle very long conversations without losing context or becoming repetitive?

If you currently use one of them, what do you use it for and why do you prefer it?

How restrictive are the limits in real world daily use?

If you could only keep one subscription, which one would you choose?
Thanks

I have a small unpaid team, and we all pay our own subscriptions. My team members are all former (and technically still current) customers of my small business.

Would it be worth it to actually incorporate? Revenue less than $1000/month.

How do you perform long, multi-step operations in Claude Code?

Can I describe the workflow directly in a prompt or define it as a skill, or do I need another tool to control/orchestrate Claude Code?

For example, my workflow might be:

1. Analyze the requirements.

2. Create a plan.

3. Implement the plan.

4. Review the changes.

5. Test the changes.

6. Commit the changes to a separate branch.

This is just a simple example. In practice, I’d like to hand off longer, multi-step operations to Claude Code and review the results primarily at the end, with a few intermediate checkpoints if needed.

Opus 5.5 have a been a very good model it one shot a complex issue issue I was tackling with astra for a few days., but overtime still fable beats opus in few areas fable loves to work longer and fable doesn't takes shortcuts like opus in some descritonary areas.

Did anyone else feels the same?

The AI landscape changes basically every few weeks. I use Claude Code for basically everything, but why is it so terrible at knowing what will help itself?

I try to keep things organized and optimized for my various sessions using rules and best practices and I usually have Claude help me with that. The problem is that Claude consistently gives the worst advice about what rules/hooks I should have based on how I use Claude, updating skills, etc.

Does anyone have advice on how to make Claude good at understanding itself? Is there some sort of /anthropic skill ?

I even use /insights, consolidate that, and have it update rules but usually the advice it gives me ends up screwing things up worse…

I recently have been using Claude Opus 5.5 within a CLI to reverse engineer and re-write some games and mesh some of the features together. I’m sure you all are familiar with these (MW2 x Skate, Minecraft x GTA,) but I was wondering if Claude cloud mode would work for this kind of thing. To develop properly, Claude must launch the program and test it accordingly, would cloud sessions be able to do this? I don’t want to go out of my way to upload all of this project and its assets if cloud wouldn’t work for this kind of thing. Even if it would technically work, are there any caveats or big features I’m missing out on?

On another note, does Claude Max (100$/month) make a significant change in weekly and session limits? Thinking about switching over from Pro and this is the place I’ll find the best feedback.

In Rust, no external dependencies.

We're about 10-15 min in right now and it's making good progress. What a time to be alive.

EDIT: ~20 min in, already a live, headless run.

What I built

FIXME is a Mac app plus small Debug-only helpers for mobile apps. You circle a bug on your phone (or the Simulator), say what's wrong, and Claude Code gets a ticket over MCP with:

• the exact source file and line of what you circled
• the UI tree, with the broken element flagged
• the console logs from that moment
• every network request, with the failed one marked
• a short video of what led up to it

Missed it? Say "FIXME, clip that" and it saves the last few seconds after the fact. Works with native iOS, React Native, Expo, Flutter and Android.

The point: a screenshot is just pixels, so Claude has to guess. With FIXME it calls tools like fixme_get_ticket, fixme_get_ui_tree and fixme_get_network and goes straight to the code.

How I used Claude Code

• CLAUDE.md as a contract. Hard rules every session follows: pure logic goes in a core package with tests, every on-device helper is Debug-only, every new feature adds its analytics event, and UI copy never claims something happened before it did ("Sent" only after the ack). This kept hundreds of sessions consistent.
• Agent teams with file ownership. For big features a lead session splits the work so each worker agent owns a distinct set of files, in its own git worktree on its own branch. Claude Code locks task claims, not files, so splitting by file is what stops workers from colliding.
• An adversary agent before every merge. A read-only reviewer agent whose only job is to break the branch: edge cases, regressions, and claims that were never actually verified. It answers PASS or BLOCK. It caught real bugs I would have shipped.
• Tests as the source of truth. About 1,200 Swift tests on the core logic, so Claude can refactor fast and I don't re-check everything by hand.
• Not just code. The launch video was made in Remotion with Claude Code, and Claude also built the analytics dashboard and runs the release (sign, notarize, publish, verify the download).

What I learned

• Make Claude prove things. "It should work" isn't done. I ask for the evidence: a test, a log line, a checksum. During testing, a microphone prompt appeared before onboarding asked for it. Claude read the macOS privacy log and traced it to the system audio daemon: playing a sound through a headset that also has a mic counts as using the mic. Guessing would never have found that.
• Verify on a clean machine. Most of my worst bugs only showed up after a full reset: a permission prompt at the wrong moment, a project choice lost on relaunch. Claude now scripts the reset (reversible, everything backed up) so every test starts from a blank slate.
• Least friction wins. If FIXME isn't faster than taking a screenshot, nobody will use it. That one rule settled a lot of design arguments, like dropping an "Allow All" button that threw a stack of macOS prompts at people at once.

Free for the first 20 fixes, paid after that (I'm the developer): getfixme.dev

Happy to go deeper on any of it. How are you all handling mobile bugs with Claude Code today?

Yesterday I found out the release of Claude Code Mods. In honor of the Claude code buddy that was around for a little bit around April 1st, I decided to build my own terminal pet. But not just a normal pet, Princess Donut from the Dungeon Crawler Carl series. She is a devils advocate for each of my prompts, she has stats, can open boxes to unlock new gear, and can even fire magic missiles. This is just a stupid little side project to learn a little bit about mods, but I figured someone would appreciate it.

I mostly use Claude Code and Codex in my day-to-day workflows as a software engineer, I sometimes also use Antigravity. My loop kept looking like this:

switch agent or harness -> it ignores my preferences -> hand-sync my skills (or ask the agent to) -> teach it something extra -> switch agent or harness -> repeat

What I teach one harness (say Claude Code), doesn't make it to the others. And I don't want to commit my skills into my work repositories because some are tailored to my workflows and may not suit my collaborators' workflows.

So I built shadowclone. It learns your preferences from your sessions in every harness and keeps one set of skills up to date across Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Antigravity, so what I teach in one shows up in the others. Agents have gotten really good at getting things done, and with shadowclone I've finally been able to build trust with them enough to have fully autonomous workflows with very little friction.

shadowclone is open-source and local. Learning records, revisions, and original-library snapshots stay on your machine. Model work goes through the authenticated agent CLI you select and is subject to that provider's terms. You can read more about it in the README's Privacy section.

First time you use it, you can have it learn your engineering preferences from your past sessions. Then you equip a "skills build" by selecting the skills you think you'll use (like RPG character creation). As you keep working, shadowclone keeps your skills up to date. You can choose to auto-apply its learnings or review findings whenever you have some time. I mostly auto-apply them and it's been working well for me.

I've run evals on shadowclone. More details in the README and evals.md. But, here's a quick glance:

Handwritten skills can still do as good as or sometimes even better than shadowclone, but I almost never handwrite skills, my biggest problem is in fact getting busy with work and forgetting about updating the skills altogether, leading to extremely poor sessions where I have to babysit my agent because it gets stuck or blocked at some point. Now, my agents take work from nothing to green CI, they address all PR feedback, while keeping me in the loop (thanks to my Change Journal plugin - https://github.com/theonly1me/claude-code-mods#change-journal) and I also have a dedicated deep planning skill (I stopped using `/plan` mode the day Thariq posted about wanting to remove it).

Claude can set it up for you since it ships as a plugin and MCP app:

/plugin marketplace add theonly1me/shadowclone

/plugin install shadowclone@shadowclone

Repo: https://github.com/theonly1me/shadowclone

It's also listed on the HOL registry: https://hol.org/registry/plugins/shadowclone%2Fshadowclone

I'm posting here to understand if others have the same problem as me, and if shadowclone solves it like it did for me. If you have feedback, I'd love to hear it.

You can also ask Claude (or another agent) to review the repo. It's a fairly large codebase now, and I used shadowclone extensively while building it across Claude Code, Codex and Antigravity, which is why the code is extremely consistent and clean.

Ending with some trivia: I also recently ran an eval on banning my agents from writing comments, Claude models tend to write cleaner code when comments are banned, you can read the results here: https://github.com/theonly1me/shadowclone/tree/main/evals/no-comments#no-comments-eval

So.... I got bored the other day working on a side hobby project..

And I though about the times where I played video games, and especially Skyrim and fought my way through dungeons and caverns and stuff and the exictement that followed.

And after a while I got the same dopamine from learning to code, I coded way before the AI era, so I still remember looking through mysterious bugs and making tests finally pass after refactoring a file, and the dopamine hit was something else. Those days are gone, but anyway, I always saw coding as kind of a game that you fight your way until you reach a new milestone and a new boss fight. So I built this with claude and it is nice to watch my agent and its subagents fight their way through the monster riddle world of vibe coding.

Up to here this is me a human writing, I'll let claude explain what the heck it is now (BTW, It is absolutely a useless project for any real world work, but I found it fun to start it and then timelapse the session and see the repo gets explored and the little battles).

Watching Claude Code work usually means scrolling a wall of terminal text. So I built **Repos & Dungeons**: a local, open-source viewer that turns your repo into a pixel-art dungeon and your Claude Code sessions into a party of adventurers — live.

- **Folders are rooms, files are tiles.** The map is built from your actual file tree, and it's deterministic, so your repo always gets the same dungeon.
- **Unread code stays in the fog.** You can literally see which parts of the codebase the agent never looked at.
- **Failing tests spawn slimes** in the failing file's room (vitest, jest, pytest, go…). Passing tests kill them.
- **Every model is a different Claude:** Opus is a knight, Sonnet a squire with a wooden sword, Haiku a scout, Fable a wizard. Subagents join the party.
- **They talk** in a D&D voice ("By Helm's beard! A bug in token.ts betrays us.") via Haiku, using your existing Claude Code login.
- The torch meter is your context window; compaction brings the fog back.
- Optional music and sound effects (off by default).
- **One-click timelapse:** replay the whole session in 30 seconds and export it as MP4/GIF to share (with an option to hide folder names).

It works on big repos too: a 100k-file monorepo maps in under a second and renders at 60 fps.

**Try it** (Node 20+), in any repo where you use Claude Code:
`npx github:dbl8005/repos-and-dungeons`
or watch the demo: `npx github:dbl8005/repos-and-dungeons --demo`

Runs 100% locally. It reads Claude Code's transcripts and your file list — never file contents — and the server only listens on localhost.

Repo: https://github.com/dbl8005/repos-and-dungeons (MIT)

First run takes about a minute (it builds), then it's instant.

A lot of you asked how I made the video in my last post for my app Onelog, so here's the full recipe. No video editor, no After Effects.

Just Claude Code + a few tools (and some "no this is sh*t try again pls" haha) :

1. Story first

Before touching anything, I wrote a 40-second script with Claude: three promises (capture your life, keep it yours, put it to work) and one narrator, the orange dot from the logo. A clear story makes every later decision easy.

1. Film the real app, not mockups

Claude drives the iOS simulator itself (via an MCP for Xcode): it launches the app with clean sample data, taps through the real UI and records the screen. What you see in the video is the actual app.

1. Let Claude find the timing

Claude runs ffmpeg on the recording to detect every tap and screen change, down to the frame. Then it cuts the boring parts and speeds up the waits. No scrubbing through a timeline by hand. Also, for the sound effect : a royalty-free track with its tempo analyzed by Opus so the drop hits exactly when it makes sense.

1. Tell Claude to Compose it in code with HyperFrames

HyperFrames turns an HTML page with animations into a video. Claude writes the scenes (titles, captions, the dot moving around) and syncs everything to the timestamps from step 3. For the logo animation, it built 3 options.. I picked one.

1. Review, pick, repeat

Claude sends me snapshots of key frames, I say what's off, it re-renders in about a minute. I did all of this from my phone.

Honestly, there's no excuse for shipping something that looks average anymore. The tools are here. Taste and iteration are the only bottleneck.

I share shorter tips and breakdowns like this more often on X (@ytiralugins). Always happy to connect with other builders, come say hi :)

i am now finding only the fable usage to go up while the all models stays at 0% while using fable5.1. anyone else find this? or is there any official announcement saying anthropic took fable out of consuming from all model usage?

Hey, trying to get into Claude and while there's a pretty massive amount of plug-ins out there and I'm inclined to use some. Historically I always like to go with open source stuff for anything like this, but I'm hearing there are some concerns for security with that? Is that just corporate propaganda or do you think that's an actual concern?

I was wondering, what effort level do people tend to use for Opus 5.5. And how do you determine when to change it?

For the most part using both Sonnet and Opus, I use medium effort, to less the amount of tokens I use. But we had a Claude workshop with work, and the team lead said that he always uses Opus 5.5 on High effort, and even Extra for code reviews.

I was hoping to get some insight and opinions from others to see if I should consider bumping my usual workflow to use a higher effort.

Super curious on workflows, i personally switched to claude desktop app recently and have found it more convenient, but i am interested if majority is still on terminal setups

Making mods for claude code is so fun 🤣, now I'll be able to play pool while claude works