Similar to prompting hacks to produce better results. If the machine we built for taking dumb input that will transform it into an answer needs special structuring around the input then it's not doing a good job at taking dumb input.

Reminds me of Vercel's Rauch talking about his aggressive 'any UX mistake is our fault, never the user's' model for evaluating UIX. (It is/was Guillermo who says that, right?)

This should be all of Information Technology’s take. Your computers get hacked - IT’s fault. Users complain about how hard your software is or that it breaks all the time - IT’s fault.

The fact users deal with almost everything being objectively not very good if not outright bad is a testament to people adapting to bad circumstances more than anything.

This. TUIs are not the correct paradigm for agentic operations. They are too constrained, and too linear.

> Ctrl-F "help"

> Ctrl-F "h"

> 0 results found

Interesting set of shortcuts and slash commands.

You have a sad narrow point of view about what UX can be.

Enlighten me?

it doesn't need to exist, its all in claudes help, and easily discoverable.

It's a CLI. CLIs have man pages and cheat sheets. That's not a UX failure, that's the format. The same argument would apply to git, ripgrep, or ffmpeg.

The actual complexity in Claude Code isn't the commands, it's figuring out a workflow that works for your codebase. CLAUDE.md files, hooks, MCP servers, custom skills. Once you have that set up the daily usage is just typing what you want done.