Actually, yes. Probably this https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/88041#issue...

They love adding flags to fix issues that users have without telling their users about the flags. It very much feels like: As long as our staff can have a good user experience, we're happy. We don't care about anyone else.

You are attributing too much agency. They just vibe code the thing and hope for the best probably.

The comments there just seem like agents talking to each other.

That's because they code their AI tool with AI so they just didn't notice what it added and they forgot about it.

The comments on this issue are unbearable.

The claudespeak immediately irks me now, then there’s also the irony of using Claude to complain about Claude

One thing worth noting is just how load-bearing it all is. Great point!

Agreed, but reminds me of the unfortunate usage of English as the de facto global standard. Ironically funny to see computers chattering in this odd piecemeal of a language. (I am a native speaker of English)

Would be interesting to see LLMs talk in something more terse like Vietnamese.

I've noticed that too. Maybe the normal Write tool has to output the entire file and this is an attempt to reduce token usage?

The Edit tool has been notoriously tricky to get right - it seems they have maybe branched out but I think morphllm started specifically with the pitch that they trained a small model to be good at editing files - most of their testimonials are about that

But I think it’s mostly a solved problem in frontier models and the bash tool usage is more likely an attempt to be more token efficient - I’ve noticed it used for making mechanical bulk edits that would be numerous “edit” tool uses otherwise

> this is an attempt to reduce token usage?

Wouldn't generating a Python script to edit files waste more tokens than using the built-in tool?

depends on the breadth of the edit. anything that involves multiple files might be better done with python (e.g. renaming a function, along with changing all call sites.)

What does this question have to do with the linked article?

Because they're thinking like I did going into the article. Harnesses like Claude expose "tools" to the agent. I usually use Cline but I'm giving up on it for this exact reason. Cline tells the model "you tell me to write a file, I'll get it done" and then it messes everything up, causes tones of errors, and the model goes "wow that's a broken tool. I'm going to write a python script to write the file instead"

Cline just recently fully upgraded their harness, see here: https://x.com/cline/status/2095897914493243512?s=20 Try if you have a better experience now!

They said as of aug 23rd it's 100% rollout. I've noticed 0 improvement. If anything a downgrade. The agents often refuse to use the tools after 1 try because the results are so trash. An open ticket that shows my biggest gripe with the write tool https://github.com/cline/cline/issues/13276

I guess the mistake count is down though. But that's because it's bypassing all the tools and just running commands

Oh and don't forget: it keeps chaining a bazillion commands together so any whitelisted commands still need approval because they're nested in such a convoluted way.

I have a hook that auto-denies when it sees 'python -c "', ' awk ', ' sed ', and '&&'

And find --exec too.

It can still invoke them in subagents and does this.

Funny enough this gets around content exclusion filters my company has set (for things like missing copyrights), so i actually like it

These file edits are faster and easier for the model to do than "regular" edits. The model is told to use them when auto mode is enabled.

The problem is when you go from plan to auto to anything but auto, that preference sticks.

There is an option to opt-out: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/88041#issue...

This won't save you from it chaining 500 bash commands with git push --force somewhere in the middle.

Because Anthropic told it to do that :-(

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49373083