Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude Code sends 33k tokens before reading the prompt; OpenCode sends 7k

systima.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 433 posts

Re: Claude Code sends 33k tokens before reading the prompt; OpenCode sends 7k

#201

Post by nvch »

mcv wrote: post #53

What really burns tokens is sub agents. I once gave Claude Code a pretty big task, and it immediately launched 7 sub agents which burned through my budget before even one of them was finished. Tried again 5 hours later: same result. If I let the main agent do the same task sequentially, it was no problem at all. I don't know if it's really just communication and orchestration that makes sub agents so inefficient, or…

I had learnt that trick, so now I explicitly disallow Fable subagents.

Yesterday, I wanted to review a complex piece after a large refactoring, and requested a review plan beforehand. The first step was 8 agents + one more to verify the findings (all Fable). Looks good, approved.

The verification step turned into an attempt to throw a party with 41 Fable verifiers.

It will find a way.

Re: Claude Code sends 33k tokens before reading the prompt; OpenCode sends 7k

#202

Post by drob518 »

hidelooktropic wrote: post #195
EMM_386 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but one of the key things about subagents is they keep all of their tool calls and exploration out of the parent context. If you plan on continuing on in the parent, and aren't going to necessarily be touching the systems the other agents are exploring, it can be worth it. It's useful in certain situations where the parent context may need the "10,000 foot" view of something without going back in there. But subsy…

They are just making the point that it makes sense that subagents would use more tokens because they have none of the parent's context.

Right, so it’s a trade off between contexts. There are two reasons to use subagents, parallelism and tailoring of context. For the second, there is the “personality” of the subagents as well as how much context is injected from the main agent. Ignoring the personality, you ideally want the injected context to be small and focused on a single task so the subagent doesn’t get distracted. You want the main agent to be orchestrating all the subagents, but not reading all the same files they are reading, otherwise you’ll be paying for the same tokens in multiple contexts. IMO, this is where prompt engineering comes in, to be able to guide the main agent as to where subagents are desired and where not.

Re: Claude Code sends 33k tokens before reading the prompt; OpenCode sends 7k

#204

Post by drob518 »

alansaber wrote: post #158
xhrpost wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a while everyone was saying sub agents is how you save tokens, use lower quality models with limited context to do simple parts of the job after a smart planning agent has put it all in place. Is that no longer true or is this just the result of sub agent being used at the wrong time?

No, you can definitely configure low cost search and apply subagents. CC and Codex do not. Not sure if this is to improve the reliability of their subagents, or just a play to increase user consumption.

Well, Anthropic and OpenAI make money selling tokens, so…

Re: Claude Code sends 33k tokens before reading the prompt; OpenCode sends 7k

#205

Post by drob518 »

leptons wrote: post #135
mcv wrote: post #53

What really burns tokens is sub agents. I once gave Claude Code a pretty big task, and it immediately launched 7 sub agents which burned through my budget before even one of them was finished. Tried again 5 hours later: same result. If I let the main agent do the same task sequentially, it was no problem at all. I don't know if it's really just communication and orchestration that makes sub agents so inefficient, or…

It's in the best interest for AI companies to gobble up tokens. I feel like every new release - Fable, etc - is just a way to extract more tokens/money.

Of course it is. How could it be anything different? Clearly, that’s how these companies make money.

Re: Claude Code sends 33k tokens before reading the prompt; OpenCode sends 7k

#206

Post by [deleted] »

btown wrote: post #76
mcv wrote: post #53

What really burns tokens is sub agents. I once gave Claude Code a pretty big task, and it immediately launched 7 sub agents which burned through my budget before even one of them was finished. Tried again 5 hours later: same result. If I let the main agent do the same task sequentially, it was no problem at all. I don't know if it's really just communication and orchestration that makes sub agents so inefficient, or…

As a counterpoint: in a complex project, Fable's "curiosity" may be exactly what you want for an exploration and planning stage - not just for the orchestrator that turns your prompt into different angles with which to explore, but for each subagent whose task is to search the codebase for one of those "angles." If you truly want no stone unturned, letting those subagents spawn their own discoveries, and recursively…

[deleted]

Re: Claude Code sends 33k tokens before reading the prompt; OpenCode sends 7k

#207

Post by guywithahat »

We've started using claude code at work and I don't understand the hype. I've been using codex and grok build at home, and they're both faster and in some cases better. Claude has a tendency to do too much. If I don't ask for unit tests and they're not in my agents.md file, then I probably don't want them. It'll try to make new libraries and classes for things that should just be a new function or a comparison check.

In our case the alternative was nothing so I'm happy to have it, but currently claude is not as competitive as I'd have maybe expected given the hype

Re: Claude Code sends 33k tokens before reading the prompt; OpenCode sends 7k

#208

Post by hoppp »

mcv wrote: post #53

What really burns tokens is sub agents. I once gave Claude Code a pretty big task, and it immediately launched 7 sub agents which burned through my budget before even one of them was finished. Tried again 5 hours later: same result. If I let the main agent do the same task sequentially, it was no problem at all. I don't know if it's really just communication and orchestration that makes sub agents so inefficient, or…

Probably both. The default subagent orchestration is designed for infinite pockets.

Maybe when they realize there is need to change this they come up with a more configurable interface for us mere mortals who can't afford to gamble their house on a pay as you go subscription.

Re: Claude Code sends 33k tokens before reading the prompt; OpenCode sends 7k

#209

Post by drob518 »

arcanemachiner wrote: post #32
mft_ wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe related to this minimalism, Pi doesn't come with most of the tools an LLM needs to function efficiently or effectively. I get that a blank slate is the paradigm, and you can add whatever you want, but it's too blank IMO.

I have a functional Pi config, mostly self-made (it has everything I want, incl. subagents, web search, a /btw command, and other misc. addons), and my system prompt is ~3k.

Exactly. It’s minimal to start but the sky is the limit at the other end. I love the plugability of Pi.

Re: Claude Code sends 33k tokens before reading the prompt; OpenCode sends 7k

#210

Post by drob518 »

agentdev001 wrote: post #121
mft_ wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's easy to add using plugins. Sure, but you have to add almost everything, no? It deliberately only comes with read, write, edit, and bash. My point wasn't that you can't add stuff, but that I'd just rather use an harness that's a bit more full featured from the start. (Pi is a bit like old 3D printing where fettling the printer to work is a central part of the hobby. I'd rather just buy a Prusa.)

I'd like to understand what features you're referring to that are missing from base-install Pi CLI.

I use Pi and love it, but the base install is extremely minimal (a handful of tools, no subagents, etc.). That’s on purpose. Sure, you can add more with packages, but that’s not the base install.
Post reply on HN