Live data from Hacker News

Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code

claude.com

31–40 of 160 posts

Re: Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code

#32
post #17

Not sure I understand how it's different from a team of sub-agents, what's the difference I'm curious?

There's two main differences:

1. Support for 1-2 OOMs more agents, to do more work in parallel

2. A phased, semi-structured approach where work happens in steps

Re: Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code

#33
post #10

A few of us from the Claude Code team will be hanging around if anyone has questions! Very excited for this launch -- dynamic workflows have been a game changer for engineering here at Anthropic. Can't wait to hear what you think.

I tried creating a workflow in Claude 1.9255.2 (1dc8f7) 2026-05-27T01:57:20.000Z

and got

API Error: 400 messages.3.content.11: `thinking` or `redacted_thinking` blocks in the latest assistant message cannot be modified. These blocks must remain as they were in the original response.

Tried again in

Claude 1.9659.1 (193bcb) 2026-05-28T16:22:15.000Z also but may need a new chat

Re: Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code

#34
post #22

I made my own knockoff of that for myself https://github.com/vblanco20-1/AgentLoom (not really usable, just a vibecoded prototype), based on the workflow files found in the Bun repo. Ive been using it but pointed at deepseek flash to do some really large scale stuff. Its a fun way of using agents, and highly useful for tasks like code review to apply some rules, or to find vulnerability candidates. Funny enough, i us…

curios minds... why to do that port?

just to test the tech. No real usage other than for the fun of it.

I did port stb_image from C to Jai which i was able to fully verify and harden and that one ill give more use. Im also using the same workflow system to perform agentic translation of a game i work with from english to various other languages, the results are far better than the commercial "human" translation services we tested. And i also use it to fix OCR issues on PDF books im ocr-ing for a data pipeline. This kind of workflow/wide agent swarm system is rather useful for many things where you want to "apply" the same prompts across a whole codebase or just in parallel.

Re: Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code

#35
post #28

I don't really get this. At this point, my limiting factor is not how quickly Claude can self-trudge through code. It's whether Claude is going to do the task correctly or not. I need more mechanisms for controlling long-running sessions and dynamically injecting my thoughts, correction, and nudges rather than faster ways to burn through my tokens without knowing if the results are going to be correct.

I think the theoretical answer here is this: "Agents address the problem from independent angles, other agents try to refute what they found, and the run keeps iterating until the answers converge." So you will be supplying the "ground truth" (test suite, detailed spec, whatever) and empower an agent to use it to guide the other agents. Currently a lot of people do this sequentially in the form of multiple code-revie…

Ground truth is not consensus, it has to be graded against what actually works for the original goal. Plenty of scenarios with AI and Humans can result in consensus around incorrectness.

Re: Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code

#36
Are these “features” just hooks to get people to burn more tokens faster?

I’m at the point where deciding what we should and should not do takes a lot more time than actually doing it. More agents just means running faster in potentially the wrong direction

Re: Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code

#37
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Boris! Thanks for Claude Code. Is there an example of how y'all use Dynamic Workflows internally that you could share with the rest of us here so that we can mimic something similar?

Hey, yep. A few things I personally used dynamic workflows for over the last few weeks: 1. Autonomously landed 20+ optimizations to reduce Claude Code's token usage by ~15% 2. Ported tree-sitter, color-diff, yoga-layout, and a number of other WASM and Rust native modules to TypeScript, improving CPU and memory use by 2-10x in the process 3. Made our CI faster, and repeatedly found and fixed flaky tests (with /loop) 4…

You _reduced_ its _efficiency_? Why do you make CC more inefficient?

Re: Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code

#38
post #10

A few of us from the Claude Code team will be hanging around if anyone has questions! Very excited for this launch -- dynamic workflows have been a game changer for engineering here at Anthropic. Can't wait to hear what you think.

Will workflows be reusable? I have a big use case of sharable and repeatable workflows for projects. Especially if this comes to Cowork.

Re: Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code

#39
post #10

A few of us from the Claude Code team will be hanging around if anyone has questions! Very excited for this launch -- dynamic workflows have been a game changer for engineering here at Anthropic. Can't wait to hear what you think.

Thanks to you and the anthropic team for developing such exciting tools! The blog post seems to position workflows for “breadth”: generating fixes / refactors against large code bases. What about for “depth”: developing specific new features and functionality end-to-end? I’ve struggled to make this work reliably using the current experimental agent teams. Does this replace or augment that functionality?

Re: Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code

#40
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the theoretical answer here is this: "Agents address the problem from independent angles, other agents try to refute what they found, and the run keeps iterating until the answers converge." So you will be supplying the "ground truth" (test suite, detailed spec, whatever) and empower an agent to use it to guide the other agents. Currently a lot of people do this sequentially in the form of multiple code-revie…

Ground truth is not consensus, it has to be graded against what actually works for the original goal. Plenty of scenarios with AI and Humans can result in consensus around incorrectness.

While pedantically correct, I think the comment above assumed that you've correctly specified the work. If you can't correctly specify your work, AI agents are just going to help you get a non-solution faster.
Post reply on HN