upvote
> No official statement and not even a tweet?

Release notes and announcements are a well-known agentic anti-pattern.

If you're doing them, you're doing agentic wrong. /s-ish-also-cry

reply
No, it's just that it's confusing, because there are two ways of using Claude Code credentials:

1. Take the oauth credentials and roll your own agent -- this is NOT allowed

2. Run your agentic application directly in Claude Code -- this IS allowed

When OpenClaw says "Open-Claw style CLI usage", it means literally running OpenClaw in an official Claude Code session. Anthropic has no problems with this, this is compliant with their ToS.

When you use Claude Code's oauth credentials outside of the claude code cli Anthropic will charge you extra usage (API pricing) within your existing subscription.

reply
But... Even when running it in mode 2 ("claude -p") they at certain points tried to detect OpenClaw-usage based prompts made, and blocked them [0]. Now OpenClaw says that Antrophic sanctions this as allowable again.

I agree with GP that this is hard to take seriously.

[0]: https://x.com/steipete/status/2040811558427648357

reply
I have never heard of this, and cannot be reproduced, and is not according to Anthropic's ToS. And there's a lot of FUD being spread around.

They don't ban Openclaw prompts, each custom LLM application provides a client application id (this is how e.g. Openrouter can tell you how popular Openclaw is, and which models are used the most).

Anthropic just checks for that.

reply
Either me or you are misunderstanding the situation. A comment from the GP link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47633867

> This is slightly different from what OpenCode was banned from doing; they were a separate harness grabbing a user’s Claude Code session and pretending to be Claude Code.

> OpenClaw was still using Claude Code as the harness (via claude -p)[0]. I understand why Anthropic is doing this (and they’ve made it clear that building products around claude -p is disallowed) but I fear Conductor will be next.

reply
If Openclaw was still using Claude Code as the harness, I don't know how to reconcile that with "Openclaw is based on the pi framework", which is decidedly NOT claude code.

From what I understand, they still had the Claude Code harness available, but were mostly fully integrated on the pi agent framework, using Claude Code's oauth credentials directly,

reply
Openclaw allows you to effectively “shell out” to another harness for your model calls, while still using Pi as your main agentic harness. This is the claude -p workflow. Tools and skills are injected into Claude and they hack session persistence into it as well.

They also absolutely blocked OpenClaw system prompts from this path in the prior weeks, based purely on keyword detection. Seems they’ve undone that now.

reply
No, if you ran Openclaw using Anthropic API as a provider, or had it use the ‘claude -p’ cli interface, you got an email from Anthropic threatening a ban unless you upgraded billing.

This was widely reported, and happened to me. You probably can’t reproduce it or see it in docs because they seem to have changed the policy.

reply
And yet running the Claude Code cli with `-p` in ephemeral VMs gets me the "Third-party apps now draw from extra usage, not plan limits. We've added a credit to your organization to get you started. Ask your workspace admin to claim it and keep going." error.

One day you're experimenting just fine. The next, everything breaks.

And I'd gladly use their web containerized agents instead (it would pretty much be the same thing), but we happen to do Apple stuff. So unless we want to dive into relying on ever-changing unreliable toolchains that break every time Apple farts, we're stuck with macOS.

reply
I think this is consistent with the Anthropic announcement. I do not see anything on this page that says it will NOT be charged as extra usage.

The most recent Anthropic announcement was not that people would be banned for using subscriptions with OpenClaw, but that it would be charged as extra usage. I think the reason this was changed three days after that announcement is that being charged for extra usage meant people would not be banned for using their subscription OAuth tokens directly against the Anthropic API with a third party harness, as they had been before. But rather both that usage, and the more recent claude -p usage both be charged as extra usage.

reply
This is called FUD, amplify negativity, silence positivity
reply
Considering Anthropic is constantly doing the opposite, I would just call it "balance".
reply
Not that I'm some paragon when it comes to critical thinking exactly, but if there any sort of proof or evidence of Anthropic "silencing negativity"? Wouldn't surprise me, but also haven't seen anything conclusive about it either, so spreading that they are as fact, is ironically FUD itself.
reply
It's also something super simple to clarify from Anthropic if they want.
reply