upvote
I think it depends on how many threads you have running at the same time. I have Claude writing a compiler in one window, a ui framework for the language in another, an application using the installed versions of compiler and frameworks in another, and a ui designer (an Interface Builder lookalike) in another keeping up with the framework.

Each of these has a file it listens to in ~/tmp/<name>.io and whenever one needs something from the other, they message each other via that file. Tasks can bounce back and forth as issues are resolved and tested. At the same time, I keep each busy with a list of tasks

I can fairly easily run out of my $200/month subs every week, if I let Fable be the default model. With Opus it’s less likely. If and when I do, I just have an alias ‘claude.ds’ which fires up Deepseek instead, and burns through far less money, though I don’t think it’s as good at solving problems, just MHO.

reply
> whenever one needs something from the other, they message each other via that file. Tasks can bounce back and forth as issues are resolved and tested.

Why isn't this just one coherent agent loop with subtools/agents as appropriate? If these tasks are related in some way, having a single context would probably make it go much better.

The freewheeling messaging part is where the token bloat is coming from. I suspect that for some of us this is actually the point. I think it's a mostly form of entertainment to do things this way. The next logical step from Factorio gameplay.

Parallel agents remind me a lot about multi core compute. It's incredibly easy to take a single core product and make it run much worse across a lot of cores.

reply
Yeah I keep getting “bell curve meme” vibes when I read about all these super complicated handrolled ways people have of getting multi agent setups to work… I’m more likely to be at the caveman end of the spectrum than the guru end but things are moving so fast, by the time I’ve heard about or vaguely understood these esoteric techniques I can usually trust that if they are any good then the good folks at Anthropic et al have already built it into the default behaviour of the harness. Reminds me of the obsession people have with wrapping a repository pattern around Entity Framework because it proves how clever they are.
reply
Why not use the native inter-session messaging in Claude Code?
reply
[flagged]
reply
I don't think too hard about usage one way or another -- not tokenmaxxing, not avoiding AI. Regularly use up over $1500/m without really trying.
reply
Which models do you primarily use, and can you very roughly list your process? Agentic coding in VSCode with tons of MCPs or... something else? Do you include lots of images or have large codebases? Which agentic harness are you using?

I also find that it's easy to spend like that, but also easy not to with little impact on productivity. At the current moment I'm stuck with rider + copilot (not ideal), but e.g. using GPT 6.1 luna is really, really cheap, and lots of tasks are quickly and decently dealt with even at lower reasoning levels, (added bonus of having low latency). And that model is so cheap, I can't see a hitting 1500$ at api prices realistically - not even close. But it also depends on the harness and codebase.

reply
I use opus primarily, on a mix of pure coding tasks, and log parsing / incident investigation.

I don't have the mental capacity to do a lot of context switching between active work streams, so I'm not doing stuff like leaving a big agent workflow running while doing other things.

All through claude code.

reply
Perhaps you're letting the chat context reach 100%? I suppose that's a way that would drive up spending.
reply
Nah, I'm typically <20% context before I clear and continue
reply
Same... I use the £90/month Claude sub and it's more than enough. Can't comprehend the users spending thousands a month.
reply
deleted
reply