I've made a few attempts at manually doing this w/ mcp and took a brief look at "claude swarm" https://github.com/parruda/claude-swarm - but in the short time I spent on it I wasn't having much success - admittedly I probably went a little too far into the "build an entire org chart of agents" territory
the main problem I have is that the agents just aren't used
For example, I set up a code reviewer agent today and then asked claude to review code, and it went off and did it by itself without using the agent
in one of anthropic's own examples they are specifically telling claude which agents to use which is exactly what I don't want to have to do:
> First use the code-analyzer sub agent to find performance issues, then use the optimizer sub agent to fix them
My working theory is that while Claude has been extensively trained on tool use and is often eager to use whatever tools are available, agents are just different enough that they don't quite fit - maybe asking another agent to do something "feels" very close to asking the user to do something, which is counter to their training
but maybe I just haven't spent enough time trying it out and tweaking the descriptions
Roo code does this really well with their orchestration mode, there’s probably a way to have a claude.md to do this as well. The only issue with roo is it’s “single threaded” but you do get the specific loaded context and rules for a specific task which is really nice.
the same problem with mcp. as well as claude md. most of the time they aren't used when it would be appropriate. what's the point of this agents and standards when you can't make them reliably being used by your model..
Agents use a separate context and won't pollute the main context.
So if you have a code review agent or a tdd agent checking the current commit if it matches some specs you have, they'll start a separate "subprocess" with its own context and return whatever they find to the main Claude context.
People speculate somewhat seriously that Claude (especially given its French name) picked up at some point that you aren't supposed to work as hard in July and August.
I don’t know about stupider, but definitely less reliable/available
A couple days ago I was getting so many api errors/timeouts I decided to upgrade from the $20 to the $100 plan (as I was also regularly hitting rate limits as well)
It seemed to fix the issue immediately. But today, the errors came back for about half an hour
Yeah, it has become unusable for me. Maybe it always has been and I am just trying to solve harder problems with it and more critical of the results. But it’s still infinitely better than gemini for me, that can’t do anything useful. It even tried removing the entire security system from my rails app because it couldn’t figure out how to login in the tests.
I did a test with a very detailed prompt, exactly specified what to fix and how. Claude did it, but not very well. Gemini? it got stuck in a loop until i told it to stop, gave it a hint and then it got stuck again and gave up after trying the exact same thing three more times…
And while Claude managed to get through it, it couldn’t get it right even with some help. It took me 15 minutes to write the prompt, 15 minutes of claude implementing it & another 10 trying to get it to do it correctly. It would have taken me about half the time to do it myself i think..
Insert something to the tune of: “never read files in slices. Instead, whenever accessing a file, you must read a file in entirety[..]” at the beginning of every conversation or whenever you’re down to burn more credits/get better results.
A great deal of claude stupidity is due to context engineering, specifically due to the fact that it tries its hardest to pick out just the slice of code it needs to fulfill the task.
A lot of the annoying “you’re absolute right!” come from CC incrementally discovering that you have more than 10 lines of code in that file that pertains to your task.
I don’t believe conspiracies about dumbed down models. Its all context pruning.
I’ve thought about that but always forget, good to know it helps.
I wish there were a way to persist in-memory context in a file automatically, say on each compact or git commit. Yesterday CC crashed and restarting it and feeding it all the context was a pain since my updated Claude.md file was a couple of days old. It literally went from a Sr Engineer to a Jr post crash.
It contains 100+ specialized agents covering the most requested development tasks - frontend, backend, DevOps, AI/ML, code review, debugging, and more. All subagents follow best practices and are maintained by the open-source framework community.
Just copy to .claude/agents/ in your project to start using them.
I wonder if this is also a good way to create experts for specific tasks/features of a codebase.
For example, a sub-agent for adding a new stat to an RPG. It could know how to integrate with various systems like items, character stats component, metrics, and so on without having to do as much research into the codebase patterns.
This is great. I hope that they expose the configuration through the SDK, but right now it works with Crystal (https://github.com/stravu/crystal) if you configure them in the CLI.
I'm working on a proper config screen for them that just modifies the agent files directly, and a future release will also give special formatting for agent output.
I use the .devcontainer¹ from the claude-code repository. It works great with VSC and let's you work in your docker container without any issues. And as long as you use some sort of version control (git) you cannot really lose anything.
One nice realization I had when using a similar feature in roo:
You don't need a full agent library to write LLM workflows.
Rather: A general purpose agent with a custom addition to the system prompt can be instructed to call other such agents.
(Of course explicitly mamaging everything is the better choice depending on your business case. But i think it would be always cheaper to at least build a prototype using this method.)
It says they can be "fine tuned," but it looks like the agents are all using the same model with different system prompts? This would be more intriguing if they trained a debugger model from the ground up that could be used for the debugger agent. I suspect we'll get there eventually.
the main problem I have is that the agents just aren't used
For example, I set up a code reviewer agent today and then asked claude to review code, and it went off and did it by itself without using the agent
in one of anthropic's own examples they are specifically telling claude which agents to use which is exactly what I don't want to have to do:
> First use the code-analyzer sub agent to find performance issues, then use the optimizer sub agent to fix them
My working theory is that while Claude has been extensively trained on tool use and is often eager to use whatever tools are available, agents are just different enough that they don't quite fit - maybe asking another agent to do something "feels" very close to asking the user to do something, which is counter to their training
but maybe I just haven't spent enough time trying it out and tweaking the descriptions
So if you have a code review agent or a tdd agent checking the current commit if it matches some specs you have, they'll start a separate "subprocess" with its own context and return whatever they find to the main Claude context.
A couple days ago I was getting so many api errors/timeouts I decided to upgrade from the $20 to the $100 plan (as I was also regularly hitting rate limits as well)
It seemed to fix the issue immediately. But today, the errors came back for about half an hour
Pretty rare to get a 529 outside of that time window in my personal experience, at least during the USA day.
Hopefully they work out whatever issue is going on.
https://status.anthropic.com/
I did a test with a very detailed prompt, exactly specified what to fix and how. Claude did it, but not very well. Gemini? it got stuck in a loop until i told it to stop, gave it a hint and then it got stuck again and gave up after trying the exact same thing three more times…
And while Claude managed to get through it, it couldn’t get it right even with some help. It took me 15 minutes to write the prompt, 15 minutes of claude implementing it & another 10 trying to get it to do it correctly. It would have taken me about half the time to do it myself i think..
I am giving up on it for a while.
A great deal of claude stupidity is due to context engineering, specifically due to the fact that it tries its hardest to pick out just the slice of code it needs to fulfill the task.
A lot of the annoying “you’re absolute right!” come from CC incrementally discovering that you have more than 10 lines of code in that file that pertains to your task.
I don’t believe conspiracies about dumbed down models. Its all context pruning.
I wish there were a way to persist in-memory context in a file automatically, say on each compact or git commit. Yesterday CC crashed and restarting it and feeding it all the context was a pain since my updated Claude.md file was a couple of days old. It literally went from a Sr Engineer to a Jr post crash.
The model feels like it has got stupid when you get on a cold streak after a hot hand.
It contains 100+ specialized agents covering the most requested development tasks - frontend, backend, DevOps, AI/ML, code review, debugging, and more. All subagents follow best practices and are maintained by the open-source framework community. Just copy to .claude/agents/ in your project to start using them.
For example, a sub-agent for adding a new stat to an RPG. It could know how to integrate with various systems like items, character stats component, metrics, and so on without having to do as much research into the codebase patterns.
I'm working on a proper config screen for them that just modifies the agent files directly, and a future release will also give special formatting for agent output.
¹ https://github.com/ruvnet/claude-flow
> [...]
> # 2. Activate Claude Code with permissions
> claude --dangerously-skip-permissions
Bypassing all permissions and connecting with MCPs, can't wait for "Claude flow deleted all my files and leaked my CI credentials" blog post
I use the .devcontainer¹ from the claude-code repository. It works great with VSC and let's you work in your docker container without any issues. And as long as you use some sort of version control (git) you cannot really lose anything.
¹ https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/tree/main/.devcont...
I’ve set it up bespoke but the auth flow gets broken.
Bro…
You don't need a full agent library to write LLM workflows.
Rather: A general purpose agent with a custom addition to the system prompt can be instructed to call other such agents.
(Of course explicitly mamaging everything is the better choice depending on your business case. But i think it would be always cheaper to at least build a prototype using this method.)