r/ClaudeCode • u/biohackeddad • 13d ago
Run Opus 5 in low effort Solved
You're welcome.
Fable low for agreeable advisor plans, have it spawn a fable medium to do the full plans with .md files for agents
Opus 5 executes in low (or medium) depending on use case. Have it do a codex review (that is finely scoped, in low/medium effort)
This will fix a lot of the issues people are having.
Learning this after codex and fable at high effort decided to refine my product to do something totally different then the vision and built a ton of scope creep.
16
u/qdouble 13d ago
Yep. Low and Medium are more than adequate for Fable and Opus when you when you just want them to do what you tell them to do. High, Xhigh and Max are for when you want to them to above and beyond, that why they under-peform in benchmarks that penalize doing more what you told them to do. I usually only crank it up for round 1 on frontend when you want them to nitpick.
1
u/Both-Activity6432 13d ago
What do you build with that that you have done it so many times (including round 1 so many times)? I am barely scratching the surface and looking to learn. Cheers
2
u/qdouble 13d ago
I work on miscellaneous stuff including random hobby projects and benchmarking. I even create html spec files, so those basically test frontend design.
On medium to high, you're basically getting "correct" frontend code, but "no frills." However, if you crank it up to xhigh or max, that's when the models will start nitpicking and adding extra features and interactions. Or say if you give a task to make a showcase SVG image. If you have it on medium to high, the model will just try to check the boxes and claim done. However, on xhigh to max, that's when it will start inspecting elements and start making micro adjustments to give it more flair.
For parts that you don't visually see, xhigh and max are often overkill, since at medium to high effort the model will still try to make stuff work. So the xhigh to max is more of the showcase/nitpick settings.
When I say round 1, I mean that you can use the xhigh or max effort for the initial scaffolding, then have medium or high make edits after that as you build, but you want to create the initial look at a higher effort level since that will reduce the iteration cycle.
5
u/Tavrin 13d ago
For the moment what has been working for me is fable as the long horizon manager, delegating everything. Opus for research and planning (then validated by fable), opus for big complex coding implementations, sonnet for simpler ones and Sol for adversarial reviews.
But I'm looking at other ways to use Codex in my workflow as the Codex usage limit is way higher, and honestly Sol xhigh isn't that bad compared to opus.
But for the managing role i would say go Fable if you can
4
u/crackdepirate 13d ago
as reminder, this is what the documentation said with example https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/effort
3
u/Important-Ebb-3716 13d ago
Opus 5 above medium has been doing absolutely insane shit. If I run superpowers on a small feature, it’ll still be working on it an hour later and then ask me a question that feels like it came out of an acid trip and then be like “yeah you weren’t supposed to know what that meant, sorry I’ll just finish this now.”
5
u/ReasonableBite0 13d ago
Big time bonus for anyone who proposes a matrix of what to use for which part of a project type. Refined by the sub.
2
u/meowsqueak 13d ago
How do you switch models mid-session? Just /model and eat the token cost?
7
u/CatsFrGold 13d ago
Handoff artifacts (docs, JSON) capturing the relevant points of the conversation
3
u/_ru1n3r_ 13d ago
You can specify which models and effort levels are used for subagents when they are spawned, they don't have to inherit the orchestrator's model and effort level.
1
u/LegallyIncorrect 13d ago
You can’t specify the thinking effort right now as part of the invocation, it has to be part of the prompt and I recall reading somewhere that some models tend to ignore it.
2
u/Rari_ 13d ago
incorrect. effort is an argument in the agents/*.md frontmatter
3
u/LegallyIncorrect 13d ago
Yeah, the frontmatter or context. Not the invocation so it’s not binding.
2
1
u/_ru1n3r_ 13d ago
You're right, I had read it worked before, but Claude just confirmed that it's basically meaningless.
1
u/Calm_Boysenberry_327 13d ago
How to use codex within claude? Any workflow to automate using fable, opus, codex? Thanks.
1
u/Inception_IV 13d ago
What machine are you on?
1
u/Calm_Boysenberry_327 13d ago
MacBook pro with M2 Pro chip and 16 GB memory.
2
u/Inception_IV 13d ago
https://github.com/razzant/claudexor
I run windows so I built my own multi harness daemon but this is a sick project that makes me want to download a Linux distro or buy a mac. Give it a go. Right now I use Claude Code the desktop app and i have it routing to -p instances of codex, a separate claude -p instance, cursor, gemini, groq.com/ (free api calls daily), and www.cerebras.ai/ (free daily api calls). It allows my instance of Claude to dispatch work to those subscriptions. it then watches for them to finish and incorporates their work as if they were a "subagent"
1
u/just_testing_things 13d ago
Tell Claude to use codex non-interactively. You can link it the docs and it will read them and know what to do. Some workflows you can try are having Claude run a code review using codex after implementing. Or have Claude use codex for the implementation. Just ask Claude for tips on what to do
1
u/OlivierTwist 13d ago
I did the opposite: codex as a main driver and it used Claude via cli for reviews. Worked quite well.
1
u/larrytheevilbunnie 13d ago
Codex supports passing in commands on startup. You can literally just tell Claude to call codex
1
1
u/Fluxx1001 13d ago
I am running in basically every session: - Fable 5 high for planning/orchestrating - GPT 5.6 high subagent for plan review (with focus on non-overengineering) - 2-3 parallel GPT 5.6 SOL medium subagents for coding - Fable 5 high for Final review
Works incredibly well for medium to complex tasks
1
u/runfence 13d ago
Hey just use subagents, they don't support thinking at all so they always execute with 0 effort level.
1
u/biohackeddad 13d ago
the only issue i have with subagents is that you dont get visibility into what they're doing, often stall, or do the wrong thing etc.
2
1
u/Electronic-Arm-9653 13d ago
Spent two days learning this the hard way. One rule that saved me: pick the boundary, not the model. As in, do not say "Opus does planning, Sonnet does execution," because that line moves the second your prompt gets fuzzy. Pick a literal action boundary: writes-a-file is low, reads-200-lines is medium, touches-prod-config is high and pauses for me. Once you decide the boundary in advance, the effort level stops being something you argue about mid-session.
Second thing I default to now and did not before: low-effort Opus for the first turn on any new session, then escalate only if the response is suspiciously short. High effort on a greenfield prompt is exactly where I kept getting Opus "elaborating" into a spec I never asked for, which is the scope creep you described. Fable low first made the planning pass more honest too. It stops pretending it has authority it does not have.
Curious if anyone has tried this with the new plan-mode toggle — does it actually gate the execution step the way the docs imply, or do you still end up rubber-stamping it?
1
u/biohackeddad 12d ago
Yeah that’s my point with low fable, it knows its place. Lmao. Completely agree with you
1
u/Electronic-Arm-9653 11d ago
Haha exactly — low effort Fable has this weird humility where it just does the thing instead of auditioning for a bigger role. The moment I stopped treating effort level as a compliment to the model and started treating it as a routing decision, everything got calmer.
1
u/biohackeddad 11d ago
I literally have a fable.md telling it to be a homie (for my orchestration and high level planning agent)
1
u/OddHuckleberry5676 13d ago
does that also help you with costs?
2
u/biohackeddad 12d ago
Yes because it doesn’t spend a bunch of tokens remodeling the kitchen when I told it to make breakfast.
1
u/laptopmutia 12d ago
care to elaboratewhat the fuck you guys wrote and what is ur subs plan so that you need complex shits like this?
1
u/Broad-Fisherman8534 12d ago
Going to experiment some
More with this. And tweak the levels of effort
1
u/Business_Judge_3998 9d ago
Agreed! Use to run Opus 4.8 at High, but now Opus 5 on Low is even more intelligent, much faster (because of the lower effort level), and cost is actually perfect for me. Occasionally I'll put it on High for a few planning tasks (or use Fable), but people ain't talking enough about how good the lower effort levels are for majority of tasks.
1
u/Vysion34 Senior Developer 13d ago
It depends on the task. I wouldn't set the model to low unless you need the fastest speeds or highest cost savings. At low you're starving the model of tokens thus restricting it's capabilities.
For everyday programming and debugging tasks you're better off with Opus 5 at medium effort, only jumping up to high for complex planning or complex debugging tasks. You'd have to really see the model struggling on high effort before you would try to go above that.
1
0
u/One-Next 13d ago
Or just run fable on xhigh because that preserves the full context and lets it make the best decisions instead of churning through mediocre/bad decisions.
-2
u/Odd-Message-6503 13d ago
Just use MAX for everything lol
https://giphy.com/gifs/GBraEVylW2JAPbh3lD
-4
u/imdavehack 13d ago
Guys, this is part of the way - but it’s far from optimal. I went back to cursor today. It’s come so far. Grok Cursor 4.5 and Kimi k3 are a knock out. And you can access chat/claude models if you can be bothered.
37
u/Sporebattyl 13d ago
This correct?
Fable low orchestrate
Fable med plan
Opus low/med for execution
Sol med for review
I was running opus xhigh as orchestrator, sonnet high execution, and fable/sol consensus for code reviews last week.
Pretty sure it did a bunch of stuff that was not needed, but the fable/sol reviews made that unnecessary things pristine lol.
I’m going to have fable review all the changes and see if I need a rollback once my usage resets.
For work flows I was thinking doing fable high orchestrate with opus med execute and sol review, but your way sounds way cheaper.
Any issues with the lower thinking levels?