Claude Code just feels different. It's the only setup where the best coding model and the product are tightly integrated. "Taste" is thrown around a lot these days, but the UX here genuinely earns it: minimalist, surfaces just the right information at the right time, never overwhelms you.

Cursor can't match it because its harness bends around wildly different models, so even the same model doesn't perform as well there.

Gemini 3 Pro overthinks everything, and Gemini CLI is just a worse product. I'd bet far fewer Google engineers use it compared to Anthropic employees "antfooding" Claude Code.

Codex (GPT-5.1 Codex Max) is a powerful sledgehammer and amazing value at 20$ but too slow for real agentic loops where you need quick tool calls and tight back-and-forth. In my experience, it also gets stuck more often.

Claude Code with Opus 4.5 is the premium developer experience right now. As the makers of CC put it in this interview, you can tell it's built by people who use it every day and are laser focused on winning the "premium" developer market.

I haven't tried Opencode or Factory Droid yet though. Anyone else try them and prefer them to CC?

I've been using Claude Code for the past two weekends and I'm absolutely blown away by what it can do! Over the last two weekends I've crushed through 230M tokens (about $140 worth of API credit) building some web applications. Personally, having tried Replit, Bolt, Loveable, Cursor and Windsurf, I feel like I enjoy using Claude Code a whole lot more.

Wanted to see how others feel about it? What do you like or don't like?

I‘m a SWE with 15 years experience.

For the last few days I have been using Claude Code via an AWS enterprise subscription. I’ve been testing it on one of our internal Web Apps that has around 4K active employees using it. With a total api runtime of around 3h, I’ve spent around 350$ implementing 3 (smaller) feature requests with a total time of 12h (4days)

Normally I am running the Proxy AI Plugin for jetbrains or a combination of the Plugin with the Jetbrains MCP Server which is in my opinion the best out of both worlds. With this setup I would have spent around 10-30$ without being much slower.

Claude Code is a blackbox that is uncontrollable most of the time. Even if you try to guide it, its often easily distracted.

Don’t get me wrong, this tool is helpful if you don’t care about money. But spending 10$ where the AI is verifying what you already told it, by reading all files over and over again is way too expensive.

They have to implement either parallel tool calling or alternatives like tools via python code.

But 100$/h is not Enterprise ready if you still need to babysit it the whole time.

I have been using Gemini 2.5 pro preview 05-06 and using the free credits because imma brokie and I have been having problems at coding that now matter what I do I can't solve and gets stuck so I ask Gemini to give me the problem of the summary paste it to Claude sonnet 4 chat and BOOM! it solves it in 1 go! And this happened already 3 times with no fail it's just makes me wish I can afford Claude but will just have to make do what I can afford for now. :)

I dont see many people talk about it.

I recently got the max plan (just to test things out). Omfg this thing feels like a true Agent system and am totally changing the way I approach coding and just doing any digital things.

I gave it a narly project to do a BI workflow/data analytics project that I had been working on. It read through my spec, understood the data schema, ran more things by itself to understand more of the data, and outputted a python code that satisfied my spec. What took me a long ass time to do (ie copy pasting data to a webui, asking ai to understand the data and write the sql i want), now it just does it all by itself.

I hooked up Notion MCP and gave a DB of projects I want it to work on (i've written some high level specs), and it automatically went thru all of it and punched it out and updated the project status.

Its unreal. I feel like this is a true agentic program that can really run on its own and do things well.

How come no ones is talking about!??

2ND Question : Is the Pro subscription worth it using Claude Code or is it game over after 10min ?

Im currently not using Claude Code but I’m noticing so many praise that it got myself wondering. Why is Claude Code that good ? How does it differ from just using Claude API ? I’m not asking for cursor or windsurf because I know those tend to throttle the LLM but when using OpenRouter through RooCode for example, why is Claude that much appreciated so suddenly ? I have never tried it because I don’t have a subscription for the moment so I’m just gathering some feedback

Ok basically : agentic tools + designed to work with Claude which make sense that it’s gonna be exploiting max potential. Thanks guys !

Hey r/ClaudeAI! This is a cross-post from my blog. I'm sharing what I've learned about Claude Code here & hopefully you find it useful :)

I've been a huge fan of Claude Code ever since it was released.

The first time I tried it, I was amazed by how good it was. But the token costs quickly turned me away. I couldn't justify those exorbitant costs at the time.

Since Anthropic enabled using Claude.ai subscriptions to power your Claude Code usage, it has been a no-brainer for me. I quickly bought the Max tier to power my usage.

Since then, I've used Claude Code extensively. I'm constantly running multiple CC instances doing some form of coding or task that is useful to me. This would have cost me many thousands of dollars if I had to pay for the usage. My productivity has noticeably improved since starting this, and it has been increasing steadily as I become better at using these agentic coding tools.

From throwaway projects...

Agentic coding gives the obvious benefit of taking on throwaway projects that you'd like to explore for fun. Just yesterday, I downloaded all my medical records from the Danish health systems and formatted them so an LLM would easily understand them. Then I gave it to OpenAI's o3 model to help me better understand my (somewhat atypical) medical history. This required barely 15 minutes of my time to set up and guide, and the result was fantastic. I finally got answers to questions I'd been wondering about for years.

There are countless instances where CC has helped me do things that are useful, but not critical enough to be prioritized in the day-to-day.

To serious development

What I'm most interested in is how I can use tools like Claude Code to increase my leverage and create better, more useful solutions. While side projects are fun, they are not the most important thing to optimize. Serious projects (usually) have existing codebases and quality standards to uphold.

I've had great experience using Claude Code, AmpCode, and other AI-coding tools for these kinds of projects, but the patterns of coding are different:

• Context curation is critical: You have to include established experience and directional cues beyond task specifications.

• You guide the architecture: The onus is on you to provide and guide the model to create designs that fit well in the context of your system. This means more hand-holding and creating explicit plans for the agentic tools to execute.

• Less vibe-coding, more partnership: It's more like an intellectual sparring partner that eagerly does trivial tasks for you, is somehow insanely capable in some areas, can read and understand hundreds of documentation pages in minutes, but doesn't quite understand your system or project without guidance.

Patterns and tips for agentic coding

Much of this advice can be boiled down to:

• Get good at using the tool you're using

• Build and maintain tools and frameworks that help you use these agentic coding tools better. Use the agentic tools to write these

Your skills and productivity gains from agentic coding tools will improve exponentially over time.

Here's my attempt at boiling down some of the most useful patterns and tips I've learned using Claude Code extensively.

1. Establish and maintain a CLAUDE.md file

This can feel like a chore but it's insanely useful and can save you a ton of time.

Use # as the prefix to your CC prompt and it'll remember your instructions by adding them to CLAUDE.md.

Put CLAUDE.md files in subdirectories to give specific instructions for tests, frontend code, backend services, etc. Curate your context!

Your investment in curating files like CLAUDE.md, or procedures as in (7) and scripts (11), is the same as investing in your developer tooling. Would you code without a linter or formatter? Without a language server to correct you and give feedback? Or a type checker? You could, but most would agree that it's not as easy, nor productive.

2. Use the commands

A few useful ones:

• Plan mode (shift+tab). I find that this increases the reliability of CC. It becomes more capable of seeing a task to completion.

• Verbose mode (CTRL+R) to see the full context Claude is seeing

• Bash mode (! prefix) to run a command and add output as context for the next turn

• Escape to interrupt and double escape to jump back in the conversation history

3. Run multiple instances in parallel

Frontend + backend at the same time is a great approach. Have one instance build the frontend with placeholder/mocked API & iterate on design while another agent codes the backend.

You can use Git worktrees to work on the same codebase with multiple agents. It's honestly more of a pain than gain when you have to spin up multiple Docker Compose environments, so just use a single Claude instance in that kind of project. Or just don't have multiple instances of the project running at the same time.

4. Use subagents

Just ask Claude Code to do so.

A common and useful pattern is to use multiple subagents to approach a problem from multiple angles simultaneously, then have the main agent compare notes and find the best solution with you.

5. Use visuals

Use screenshots (just drag them in). Claude Code is excellent at understanding visual information and can help debug UI issues or replicate designs.

6. Choose Claude 4 Opus

Especially if you're on a higher tier. Why not use the best model available?

Anecdotally, it's a noticeable step up from Claude 4 Sonnet – which is already a good model in itself.

7. Create project-specific slash commands

Put them in .claude/commands.

Examples:

• Common tasks or instructions

• Creating migrations

• Project setup

• Loading context/instructions

• Tasks that need repetition with different focus each time

@tokenbender wrote a great guide to their agent-guides setup that shows this practice.

8. Use Extended Thinking

Write think, think harder, or ultrathink for cases requiring more consideration, like debugging, planning, design.

These increase the thinking budget, which gives better results (but takes longer). ultrathink supposedly allocates 31,999 tokens.

9. Document everything

Have Claude Code write its thoughts, current task specifications, designs, requirement specifications, etc. to an intermediate markdown document. This both serves as context later and a scratchpad for now. And it'll be easier for you to verify and help guide the coding process.

Using these documents in later sessions is invaluable. As your sessions grow in length, context is lost. Regain important context by just reading the document again.

10. For the Vibe-Coders

USE GIT. USE IT OFTEN. You can just make Claude write your commit messages. But seriously, version control becomes even more critical when you're moving fast with AI assistance.

11. Optimize your workflow

• Continue previous sessions to preserve context (use --resume)

• Use MCP servers (context7, deepwiki, puppeteer, or build your own)

• Write scripts for common deterministic tasks and have CC maintain them

• Use the GitHub CLI instead of fetch tools for GitHub context. Don't use fetch tools to retrieve context from GitHub. (Or use an MCP server, but the CLI is better).

• Track your usage with ccusage

  • It's more of a fun gimmick if you're on Pro/Max tier – you'll just see what you 'could have' spent if you were using the API.

  • But the live dashboard (bunx ccusage blocks --live) is useful to see if your multiple agents are coming close to hitting your rate limits.

• Stay up to date via the docs – they're super good

12. Aim for fast feedback loops

Provide a verification mechanism for the model to achieve a fast feedback loop. This usually leads to less reward-hacking, especially when paired with specific instructions and constraints.

Reward hacking: when the AI takes shortcuts to make it look like it succeeded without actually solving the problem. For example, it might hardcode fake outputs or write tests that always pass instead of doing the real work.

13. Use Claude Code in your IDE

The experience becomes more akin to pair-programming, and it gives CC the ability to interact with IDE tools, which is very useful. E.g. access to lint errors, your active file, etc.

14. Queue messages

You can keep sending messages while Claude Code is working, which queues them for the next turn. Useful when you already know what's next.

There's currently a bug where CC doesn't always see this message, but it usually works. Just be aware of it.

15. Compacting and session context length

Be very mindful of compacting. It reduces the noise in your conversation, but also leads to compacting away important context. Do it preemptively at natural stopping points, as compression leads to information loss.

16. Get a better PR template

This is more of a personal gripe with the template itself.

Use another PR template than the default. It seems like Claude 4/CC was instructed to use a specific template, but that template sucks. "Summary → Changes → Test plan" is OK but it's better to have a PR body tailored to your exact PR or project.

Beyond Coding

Claude Code can be used for more than just code.

• Researching docs → writeup (e.g. to use for another sessions context)

• Debugging (it's really good at this!)

• Writing docs after completing features

• Refactoring

• Writing tests

• Finding where X is done (e.g. in new codebases, or huge codebases you're unfamiliar with).

• Using Claude Code in my Obsidian vault for extensive research into my notes (journals, thoughts, ideas, notes, ...)

Things to watch out for

Security when using tools

Be VERY careful about the external context you inject into the model, e.g. by fetching via MCPs or other means. Prompt injection is a real security concern. People can write malicious prompts in e.g. GitHub issues and have your agent leak unintended information or take unprecedented actions.

Vibing

I've still yet to see a case where full-on, automated vibe-coding for hours on end makes sense. Yes, it works, and you can do it, but I'd avoid it in production systems where people actively have to maintain code. Or, at least review the code yourself.

Model variability

Sometimes it feels like Anthropic is using quantized models depending on model demand. It's as if the model quality can vary over time. This could be a skill issue, but I've seen other users report similar experiences. While understandable, it doesn't feel great as a paying user.

Running Claude Code

I can't help but tinker and explore the tools I use, and I've found some interesting configurations to use with Claude Code.

Some of the environment variables I'm using aren't publicly documented yet, so this is your warning that they may be unstable.

Here's a bash function I use to launch Claude Code with optimized settings:

function ccv() {
  local env_vars=(
    "ENABLE_BACKGROUND_TASKS=true"
    "FORCE_AUTO_BACKGROUND_TASKS=true"
    "CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_NONESSENTIAL_TRAFFIC=true"
    "CLAUDE_CODE_ENABLE_UNIFIED_READ_TOOL=true"
  )
  
  local claude_args=()
  
  if [[ "$1" == "-y" ]]; then
    claude_args+=("--dangerously-skip-permissions")
  elif [[ "$1" == "-r" ]]; then
    claude_args+=("--resume")
  elif [[ "$1" == "-ry" ]] || [[ "$1" == "-yr" ]]; then
    claude_args+=("--resume" "--dangerously-skip-permissions")
  fi
  
  env "${env_vars[@]}" claude "${claude_args[@]}"
}

• CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_NONESSENTIAL_TRAFFIC=true: Disables telemetry, error reporting, and auto-updates

• ENABLE_BACKGROUND_TASKS=true: Enables background task functionality for long-running commands

• FORCE_AUTO_BACKGROUND_TASKS=true: Automatically sends long tasks to background without needing to confirm

• CLAUDE_CODE_ENABLE_UNIFIED_READ_TOOL=true: Unifies file reading capabilities, including Jupyter notebooks.

This gives you:

• Automatic background handling for long tasks (e.g. your dev server)

• No telemetry or unnecessary network traffic

• Unified file reading

• Easy switches for common scenarios (-y for auto-approve, -r for resume)

Quick pro-tip from a fellow lazy person: You can throw this book of a post into one of the many text-to-speech AI services like ElevenLabs Reader or Natural Reader and have it read the post for you :)

Edit: Many of you are asking for a repo so I will make an effort to get one up in the next couple days. All of this is a part of a work project at the moment, so I have to take some time to copy everything into a fresh project and scrub any identifying info. I will post the link here when it's up. You can also follow me and I will post it on my profile so you get notified. Thank you all for the kind comments. I'm happy to share this info with others since I don't get much chance to do so in my day-to-day.

Edit (final?): I bit the bullet and spent the afternoon getting a github repo up for you guys. Just made a post with some additional info here or you can go straight to the source:

🎯 Repository: https://github.com/diet103/claude-code-infrastructure-showcase

Disclaimer

I made a post about six months ago sharing my experience after a week of hardcore use with Claude Code. It's now been about six months of hardcore use, and I would like to share some more tips, tricks, and word vomit with you all. I may have went a little overboard here so strap in, grab a coffee, sit on the toilet or whatever it is you do when doom-scrolling reddit.

I want to start the post off with a disclaimer: all the content within this post is merely me sharing what setup is working best for me currently and should not be taken as gospel or the only correct way to do things. It's meant to hopefully inspire you to improve your setup and workflows with AI agentic coding. I'm just a guy, and this is just like, my opinion, man.

Also, I'm on the 20x Max plan, so your mileage may vary. And if you're looking for vibe-coding tips, you should look elsewhere. If you want the best out of CC, then you should be working together with it: planning, reviewing, iterating, exploring different approaches, etc.

Quick Overview

After 6 months of pushing Claude Code to its limits (solo rewriting 300k LOC), here's the system I built:

• Skills that actually auto-activate when needed

• Dev docs workflow that prevents Claude from losing the plot

• PM2 + hooks for zero-errors-left-behind

• Army of specialized agents for reviews, testing, and planning

Let's get into it.

Background

I'm a software engineer who has been working on production web apps for the last seven years or so. And I have fully embraced the wave of AI with open arms. I'm not too worried about AI taking my job anytime soon, as it is a tool that I use to leverage my capabilities. In doing so, I have been building MANY new features and coming up with all sorts of new proposal presentations put together with Claude and GPT-5 Thinking to integrate new AI systems into our production apps. Projects I would have never dreamt of having the time to even consider before integrating AI into my workflow. And with all that, I'm giving myself a good deal of job security and have become the AI guru at my job since everyone else is about a year or so behind on how they're integrating AI into their day-to-day.

With my newfound confidence, I proposed a pretty large redesign/refactor of one of our web apps used as an internal tool at work. This was a pretty rough college student-made project that was forked off another project developed by me as an intern (created about 7 years ago and forked 4 years ago). This may have been a bit overly ambitious of me since, to sell it to the stakeholders, I agreed to finish a top-down redesign of this fairly decent-sized project (~100k LOC) in a matter of a few months...all by myself. I knew going in that I was going to have to put in extra hours to get this done, even with the help of CC. But deep down, I know it's going to be a hit, automating several manual processes and saving a lot of time for a lot of people at the company.

It's now six months later... yeah, I probably should not have agreed to this timeline. I have tested the limits of both Claude as well as my own sanity trying to get this thing done. I completely scrapped the old frontend, as everything was seriously outdated and I wanted to play with the latest and greatest. I'm talkin' React 16 JS → React 19 TypeScript, React Query v2 → TanStack Query v5, React Router v4 w/ hashrouter → TanStack Router w/ file-based routing, Material UI v4 → MUI v7, all with strict adherence to best practices. The project is now at ~300-400k LOC and my life expectancy ~5 years shorter. It's finally ready to put up for testing, and I am incredibly happy with how things have turned out.

This used to be a project with insurmountable tech debt, ZERO test coverage, HORRIBLE developer experience (testing things was an absolute nightmare), and all sorts of jank going on. I addressed all of those issues with decent test coverage, manageable tech debt, and implemented a command-line tool for generating test data as well as a dev mode to test different features on the frontend. During this time, I have gotten to know CC's abilities and what to expect out of it.

A Note on Quality and Consistency

I've noticed a recurring theme in forums and discussions - people experiencing frustration with usage limits and concerns about output quality declining over time. I want to be clear up front: I'm not here to dismiss those experiences or claim it's simply a matter of "doing it wrong." Everyone's use cases and contexts are different, and valid concerns deserve to be heard.

That said, I want to share what's been working for me. In my experience, CC's output has actually improved significantly over the last couple of months, and I believe that's largely due to the workflow I've been constantly refining. My hope is that if you take even a small bit of inspiration from my system and integrate it into your CC workflow, you'll give it a better chance at producing quality output that you're happy with.

Now, let's be real - there are absolutely times when Claude completely misses the mark and produces suboptimal code. This can happen for various reasons. First, AI models are stochastic, meaning you can get widely varying outputs from the same input. Sometimes the randomness just doesn't go your way, and you get an output that's legitimately poor quality through no fault of your own. Other times, it's about how the prompt is structured. There can be significant differences in outputs given slightly different wording because the model takes things quite literally. If you misword or phrase something ambiguously, it can lead to vastly inferior results.

Sometimes You Just Need to Step In

Look, AI is incredible, but it's not magic. There are certain problems where pattern recognition and human intuition just win. If you've spent 30 minutes watching Claude struggle with something that you could fix in 2 minutes, just fix it yourself. No shame in that. Think of it like teaching someone to ride a bike, sometimes you just need to steady the handlebars for a second before letting go again.

I've seen this especially with logic puzzles or problems that require real-world common sense. AI can brute-force a lot of things, but sometimes a human just "gets it" faster. Don't let stubbornness or some misguided sense of "but the AI should do everything" waste your time. Step in, fix the issue, and keep moving.

I've had my fair share of terrible prompting, which usually happens towards the end of the day where I'm getting lazy and I'm not putting that much effort into my prompts. And the results really show. So next time you are having these kinds of issues where you think the output is way worse these days because you think Anthropic shadow-nerfed Claude, I encourage you to take a step back and reflect on how you are prompting.

Re-prompt often. You can hit double-esc to bring up your previous prompts and select one to branch from. You'd be amazed how often you can get way better results armed with the knowledge of what you don't want when giving the same prompt. All that to say, there can be many reasons why the output quality seems to be worse, and it's good to self-reflect and consider what you can do to give it the best possible chance to get the output you want.

As some wise dude somewhere probably said, "Ask not what Claude can do for you, ask what context you can give to Claude" ~ Wise Dude

Alright, I'm going to step down from my soapbox now and get on to the good stuff.

My System

I've implemented a lot changes to my workflow as it relates to CC over the last 6 months, and the results have been pretty great, IMO.

Skills Auto-Activation System (Game Changer!)

This one deserves its own section because it completely transformed how I work with Claude Code.

The Problem

So Anthropic releases this Skills feature, and I'm thinking "this looks awesome!" The idea of having these portable, reusable guidelines that Claude can reference sounded perfect for maintaining consistency across my massive codebase. I spent a good chunk of time with Claude writing up comprehensive skills for frontend development, backend development, database operations, workflow management, etc. We're talking thousands of lines of best practices, patterns, and examples.

And then... nothing. Claude just wouldn't use them. I'd literally use the exact keywords from the skill descriptions. Nothing. I'd work on files that should trigger the skills. Nothing. It was incredibly frustrating because I could see the potential, but the skills just sat there like expensive decorations.

The "Aha!" Moment

That's when I had the idea of using hooks. If Claude won't automatically use skills, what if I built a system that MAKES it check for relevant skills before doing anything?

So I dove into Claude Code's hook system and built a multi-layered auto-activation architecture with TypeScript hooks. And it actually works!

How It Works

I created two main hooks:

1. UserPromptSubmit Hook (runs BEFORE Claude sees your message):

• Analyzes your prompt for keywords and intent patterns

• Checks which skills might be relevant

• Injects a formatted reminder into Claude's context

• Now when I ask "how does the layout system work?" Claude sees a big "🎯 SKILL ACTIVATION CHECK - Use project-catalog-developer skill" (project catalog is a large complex data grid based feature on my front end) before even reading my question

2. Stop Event Hook (runs AFTER Claude finishes responding):

• Analyzes which files were edited

• Checks for risky patterns (try-catch blocks, database operations, async functions)

• Displays a gentle self-check reminder

• "Did you add error handling? Are Prisma operations using the repository pattern?"

• Non-blocking, just keeps Claude aware without being annoying

skill-rules.json Configuration

I created a central configuration file that defines every skill with:

• Keywords: Explicit topic matches ("layout", "workflow", "database")

• Intent patterns: Regex to catch actions ("(create|add).*?(feature|route)")

• File path triggers: Activates based on what file you're editing

• Content triggers: Activates if file contains specific patterns (Prisma imports, controllers, etc.)

Example snippet:

{
  "backend-dev-guidelines": {
    "type": "domain",
    "enforcement": "suggest",
    "priority": "high",
    "promptTriggers": {
      "keywords": ["backend", "controller", "service", "API", "endpoint"],
      "intentPatterns": [
        "(create|add).*?(route|endpoint|controller)",
        "(how to|best practice).*?(backend|API)"
      ]
    },
    "fileTriggers": {
      "pathPatterns": ["backend/src/**/*.ts"],
      "contentPatterns": ["router\\.", "export.*Controller"]
    }
  }
}

The Results

Now when I work on backend code, Claude automatically:

1. Sees the skill suggestion before reading my prompt

2. Loads the relevant guidelines

3. Actually follows the patterns consistently

4. Self-checks at the end via gentle reminders

The difference is night and day. No more inconsistent code. No more "wait, Claude used the old pattern again." No more manually telling it to check the guidelines every single time.

Following Anthropic's Best Practices (The Hard Way)

After getting the auto-activation working, I dove deeper and found Anthropic's official best practices docs. Turns out I was doing it wrong because they recommend keeping the main SKILL.md file under 500 lines and using progressive disclosure with resource files.

Whoops. My frontend-dev-guidelines skill was 1,500+ lines. And I had a couple other skills over 1,000 lines. These monolithic files were defeating the whole purpose of skills (loading only what you need).

So I restructured everything:

• frontend-dev-guidelines: 398-line main file + 10 resource files

• backend-dev-guidelines: 304-line main file + 11 resource files

Now Claude loads the lightweight main file initially, and only pulls in detailed resource files when actually needed. Token efficiency improved 40-60% for most queries.

Skills I've Created

Here's my current skill lineup:

Guidelines & Best Practices:

• backend-dev-guidelines - Routes → Controllers → Services → Repositories

• frontend-dev-guidelines - React 19, MUI v7, TanStack Query/Router patterns

• skill-developer - Meta-skill for creating more skills

Domain-Specific:

• workflow-developer - Complex workflow engine patterns

• notification-developer - Email/notification system

• database-verification - Prevent column name errors (this one is a guardrail that actually blocks edits!)

• project-catalog-developer - DataGrid layout system

All of these automatically activate based on what I'm working on. It's like having a senior dev who actually remembers all the patterns looking over Claude's shoulder.

Why This Matters

Before skills + hooks:

• Claude would use old patterns even though I documented new ones

• Had to manually tell Claude to check BEST_PRACTICES.md every time

• Inconsistent code across the 300k+ LOC codebase

• Spent too much time fixing Claude's "creative interpretations"

After skills + hooks:

• Consistent patterns automatically enforced

• Claude self-corrects before I even see the code

• Can trust that guidelines are being followed

• Way less time spent on reviews and fixes

If you're working on a large codebase with established patterns, I cannot recommend this system enough. The initial setup took a couple of days to get right, but it's paid for itself ten times over.

CLAUDE.md and Documentation Evolution

In a post I wrote 6 months ago, I had a section about rules being your best friend, which I still stand by. But my CLAUDE.md file was quickly getting out of hand and was trying to do too much. I also had this massive BEST_PRACTICES.md file (1,400+ lines) that Claude would sometimes read and sometimes completely ignore.

So I took an afternoon with Claude to consolidate and reorganize everything into a new system. Here's what changed:

What Moved to Skills

Previously, BEST_PRACTICES.md contained:

• TypeScript standards

• React patterns (hooks, components, suspense)

• Backend API patterns (routes, controllers, services)

• Error handling (Sentry integration)

• Database patterns (Prisma usage)

• Testing guidelines

• Performance optimization

All of that is now in skills with the auto-activation hook ensuring Claude actually uses them. No more hoping Claude remembers to check BEST_PRACTICES.md.

What Stayed in CLAUDE.md

Now CLAUDE.md is laser-focused on project-specific info (only ~200 lines):

• Quick commands (pnpm pm2:start, pnpm build, etc.)

• Service-specific configuration

• Task management workflow (dev docs system)

• Testing authenticated routes

• Workflow dry-run mode

• Browser tools configuration

The New Structure

Root CLAUDE.md (100 lines)
├── Critical universal rules
├── Points to repo-specific claude.md files
└── References skills for detailed guidelines

Each Repo's claude.md (50-100 lines)
├── Quick Start section pointing to:
│   ├── PROJECT_KNOWLEDGE.md - Architecture & integration
│   ├── TROUBLESHOOTING.md - Common issues
│   └── Auto-generated API docs
└── Repo-specific quirks and commands

The magic: Skills handle all the "how to write code" guidelines, and CLAUDE.md handles "how this specific project works." Separation of concerns for the win.

Dev Docs System

This system, out of everything (besides skills), I think has made the most impact on the results I'm getting out of CC. Claude is like an extremely confident junior dev with extreme amnesia, losing track of what they're doing easily. This system is aimed at solving those shortcomings.

The dev docs section from my CLAUDE.md:

### Starting Large Tasks

When exiting plan mode with an accepted plan: 1.**Create Task Directory**:
mkdir -p ~/git/project/dev/active/[task-name]/

2.**Create Documents**:

- `[task-name]-plan.md` - The accepted plan
- `[task-name]-context.md` - Key files, decisions
- `[task-name]-tasks.md` - Checklist of work

3.**Update Regularly**: Mark tasks complete immediately

### Continuing Tasks

- Check `/dev/active/` for existing tasks
- Read all three files before proceeding
- Update "Last Updated" timestamps

These are documents that always get created for every feature or large task. Before using this system, I had many times when I all of a sudden realized that Claude had lost the plot and we were no longer implementing what we had planned out 30 minutes earlier because we went off on some tangent for whatever reason.

My Planning Process

My process starts with planning. Planning is king. If you aren't at a minimum using planning mode before asking Claude to implement something, you're gonna have a bad time, mmm'kay. You wouldn't have a builder come to your house and start slapping on an addition without having him draw things up first.

When I start planning a feature, I put it into planning mode, even though I will eventually have Claude write the plan down in a markdown file. I'm not sure putting it into planning mode necessary, but to me, it feels like planning mode gets better results doing the research on your codebase and getting all the correct context to be able to put together a plan.

I created a strategic-plan-architect subagent that's basically a planning beast. It:

• Gathers context efficiently

• Analyzes project structure

• Creates comprehensive structured plans with executive summary, phases, tasks, risks, success metrics, timelines

• Generates three files automatically: plan, context, and tasks checklist

But I find it really annoying that you can't see the agent's output, and even more annoying is if you say no to the plan, it just kills the agent instead of continuing to plan. So I also created a custom slash command (/dev-docs) with the same prompt to use on the main CC instance.

Once Claude spits out that beautiful plan, I take time to review it thoroughly. This step is really important. Take time to understand it, and you'd be surprised at how often you catch silly mistakes or Claude misunderstanding a very vital part of the request or task.

More often than not, I'll be at 15% context left or less after exiting plan mode. But that's okay because we're going to put everything we need to start fresh into our dev docs. Claude usually likes to just jump in guns blazing, so I immediately slap the ESC key to interrupt and run my /dev-docs slash command. The command takes the approved plan and creates all three files, sometimes doing a bit more research to fill in gaps if there's enough context left.

And once I'm done with that, I'm pretty much set to have Claude fully implement the feature without getting lost or losing track of what it was doing, even through an auto-compaction. I just make sure to remind Claude every once in a while to update the tasks as well as the context file with any relevant context. And once I'm running low on context in the current session, I just run my slash command /update-dev-docs. Claude will note any relevant context (with next steps) as well as mark any completed tasks or add new tasks before I compact the conversation. And all I need to say is "continue" in the new session.

During implementation, depending on the size of the feature or task, I will specifically tell Claude to only implement one or two sections at a time. That way, I'm getting the chance to go in and review the code in between each set of tasks. And periodically, I have a subagent also reviewing the changes so I can catch big mistakes early on. If you aren't having Claude review its own code, then I highly recommend it because it saved me a lot of headaches catching critical errors, missing implementations, inconsistent code, and security flaws.

PM2 Process Management (Backend Debugging Game Changer)

This one's a relatively recent addition, but it's made debugging backend issues so much easier.

The Problem

My project has seven backend microservices running simultaneously. The issue was that Claude didn't have access to view the logs while services were running. I couldn't just ask "what's going wrong with the email service?" - Claude couldn't see the logs without me manually copying and pasting them into chat.

The Intermediate Solution

For a while, I had each service write its output to a timestamped log file using a devLog script. This worked... okay. Claude could read the log files, but it was clunky. Logs weren't real-time, services wouldn't auto-restart on crashes, and managing everything was a pain.

The Real Solution: PM2

Then I discovered PM2, and it was a game changer. I configured all my backend services to run via PM2 with a single command: pnpm pm2:start

What this gives me:

• Each service runs as a managed process with its own log file

• Claude can easily read individual service logs in real-time

• Automatic restarts on crashes

• Real-time monitoring with pm2 logs

• Memory/CPU monitoring with pm2 monit

• Easy service management (pm2 restart email, pm2 stop all, etc.)

PM2 Configuration:

// ecosystem.config.jsmodule.exports = {
  apps: [
    {
      name: 'form-service',
      script: 'npm',
      args: 'start',
      cwd: './form',
      error_file: './form/logs/error.log',
      out_file: './form/logs/out.log',
    },
// ... 6 more services
  ]
};

Before PM2:

Me: "The email service is throwing errors"
Me: [Manually finds and copies logs]
Me: [Pastes into chat]
Claude: "Let me analyze this..."

The debugging workflow now:

Me: "The email service is throwing errors"
Claude: [Runs] pm2 logs email --lines 200
Claude: [Reads the logs] "I see the issue - database connection timeout..."
Claude: [Runs] pm2 restart email
Claude: "Restarted the service, monitoring for errors..."

Night and day difference. Claude can autonomously debug issues now without me being a human log-fetching service.

One caveat: Hot reload doesn't work with PM2, so I still run the frontend separately with pnpm dev. But for backend services that don't need hot reload as often, PM2 is incredible.

Hooks System (#NoMessLeftBehind)

The project I'm working on is multi-root and has about eight different repos in the root project directory. One for the frontend and seven microservices and utilities for the backend. I'm constantly bouncing around making changes in a couple of repos at a time depending on the feature.

And one thing that would annoy me to no end is when Claude forgets to run the build command in whatever repo it's editing to catch errors. And it will just leave a dozen or so TypeScript errors without me catching it. Then a couple of hours later I see Claude running a build script like a good boy and I see the output: "There are several TypeScript errors, but they are unrelated, so we're all good here!"

No, we are not good, Claude.

Hook #1: File Edit Tracker

First, I created a post-tool-use hook that runs after every Edit/Write/MultiEdit operation. It logs:

• Which files were edited

• What repo they belong to

• Timestamps

Initially, I made it run builds immediately after each edit, but that was stupidly inefficient. Claude makes edits that break things all the time before quickly fixing them.

Hook #2: Build Checker

Then I added a Stop hook that runs when Claude finishes responding. It:

1. Reads the edit logs to find which repos were modified

2. Runs build scripts on each affected repo

3. Checks for TypeScript errors

4. If < 5 errors: Shows them to Claude

5. If ≥ 5 errors: Recommends launching auto-error-resolver agent

6. Logs everything for debugging

Since implementing this system, I've not had a single instance where Claude has left errors in the code for me to find later. The hook catches them immediately, and Claude fixes them before moving on.

Hook #3: Prettier Formatter

This one's simple but effective. After Claude finishes responding, automatically format all edited files with Prettier using the appropriate .prettierrc config for that repo.

No more going into to manually edit a file just to have prettier run and produce 20 changes because Claude decided to leave off trailing commas last week when we created that file.

⚠️ Update: I No Longer Recommend This Hook

After publishing, a reader shared detailed data showing that file modifications trigger <system-reminder> notifications that can consume significant context tokens. In their case, Prettier formatting led to 160k tokens consumed in just 3 rounds due to system-reminders showing file diffs.

While the impact varies by project (large files and strict formatting rules are worst-case scenarios), I'm removing this hook from my setup. It's not a big deal to let formatting happen when you manually edit files anyway, and the potential token cost isn't worth the convenience.

If you want automatic formatting, consider running Prettier manually between sessions instead of during Claude conversations.

Hook #4: Error Handling Reminder

This is the gentle philosophy hook I mentioned earlier:

• Analyzes edited files after Claude finishes

• Detects risky patterns (try-catch, async operations, database calls, controllers)

• Shows a gentle reminder if risky code was written

• Claude self-assesses whether error handling is needed

• No blocking, no friction, just awareness

Example output:

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
📋 ERROR HANDLING SELF-CHECK
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

⚠️  Backend Changes Detected
   2 file(s) edited

   ❓ Did you add Sentry.captureException() in catch blocks?
   ❓ Are Prisma operations wrapped in error handling?

   💡 Backend Best Practice:
      - All errors should be captured to Sentry
      - Controllers should extend BaseController
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

The Complete Hook Pipeline

Here's what happens on every Claude response now:

Claude finishes responding
  ↓
Hook 1: Prettier formatter runs → All edited files auto-formatted
  ↓
Hook 2: Build checker runs → TypeScript errors caught immediately
  ↓
Hook 3: Error reminder runs → Gentle self-check for error handling
  ↓
If errors found → Claude sees them and fixes
  ↓
If too many errors → Auto-error-resolver agent recommended
  ↓
Result: Clean, formatted, error-free code

And the UserPromptSubmit hook ensures Claude loads relevant skills BEFORE even starting work.

No mess left behind. It's beautiful.

Scripts Attached to Skills

One really cool pattern I picked up from Anthropic's official skill examples on GitHub: attach utility scripts to skills.

For example, my backend-dev-guidelines skill has a section about testing authenticated routes. Instead of just explaining how authentication works, the skill references an actual script:

### Testing Authenticated Routes

Use the provided test-auth-route.js script:


node scripts/test-auth-route.js http://localhost:3002/api/endpoint

The script handles all the complex authentication steps for you:

1. Gets a refresh token from Keycloak

2. Signs the token with JWT secret

3. Creates cookie header

4. Makes authenticated request

When Claude needs to test a route, it knows exactly what script to use and how to use it. No more "let me create a test script" and reinventing the wheel every time.

I'm planning to expand this pattern - attach more utility scripts to relevant skills so Claude has ready-to-use tools instead of generating them from scratch.

Tools and Other Things

SuperWhisper on Mac

Voice-to-text for prompting when my hands are tired from typing. Works surprisingly well, and Claude understands my rambling voice-to-text surprisingly well.

Memory MCP

I use this less over time now that skills handle most of the "remembering patterns" work. But it's still useful for tracking project-specific decisions and architectural choices that don't belong in skills.

BetterTouchTool

• Relative URL copy from Cursor (for sharing code references)

  • I have VSCode open to more easily find the files I’m looking for and I can double tap CAPS-LOCK, then BTT inputs the shortcut to copy relative URL, transforms the clipboard contents by prepending an ‘@’ symbol, focuses the terminal, and then pastes the file path. All in one.

• Double-tap hotkeys to quickly focus apps (CMD+CMD = Claude Code, OPT+OPT = Browser)

• Custom gestures for common actions

Honestly, the time savings on just not fumbling between apps is worth the BTT purchase alone.

Scripts for Everything

If there's any annoying tedious task, chances are there's a script for that:

• Command-line tool to generate mock test data. Before using Claude code, it was extremely annoying to generate mock data because I would have to make a submission to a form that had about a 120 questions Just to generate one single test submission.

• Authentication testing scripts (get tokens, test routes)

• Database resetting and seeding

• Schema diff checker before migrations

• Automated backup and restore for dev database

Pro tip: When Claude helps you write a useful script, immediately document it in CLAUDE.md or attach it to a relevant skill. Future you will thank past you.

Documentation (Still Important, But Evolved)

I think next to planning, documentation is almost just as important. I document everything as I go in addition to the dev docs that are created for each task or feature. From system architecture to data flow diagrams to actual developer docs and APIs, just to name a few.

But here's what changed: Documentation now works WITH skills, not instead of them.

Skills contain: Reusable patterns, best practices, how-to guides Documentation contains: System architecture, data flows, API references, integration points

For example:

• "How to create a controller" → backend-dev-guidelines skill

• "How our workflow engine works" → Architecture documentation

• "How to write React components" → frontend-dev-guidelines skill

• "How notifications flow through the system" → Data flow diagram + notification skill

I still have a LOT of docs (850+ markdown files), but now they're laser-focused on project-specific architecture rather than repeating general best practices that are better served by skills.

You don't necessarily have to go that crazy, but I highly recommend setting up multiple levels of documentation. Ones for broad architectural overview of specific services, wherein you'll include paths to other documentation that goes into more specifics of different parts of the architecture. It will make a major difference on Claude's ability to easily navigate your codebase.

Prompt Tips

When you're writing out your prompt, you should try to be as specific as possible about what you are wanting as a result. Once again, you wouldn't ask a builder to come out and build you a new bathroom without at least discussing plans, right?

"You're absolutely right! Shag carpet probably is not the best idea to have in a bathroom."

Sometimes you might not know the specifics, and that's okay. If you don't ask questions, tell Claude to research and come back with several potential solutions. You could even use a specialized subagent or use any other AI chat interface to do your research. The world is your oyster. I promise you this will pay dividends because you will be able to look at the plan that Claude has produced and have a better idea if it's good, bad, or needs adjustments. Otherwise, you're just flying blind, pure vibe-coding. Then you're gonna end up in a situation where you don't even know what context to include because you don't know what files are related to the thing you're trying to fix.

Try not to lead in your prompts if you want honest, unbiased feedback. If you're unsure about something Claude did, ask about it in a neutral way instead of saying, "Is this good or bad?" Claude tends to tell you what it thinks you want to hear, so leading questions can skew the response. It's better to just describe the situation and ask for thoughts or alternatives. That way, you'll get a more balanced answer.

Agents, Hooks, and Slash Commands (The Holy Trinity)

Agents

I've built a small army of specialized agents:

Quality Control:

• code-architecture-reviewer - Reviews code for best practices adherence

• build-error-resolver - Systematically fixes TypeScript errors

• refactor-planner - Creates comprehensive refactoring plans

Testing & Debugging:

• auth-route-tester - Tests backend routes with authentication

• auth-route-debugger - Debugs 401/403 errors and route issues

• frontend-error-fixer - Diagnoses and fixes frontend errors

Planning & Strategy:

• strategic-plan-architect - Creates detailed implementation plans

• plan-reviewer - Reviews plans before implementation

• documentation-architect - Creates/updates documentation

Specialized:

• frontend-ux-designer - Fixes styling and UX issues

• web-research-specialist - Researches issues along with many other things on the web

• reactour-walkthrough-designer - Creates UI tours

The key with agents is to give them very specific roles and clear instructions on what to return. I learned this the hard way after creating agents that would go off and do who-knows-what and come back with "I fixed it!" without telling me what they fixed.

Hooks (Covered Above)

The hook system is honestly what ties everything together. Without hooks:

• Skills sit unused

• Errors slip through

• Code is inconsistently formatted

• No automatic quality checks

With hooks:

• Skills auto-activate

• Zero errors left behind

• Automatic formatting

• Quality awareness built-in

Slash Commands

I have quite a few custom slash commands, but these are the ones I use most:

Planning & Docs:

• /dev-docs - Create comprehensive strategic plan

• /dev-docs-update - Update dev docs before compaction

• /create-dev-docs - Convert approved plan to dev doc files

Quality & Review:

• /code-review - Architectural code review

• /build-and-fix - Run builds and fix all errors

Testing:

• /route-research-for-testing - Find affected routes and launch tests

• /test-route - Test specific authenticated routes

The beauty of slash commands is they expand into full prompts, so you can pack a ton of context and instructions into a simple command. Way better than typing out the same instructions every time.

Conclusion

After six months of hardcore use, here's what I've learned:

The Essentials:

1. Plan everything - Use planning mode or strategic-plan-architect

2. Skills + Hooks - Auto-activation is the only way skills actually work reliably

3. Dev docs system - Prevents Claude from losing the plot

4. Code reviews - Have Claude review its own work

5. PM2 for backend - Makes debugging actually bearable

The Nice-to-Haves:

• Specialized agents for common tasks

• Slash commands for repeated workflows

• Comprehensive documentation

• Utility scripts attached to skills

• Memory MCP for decisions

And that's about all I can think of for now. Like I said, I'm just some guy, and I would love to hear tips and tricks from everybody else, as well as any criticisms. Because I'm always up for improving upon my workflow. I honestly just wanted to share what's working for me with other people since I don't really have anybody else to share this with IRL (my team is very small, and they are all very slow getting on the AI train).

If you made it this far, thanks for taking the time to read. If you have questions about any of this stuff or want more details on implementation, happy to share. The hooks and skills system especially took some trial and error to get right, but now that it's working, I can't imagine going back.

TL;DR: Built an auto-activation system for Claude Code skills using TypeScript hooks, created a dev docs workflow to prevent context loss, and implemented PM2 + automated error checking. Result: Solo rewrote 300k LOC in 6 months with consistent quality.

6 months ago: "AI coding tools are fine but overhyped"

2 weeks ago: Cancelled Cursor, went all-in on Claude Code

Now: Claude Code writes literally all my code

I just tell it what I want in plain English. And it just... builds it. Everything. Even the tests I would've forgotten to write.

Today a dev friend asked how I'm suddenly shipping so fast. Halfway through explaining Claude Code, they said I sound exactly like those crypto bros from 2021.

They're not wrong. I hear myself saying things like:

• "It's revolutionary"

• "Changes everything"

• "You just have to try it"

• "No this time it's different"

• "I'm not exaggerating, I swear"

I hate myself for this.

But seriously, how else do I explain that after 10+ years of coding, I'd rather describe features than write them?

I still love programming. I just love delegating it more.

I've been using Claude Code extensively since its release, and despite not being a coding expert, the results have been incredible. It's so effective that I've been able to handle bug fixes and development tasks that I previously outsourced to freelancers.

To put this in perspective: I recently posted a job on Upwork to rebuild my app (a straightforward CRUD application). The quotes I received started at $1,000 with a timeline of 1-2 weeks minimum. Instead, I decided to try Claude Code.

I provided it with my old codebase and backend API documentation. Within 2 hours of iterating and refining, I had a fully functional app with an excellent design. There were a few minor bugs, but they were quickly resolved. The final product matched or exceeded what I would have received from a freelancer. And the thing here is, I didn't even see the codebase. Just chatting.

It's not just this case, it's with many other things.

The economics are mind-blowing. For $200/month on the max plan, I have access to this capability. Previously, feature releases and fixes took weeks due to freelancer availability and turnaround times. Now I can implement new features in days, sometimes hours. When I have an idea, I can ship it within days (following proper release practices, of course).

This experience has me wondering about the future of programming and AI. The productivity gains are transformative, and I can't help but think about what the landscape will look like in the coming months as these tools continue to evolve. I imagine others have had similar experiences - if this technology disappeared overnight, the productivity loss would be staggering.

I picked up the Claude Pro MAX subscription about a week ago specifically to use Claude Code, since I’m doing a massive overhaul of a production web app. After putting it through serious daily use, 12 hours a day without stopping, I’ve been incredibly impressed. Not once have I hit a rate limit.

It’s obviously not perfect. It has a tendency to go off track, especially early on when it would cheat its way through problems by creating fake solutions like mock components or made-up data instead of solving the real issue. That started to change once I had it write to a CLAUDE.md file with clear instructions on what not to do.

Claude Code is an absolute beast. It handles large tasks with ease, and when used properly, it’s incredibly powerful. After a lot of trial and error, I’ve picked up a few tricks that made a major difference in productivity and output quality. Here’s what worked best for me:

1. Plan, plan, and then plan again

When implementing large features or changes, don’t just jump in. Have Claude analyze your existing code or documentation and write out a plan in a markdown file. The results are significantly better when it’s working from a structured roadmap.
I also pay for OpenAI’s Plus plan and use my 50 weekly o3 messages to help with the planning phase. The o3 model is especially good at understanding nuance compared to any other model I’ve tried.

2. Rules are your best friend

Claude was frustrating at first, especially when it kept repeating the same mistakes. That changed once I started maintaining a CLAUDE.md rules file. (You can use # to quickly write to it.)

I’m working with the latest version of a package that includes breaking changes Claude won’t be aware of. So I wrote clear instructions in the file to always check the documentation before working with any related code. That alone drastically improved the results.

3. Use /compact early and often

If you are in the middle of a large feature and let Claude hit its auto-compact limit, it can lose important context and spiral out of control by recreating files or forgetting what it already did.
Now, I manually run /compact before that happens and give it specific instructions on what I want to accomplish next. Doing this consistently has made the entire experience much more stable.

Just following these three rules improved everything. I’ve been running Claude Code non-stop and have been blown away by how much it can accomplish in a single run. Even when I try to break a big feature into smaller steps, it often completes the whole thing smoothly without hesitation.

Claude Code is amazing—until you hit that one bug it just can’t fucking tackle. You’re too lazy to fix it yourself, so you keep going, and it gets worse, and worse, and worse, until you finally have to do it—going from 368 lines of fucking mess back down to the 42 it should have been in the first place.

Before AI, I was going 50 km an hour—nice and steady. With AI, I’m flying at 120, until it slams to a fucking halt and I’m stuck pushing the car up the road at 3 km an hour.

Am I alone in this?

I feel like I read more about how amazing it is and less about what people have made with it. Any interesting working projects that were built with the help of claude code? The hype seems real but I barely see any actual evidence of things people have made.

I used to think cursor was pretty average and not super helpful, but Claude code with opus 4 takes longer and seems to be a lot better at generating quality code without needing to spec every single requirement.

I still do review the code but I feel like I’m trusting it more because the quality is better.

Interested to hear your thoughts

I’ve been watching my team use Claude Code for a few months now, and there’s this weird pattern. Two developers with similar experience working on similar tasks, but one consistently ships features in hours while the other is still debugging. At first I thought it was just luck or skill differences. Then I realized what was actually happening, it’s their instruction library. I’ve been lurking in Discord servers and GitHub repos, and there’s this underground collection of power users sharing CLAUDE.md templates and slash commands, we saw many in this subreddit already. They’re hoarding workflows like trading cards:

• Commands that automatically debug and fix entire codebases

• CLAUDE.md files that turn Claude into domain experts for specific frameworks

• Prompt templates that trigger hidden thinking modes

Meanwhile, most people are still typing “help me fix this bug” and wondering why their results suck. One person mentioned their C++ colleague solved a 4-year-old bug in minutes using a custom debugging workflow. Another has slash commands that turn 45-minute manual processes into 2-minute automated ones. The people building these instruction libraries aren’t necessarily better programmers - they just understand that Claude Code inherits your bash environment and can leverage complex tools through MCP. It’s like having cheat codes while everyone else plays on hard mode. As one developer put it: “90% of traditional programming skills are becoming commoditized while the remaining 10% becomes worth 1000x more.” That 10% isn’t coding, it’s knowing how to design distributed system, how to architect AI workflows. The people building powerful instruction sets today are creating an unfair advantage that compounds over time. Every custom command they write, every CLAUDE.md pattern they discover, widens the productivity gap. Are we seeing the emergence of a new class of developer? The ones who can orchestrate AI vs those who just prompt it?

Are you generous enough to share your secret sauce?

Edit: sorry if I didn’t make myself clear, I was not asking you to share your instructions, my post is more about philosophical questions about the future, when CC become general available and the only edges will be the secret/powerful instructions.

So last night I was giving Claude Code a try as I got tired of Claude doing so many mistakes over and over again and not following my prompt(s) properly.

The difference is crazy: While Claude Code does cost a lot more in comparison, as it uses the API, I get way better results and can fix issues faster.

Can anybody else relate to this, and why is this happening? Shouldn't Claude and Claude Code do the same (Check project files, find the issues mentioned and fix them, etc.)? Claude Code definitely excels at this!

Edit: Many of you are asking for a repo so I will make an effort to get one up in the next couple days. All of this is a part of a work project at the moment, so I have to take some time to copy everything into a fresh project and scrub any identifying info. I will post the link here when it's up. You can also follow me and I will post it on my profile so you get notified. Thank you all for the kind comments. I'm happy to share this info with others since I don't get much chance to do so in my day-to-day.

Edit (final?): I bit the bullet and spent the afternoon getting a github repo up for you guys. Just made a post with some additional info here or you can go straight to the source:

🎯 Repository: https://github.com/diet103/claude-code-infrastructure-showcase

Quick tip from a fellow lazy person: You can throw this book of a post into one of the many text-to-speech AI services like ElevenLabs Reader or Natural Reader and have it read the post for you :)

Disclaimer

I made a post about six months ago sharing my experience after a week of hardcore use with Claude Code. It's now been about six months of hardcore use, and I would like to share some more tips, tricks, and word vomit with you all. I may have went a little overboard here so strap in, grab a coffee, sit on the toilet or whatever it is you do when doom-scrolling reddit.

I want to start the post off with a disclaimer: all the content within this post is merely me sharing what setup is working best for me currently and should not be taken as gospel or the only correct way to do things. It's meant to hopefully inspire you to improve your setup and workflows with AI agentic coding. I'm just a guy, and this is just like, my opinion, man.

Also, I'm on the 20x Max plan, so your mileage may vary. And if you're looking for vibe-coding tips, you should look elsewhere. If you want the best out of CC, then you should be working together with it: planning, reviewing, iterating, exploring different approaches, etc.

Quick Overview

After 6 months of pushing Claude Code to its limits (solo rewriting 300k LOC), here's the system I built:

• Skills that actually auto-activate when needed

• Dev docs workflow that prevents Claude from losing the plot

• PM2 + hooks for zero-errors-left-behind

• Army of specialized agents for reviews, testing, and planning Let's get into it.

Background

I'm a software engineer who has been working on production web apps for the last seven years or so. And I have fully embraced the wave of AI with open arms. I'm not too worried about AI taking my job anytime soon, as it is a tool that I use to leverage my capabilities. In doing so, I have been building MANY new features and coming up with all sorts of new proposal presentations put together with Claude and GPT-5 Thinking to integrate new AI systems into our production apps. Projects I would have never dreamt of having the time to even consider before integrating AI into my workflow. And with all that, I'm giving myself a good deal of job security and have become the AI guru at my job since everyone else is about a year or so behind on how they're integrating AI into their day-to-day.

With my newfound confidence, I proposed a pretty large redesign/refactor of one of our web apps used as an internal tool at work. This was a pretty rough college student-made project that was forked off another project developed by me as an intern (created about 7 years ago and forked 4 years ago). This may have been a bit overly ambitious of me since, to sell it to the stakeholders, I agreed to finish a top-down redesign of this fairly decent-sized project (~100k LOC) in a matter of two to three months...all by myself. I knew going in that I was going to have to put in extra hours to get this done, even with the help of CC. But deep down, I know it's going to be a hit, automating several manual processes and saving a lot of time for a lot of people at the company.

It's now six months later... yeah, I probably should not have agreed to this timeline. I have tested the limits of both Claude as well as my own sanity trying to get this thing done. I completely scrapped the old frontend, as everything was seriously outdated and I wanted to play with the latest and greatest. I'm talkin' React 16 JS → React 19 TypeScript, React Query v2 → TanStack Query v5, React Router v4 w/ hashrouter → TanStack Router w/ file-based routing, Material UI v4 → MUI v7, all with strict adherence to best practices. The project is now at ~300-400k LOC and my life expectancy ~5 years shorter. It's finally ready to put up for testing, and I am incredibly happy with how things have turned out.

This used to be a project with insurmountable tech debt, ZERO test coverage, HORRIBLE developer experience (testing things was an absolute nightmare), and all sorts of jank going on. I addressed all of those issues with decent test coverage, manageable tech debt, and implemented a command-line tool for generating test data as well as a dev mode to test different features on the frontend. During this time, I have gotten to know CC's abilities and what to expect out of it.

A Note on Quality and Consistency

I've noticed a recurring theme in forums and discussions - people experiencing frustration with usage limits and concerns about output quality declining over time. I want to be clear up front: I'm not here to dismiss those experiences or claim it's simply a matter of "doing it wrong." Everyone's use cases and contexts are different, and valid concerns deserve to be heard.

That said, I want to share what's been working for me. In my experience, CC's output has actually improved significantly over the last couple of months, and I believe that's largely due to the workflow I've been constantly refining. My hope is that if you take even a small bit of inspiration from my system and integrate it into your CC workflow, you'll give it a better chance at producing quality output that you're happy with.

Now, let's be real - there are absolutely times when Claude completely misses the mark and produces suboptimal code. This can happen for various reasons. First, AI models are stochastic, meaning you can get widely varying outputs from the same input. Sometimes the randomness just doesn't go your way, and you get an output that's legitimately poor quality through no fault of your own. Other times, it's about how the prompt is structured. There can be significant differences in outputs given slightly different wording because the model takes things quite literally. If you misword or phrase something ambiguously, it can lead to vastly inferior results.

Sometimes You Just Need to Step In

Look, AI is incredible, but it's not magic. There are certain problems where pattern recognition and human intuition just win. If you've spent 30 minutes watching Claude struggle with something that you could fix in 2 minutes, just fix it yourself. No shame in that. Think of it like teaching someone to ride a bike - sometimes you just need to steady the handlebars for a second before letting go again.

I've seen this especially with logic puzzles or problems that require real-world common sense. AI can brute-force a lot of things, but sometimes a human just "gets it" faster. Don't let stubbornness or some misguided sense of "but the AI should do everything" waste your time. Step in, fix the issue, and keep moving.

I've had my fair share of terrible prompting, which usually happens towards the end of the day where I'm getting lazy and I'm not putting that much effort into my prompts. And the results really show. So next time you are having these kinds of issues where you think the output is way worse these days because you think Anthropic shadow-nerfed Claude, I encourage you to take a step back and reflect on how you are prompting.

Re-prompt often. You can hit double-esc to bring up your previous prompts and select one to branch from. You'd be amazed how often you can get way better results armed with the knowledge of what you don't want when giving the same prompt. All that to say, there can be many reasons why the output quality seems to be worse, and it's good to self-reflect and consider what you can do to give it the best possible chance to get the output you want.

As some wise dude somewhere probably said, "Ask not what Claude can do for you, ask what context you can give to Claude" ~ Wise Dude

Alright, I'm going to step down from my soapbox now and get on to the good stuff.

My System

I've implemented a lot changes to my workflow as it relates to CC over the last 6 months, and the results have been pretty great, IMO.

Skills Auto-Activation System (Game Changer!)

This one deserves its own section because it completely transformed how I work with Claude Code.

The Problem

So Anthropic releases this Skills feature, and I'm thinking "this looks awesome!" The idea of having these portable, reusable guidelines that Claude can reference sounded perfect for maintaining consistency across my massive codebase. I spent a good chunk of time with Claude writing up comprehensive skills for frontend development, backend development, database operations, workflow management, etc. We're talking thousands of lines of best practices, patterns, and examples.

And then... nothing. Claude just wouldn't use them. I'd literally use the exact keywords from the skill descriptions. Nothing. I'd work on files that should trigger the skills. Nothing. It was incredibly frustrating because I could see the potential, but the skills just sat there like expensive decorations.

The "Aha!" Moment

That's when I had the idea of using hooks. If Claude won't automatically use skills, what if I built a system that MAKES it check for relevant skills before doing anything?

So I dove into Claude Code's hook system and built a multi-layered auto-activation architecture with TypeScript hooks. And it actually works!

How It Works

I created two main hooks:

1. UserPromptSubmit Hook (runs BEFORE Claude sees your message):

• Analyzes your prompt for keywords and intent patterns

• Checks which skills might be relevant

• Injects a formatted reminder into Claude's context

• Now when I ask "how does the layout system work?" Claude sees a big "🎯 SKILL ACTIVATION CHECK - Use project-catalog-developer skill" (project catalog is a large complex data grid based feature on my front end) before even reading my question

2. Stop Event Hook (runs AFTER Claude finishes responding):

• Analyzes which files were edited

• Checks for risky patterns (try-catch blocks, database operations, async functions)

• Displays a gentle self-check reminder

• "Did you add error handling? Are Prisma operations using the repository pattern?"

• Non-blocking, just keeps Claude aware without being annoying

skill-rules.json Configuration

I created a central configuration file that defines every skill with:

• Keywords: Explicit topic matches ("layout", "workflow", "database")

• Intent patterns: Regex to catch actions ("(create|add).*?(feature|route)")

• File path triggers: Activates based on what file you're editing

• Content triggers: Activates if file contains specific patterns (Prisma imports, controllers, etc.)

Example snippet:

{
  "backend-dev-guidelines": {
    "type": "domain",
    "enforcement": "suggest",
    "priority": "high",
    "promptTriggers": {
      "keywords": ["backend", "controller", "service", "API", "endpoint"],
      "intentPatterns": [
        "(create|add).*?(route|endpoint|controller)",
        "(how to|best practice).*?(backend|API)"
      ]
    },
    "fileTriggers": {
      "pathPatterns": ["backend/src/**/*.ts"],
      "contentPatterns": ["router\\.", "export.*Controller"]
    }
  }
}

The Results

Now when I work on backend code, Claude automatically:

1. Sees the skill suggestion before reading my prompt

2. Loads the relevant guidelines

3. Actually follows the patterns consistently

4. Self-checks at the end via gentle reminders

The difference is night and day. No more inconsistent code. No more "wait, Claude used the old pattern again." No more manually telling it to check the guidelines every single time.

Following Anthropic's Best Practices (The Hard Way)

After getting the auto-activation working, I dove deeper and found Anthropic's official best practices docs. Turns out I was doing it wrong because they recommend keeping the main SKILL.md file under 500 lines and using progressive disclosure with resource files.

Whoops. My frontend-dev-guidelines skill was 1,500+ lines. And I had a couple other skills over 1,000 lines. These monolithic files were defeating the whole purpose of skills (loading only what you need).

So I restructured everything:

• frontend-dev-guidelines: 398-line main file + 10 resource files

• backend-dev-guidelines: 304-line main file + 11 resource files

Now Claude loads the lightweight main file initially, and only pulls in detailed resource files when actually needed. Token efficiency improved 40-60% for most queries.

Skills I've Created

Here's my current skill lineup:

Guidelines & Best Practices:

• backend-dev-guidelines - Routes → Controllers → Services → Repositories

• frontend-dev-guidelines - React 19, MUI v7, TanStack Query/Router patterns

• skill-developer - Meta-skill for creating more skills

Domain-Specific:

• workflow-developer - Complex workflow engine patterns

• notification-developer - Email/notification system

• database-verification - Prevent column name errors (this one is a guardrail that actually blocks edits!)

• project-catalog-developer - DataGrid layout system

All of these automatically activate based on what I'm working on. It's like having a senior dev who actually remembers all the patterns looking over Claude's shoulder.

Why This Matters

Before skills + hooks:

• Claude would use old patterns even though I documented new ones

• Had to manually tell Claude to check BEST_PRACTICES.md every time

• Inconsistent code across the 300k+ LOC codebase

• Spent too much time fixing Claude's "creative interpretations"

After skills + hooks:

• Consistent patterns automatically enforced

• Claude self-corrects before I even see the code

• Can trust that guidelines are being followed

• Way less time spent on reviews and fixes

If you're working on a large codebase with established patterns, I cannot recommend this system enough. The initial setup took a couple of days to get right, but it's paid for itself ten times over.

CLAUDE.md and Documentation Evolution

In a post I wrote 6 months ago, I had a section about rules being your best friend, which I still stand by. But my CLAUDE.md file was quickly getting out of hand and was trying to do too much. I also had this massive BEST_PRACTICES.md file (1,400+ lines) that Claude would sometimes read and sometimes completely ignore.

So I took an afternoon with Claude to consolidate and reorganize everything into a new system. Here's what changed:

What Moved to Skills

Previously, BEST_PRACTICES.md contained:

• TypeScript standards

• React patterns (hooks, components, suspense)

• Backend API patterns (routes, controllers, services)

• Error handling (Sentry integration)

• Database patterns (Prisma usage)

• Testing guidelines

• Performance optimization

All of that is now in skills with the auto-activation hook ensuring Claude actually uses them. No more hoping Claude remembers to check BEST_PRACTICES.md.

What Stayed in CLAUDE.md

Now CLAUDE.md is laser-focused on project-specific info (only ~200 lines):

• Quick commands (pnpm pm2:start, pnpm build, etc.)

• Service-specific configuration

• Task management workflow (dev docs system)

• Testing authenticated routes

• Workflow dry-run mode

• Browser tools configuration

The New Structure

Root CLAUDE.md (100 lines)
├── Critical universal rules
├── Points to repo-specific claude.md files
└── References skills for detailed guidelines

Each Repo's claude.md (50-100 lines)
├── Quick Start section pointing to:
│   ├── PROJECT_KNOWLEDGE.md - Architecture & integration
│   ├── TROUBLESHOOTING.md - Common issues
│   └── Auto-generated API docs
└── Repo-specific quirks and commands

The magic: Skills handle all the "how to write code" guidelines, and CLAUDE.md handles "how this specific project works." Separation of concerns for the win.

Dev Docs System

This system, out of everything (besides skills), I think has made the most impact on the results I'm getting out of CC. Claude is like an extremely confident junior dev with extreme amnesia, losing track of what they're doing easily. This system is aimed at solving those shortcomings.

The dev docs section from my CLAUDE.md:

### Starting Large Tasks

When exiting plan mode with an accepted plan: 1.**Create Task Directory**:
mkdir -p ~/git/project/dev/active/[task-name]/

2.**Create Documents**:

- `[task-name]-plan.md` - The accepted plan
- `[task-name]-context.md` - Key files, decisions
- `[task-name]-tasks.md` - Checklist of work

3.**Update Regularly**: Mark tasks complete immediately

### Continuing Tasks

- Check `/dev/active/` for existing tasks
- Read all three files before proceeding
- Update "Last Updated" timestamps

These are documents that always get created for every feature or large task. Before using this system, I had many times when I all of a sudden realized that Claude had lost the plot and we were no longer implementing what we had planned out 30 minutes earlier because we went off on some tangent for whatever reason.

My Planning Process

My process starts with planning. Planning is king. If you aren't at a minimum using planning mode before asking Claude to implement something, you're gonna have a bad time, mmm'kay. You wouldn't have a builder come to your house and start slapping on an addition without having him draw things up first.

When I start planning a feature, I put it into planning mode, even though I will eventually have Claude write the plan down in a markdown file. I'm not sure putting it into planning mode necessary, but to me, it feels like planning mode gets better results doing the research on your codebase and getting all the correct context to be able to put together a plan.

I created a strategic-plan-architect subagent that's basically a planning beast. It:

• Gathers context efficiently

• Analyzes project structure

• Creates comprehensive structured plans with executive summary, phases, tasks, risks, success metrics, timelines

• Generates three files automatically: plan, context, and tasks checklist

But I find it really annoying that you can't see the agent's output, and even more annoying is if you say no to the plan, it just kills the agent instead of continuing to plan. So I also created a custom slash command (/dev-docs) with the same prompt to use on the main CC instance.

Once Claude spits out that beautiful plan, I take time to review it thoroughly. This step is really important. Take time to understand it, and you'd be surprised at how often you catch silly mistakes or Claude misunderstanding a very vital part of the request or task.

More often than not, I'll be at 15% context left or less after exiting plan mode. But that's okay because we're going to put everything we need to start fresh into our dev docs. Claude usually likes to just jump in guns blazing, so I immediately slap the ESC key to interrupt and run my /dev-docs slash command. The command takes the approved plan and creates all three files, sometimes doing a bit more research to fill in gaps if there's enough context left.

And once I'm done with that, I'm pretty much set to have Claude fully implement the feature without getting lost or losing track of what it was doing, even through an auto-compaction. I just make sure to remind Claude every once in a while to update the tasks as well as the context file with any relevant context. And once I'm running low on context in the current session, I just run my slash command /update-dev-docs. Claude will note any relevant context (with next steps) as well as mark any completed tasks or add new tasks before I compact the conversation. And all I need to say is "continue" in the new session.

During implementation, depending on the size of the feature or task, I will specifically tell Claude to only implement one or two sections at a time. That way, I'm getting the chance to go in and review the code in between each set of tasks. And periodically, I have a subagent also reviewing the changes so I can catch big mistakes early on. If you aren't having Claude review its own code, then I highly recommend it because it saved me a lot of headaches catching critical errors, missing implementations, inconsistent code, and security flaws.

PM2 Process Management (Backend Debugging Game Changer)

This one's a relatively recent addition, but it's made debugging backend issues so much easier.

The Problem

My project has seven backend microservices running simultaneously. The issue was that Claude didn't have access to view the logs while services were running. I couldn't just ask "what's going wrong with the email service?" - Claude couldn't see the logs without me manually copying and pasting them into chat.

The Intermediate Solution

For a while, I had each service write its output to a timestamped log file using a devLog script. This worked... okay. Claude could read the log files, but it was clunky. Logs weren't real-time, services wouldn't auto-restart on crashes, and managing everything was a pain.

The Real Solution: PM2

Then I discovered PM2, and it was a game changer. I configured all my backend services to run via PM2 with a single command: pnpm pm2:start

What this gives me:

• Each service runs as a managed process with its own log file

• Claude can easily read individual service logs in real-time

• Automatic restarts on crashes

• Real-time monitoring with pm2 logs

• Memory/CPU monitoring with pm2 monit

• Easy service management (pm2 restart email, pm2 stop all, etc.)

PM2 Configuration:

// ecosystem.config.jsmodule.exports = {
  apps: [
    {
      name: 'form-service',
      script: 'npm',
      args: 'start',
      cwd: './form',
      error_file: './form/logs/error.log',
      out_file: './form/logs/out.log',
    },
// ... 6 more services
  ]
};

Before PM2:

Me: "The email service is throwing errors"
Me: [Manually finds and copies logs]
Me: [Pastes into chat]
Claude: "Let me analyze this..."

The debugging workflow now:

Me: "The email service is throwing errors"
Claude: [Runs] pm2 logs email --lines 200
Claude: [Reads the logs] "I see the issue - database connection timeout..."
Claude: [Runs] pm2 restart email
Claude: "Restarted the service, monitoring for errors..."

Night and day difference. Claude can autonomously debug issues now without me being a human log-fetching service.

One caveat: Hot reload doesn't work with PM2, so I still run the frontend separately with pnpm dev. But for backend services that don't need hot reload as often, PM2 is incredible.

Hooks System (#NoMessLeftBehind)

The project I'm working on is multi-root and has about eight different repos in the root project directory. One for the frontend and seven microservices and utilities for the backend. I'm constantly bouncing around making changes in a couple of repos at a time depending on the feature.

And one thing that would annoy me to no end is when Claude forgets to run the build command in whatever repo it's editing to catch errors. And it will just leave a dozen or so TypeScript errors without me catching it. Then a couple of hours later I see Claude running a build script like a good boy and I see the output: "There are several TypeScript errors, but they are unrelated, so we're all good here!"

No, we are not good, Claude.

Hook #1: File Edit Tracker

First, I created a post-tool-use hook that runs after every Edit/Write/MultiEdit operation. It logs:

• Which files were edited

• What repo they belong to

• Timestamps

Initially, I made it run builds immediately after each edit, but that was stupidly inefficient. Claude makes edits that break things all the time before quickly fixing them.

Hook #2: Build Checker

Then I added a Stop hook that runs when Claude finishes responding. It:

1. Reads the edit logs to find which repos were modified

2. Runs build scripts on each affected repo

3. Checks for TypeScript errors

4. If < 5 errors: Shows them to Claude

5. If ≥ 5 errors: Recommends launching auto-error-resolver agent

6. Logs everything for debugging

Since implementing this system, I've not had a single instance where Claude has left errors in the code for me to find later. The hook catches them immediately, and Claude fixes them before moving on.

Hook #3: Prettier Formatter

This one's simple but effective. After Claude finishes responding, automatically format all edited files with Prettier using the appropriate .prettierrc config for that repo.

No more going into to manually edit a file just to have prettier run and produce 20 changes because Claude decided to leave off trailing commas last week when we created that file.

⚠️ Update: I No Longer Recommend This Hook

After publishing, a reader shared detailed data showing that file modifications trigger <system-reminder> notifications that can consume significant context tokens. In their case, Prettier formatting led to 160k tokens consumed in just 3 rounds due to system-reminders showing file diffs.

While the impact varies by project (large files and strict formatting rules are worst-case scenarios), I'm removing this hook from my setup. It's not a big deal to let formatting happen when you manually edit files anyway, and the potential token cost isn't worth the convenience.

If you want automatic formatting, consider running Prettier manually between sessions instead of during Claude conversations.

Hook #4: Error Handling Reminder

This is the gentle philosophy hook I mentioned earlier:

• Analyzes edited files after Claude finishes

• Detects risky patterns (try-catch, async operations, database calls, controllers)

• Shows a gentle reminder if risky code was written

• Claude self-assesses whether error handling is needed

• No blocking, no friction, just awareness

Example output:

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
📋 ERROR HANDLING SELF-CHECK
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

⚠️  Backend Changes Detected
   2 file(s) edited

   ❓ Did you add Sentry.captureException() in catch blocks?
   ❓ Are Prisma operations wrapped in error handling?

   💡 Backend Best Practice:
      - All errors should be captured to Sentry
      - Controllers should extend BaseController
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

The Complete Hook Pipeline

Here's what happens on every Claude response now:

Claude finishes responding
  ↓
Hook 1: Prettier formatter runs → All edited files auto-formatted
  ↓
Hook 2: Build checker runs → TypeScript errors caught immediately
  ↓
Hook 3: Error reminder runs → Gentle self-check for error handling
  ↓
If errors found → Claude sees them and fixes
  ↓
If too many errors → Auto-error-resolver agent recommended
  ↓
Result: Clean, formatted, error-free code

And the UserPromptSubmit hook ensures Claude loads relevant skills BEFORE even starting work.

No mess left behind. It's beautiful.

Scripts Attached to Skills

One really cool pattern I picked up from Anthropic's official skill examples on GitHub: attach utility scripts to skills.

For example, my backend-dev-guidelines skill has a section about testing authenticated routes. Instead of just explaining how authentication works, the skill references an actual script:

### Testing Authenticated Routes

Use the provided test-auth-route.js script:


`node scripts/test-auth-route.js http://localhost:3002/api/endpoint`

The script handles all the complex authentication steps for you:

1. Gets a refresh token from Keycloak

2. Signs the token with JWT secret

3. Creates cookie header

4. Makes authenticated request

When Claude needs to test a route, it knows exactly what script to use and how to use it. No more "let me create a test script" and reinventing the wheel every time.

I'm planning to expand this pattern - attach more utility scripts to relevant skills so Claude has ready-to-use tools instead of generating them from scratch.

Tools and Other Things

SuperWhisper on Mac

Voice-to-text for prompting when my hands are tired from typing. Works surprisingly well, and Claude understands my rambling voice-to-text surprisingly well.

Memory MCP

I use this less over time now that skills handle most of the "remembering patterns" work. But it's still useful for tracking project-specific decisions and architectural choices that don't belong in skills.

BetterTouchTool

• Relative URL copy from Cursor (for sharing code references)

  • I have VSCode open to more easily find the files I’m looking for and I can double tap CAPS-LOCK, then BTT inputs the shortcut to copy relative URL, transforms the clipboard contents by prepending an ‘@’ symbol, focuses the terminal, and then pastes the file path. All in one.

• Double-tap hotkeys to quickly focus apps (CMD+CMD = Claude Code, OPT+OPT = Browser)

• Custom gestures for common actions

Honestly, the time savings on just not fumbling between apps is worth the BTT purchase alone.

Scripts for Everything

If there's any annoying tedious task, chances are there's a script for that:

• Command-line tool to generate mock test data. Before using Claude code, it was extremely annoying to generate mock data because I would have to make a submission to a form that had about a 120 questions Just to generate one single test submission.

• Authentication testing scripts (get tokens, test routes)

• Database resetting and seeding

• Schema diff checker before migrations

• Automated backup and restore for dev database

Pro tip: When Claude helps you write a useful script, immediately document it in CLAUDE.md or attach it to a relevant skill. Future you will thank past you.

Documentation (Still Important, But Evolved)

I think next to planning, documentation is almost just as important. I document everything as I go in addition to the dev docs that are created for each task or feature. From system architecture to data flow diagrams to actual developer docs and APIs, just to name a few.

But here's what changed: Documentation now works WITH skills, not instead of them.

Skills contain: Reusable patterns, best practices, how-to guides Documentation contains: System architecture, data flows, API references, integration points

For example:

• "How to create a controller" → backend-dev-guidelines skill

• "How our workflow engine works" → Architecture documentation

• "How to write React components" → frontend-dev-guidelines skill

• "How notifications flow through the system" → Data flow diagram + notification skill

I still have a LOT of docs (850+ markdown files), but now they're laser-focused on project-specific architecture rather than repeating general best practices that are better served by skills.

You don't necessarily have to go that crazy, but I highly recommend setting up multiple levels of documentation. Ones for broad architectural overview of specific services, wherein you'll include paths to other documentation that goes into more specifics of different parts of the architecture. It will make a major difference on Claude's ability to easily navigate your codebase.

Prompt Tips

When you're writing out your prompt, you should try to be as specific as possible about what you are wanting as a result. Once again, you wouldn't ask a builder to come out and build you a new bathroom without at least discussing plans, right?

"You're absolutely right! Shag carpet probably is not the best idea to have in a bathroom."

Sometimes you might not know the specifics, and that's okay. If you don't ask questions, tell Claude to research and come back with several potential solutions. You could even use a specialized subagent or use any other AI chat interface to do your research. The world is your oyster. I promise you this will pay dividends because you will be able to look at the plan that Claude has produced and have a better idea if it's good, bad, or needs adjustments. Otherwise, you're just flying blind, pure vibe-coding. Then you're gonna end up in a situation where you don't even know what context to include because you don't know what files are related to the thing you're trying to fix.

Try not to lead in your prompts if you want honest, unbiased feedback. If you're unsure about something Claude did, ask about it in a neutral way instead of saying, "Is this good or bad?" Claude tends to tell you what it thinks you want to hear, so leading questions can skew the response. It's better to just describe the situation and ask for thoughts or alternatives. That way, you'll get a more balanced answer.

Agents, Hooks, and Slash Commands (The Holy Trinity)

Agents

I've built a small army of specialized agents:

Quality Control:

• code-architecture-reviewer - Reviews code for best practices adherence

• build-error-resolver - Systematically fixes TypeScript errors

• refactor-planner - Creates comprehensive refactoring plans

Testing & Debugging:

• auth-route-tester - Tests backend routes with authentication

• auth-route-debugger - Debugs 401/403 errors and route issues

• frontend-error-fixer - Diagnoses and fixes frontend errors

Planning & Strategy:

• strategic-plan-architect - Creates detailed implementation plans

• plan-reviewer - Reviews plans before implementation

• documentation-architect - Creates/updates documentation

Specialized:

• frontend-ux-designer - Fixes styling and UX issues

• web-research-specialist - Researches issues along with many other things on the web

• reactour-walkthrough-designer - Creates UI tours

The key with agents is to give them very specific roles and clear instructions on what to return. I learned this the hard way after creating agents that would go off and do who-knows-what and come back with "I fixed it!" without telling me what they fixed.

Hooks (Covered Above)

The hook system is honestly what ties everything together. Without hooks:

• Skills sit unused

• Errors slip through

• Code is inconsistently formatted

• No automatic quality checks

With hooks:

• Skills auto-activate

• Zero errors left behind

• Automatic formatting

• Quality awareness built-in

Slash Commands

I have quite a few custom slash commands, but these are the ones I use most:

Planning & Docs:

• /dev-docs - Create comprehensive strategic plan

• /dev-docs-update - Update dev docs before compaction

• /create-dev-docs - Convert approved plan to dev doc files

Quality & Review:

• /code-review - Architectural code review

• /build-and-fix - Run builds and fix all errors

Testing:

• /route-research-for-testing - Find affected routes and launch tests

• /test-route - Test specific authenticated routes

The beauty of slash commands is they expand into full prompts, so you can pack a ton of context and instructions into a simple command. Way better than typing out the same instructions every time.

Conclusion

After six months of hardcore use, here's what I've learned:

The Essentials:

1. Plan everything - Use planning mode or strategic-plan-architect

2. Skills + Hooks - Auto-activation is the only way skills actually work reliably

3. Dev docs system - Prevents Claude from losing the plot

4. Code reviews - Have Claude review its own work

5. PM2 for backend - Makes debugging actually bearable

The Nice-to-Haves:

• Specialized agents for common tasks

• Slash commands for repeated workflows

• Comprehensive documentation

• Utility scripts attached to skills

• Memory MCP for decisions

And that's about all I can think of for now. Like I said, I'm just some guy, and I would love to hear tips and tricks from everybody else, as well as any criticisms. Because I'm always up for improving upon my workflow. I honestly just wanted to share what's working for me with other people since I don't really have anybody else to share this with IRL (my team is very small, and they are all very slow getting on the AI train).

If you made it this far, thanks for taking the time to read. If you have questions about any of this stuff or want more details on implementation, happy to share. The hooks and skills system especially took some trial and error to get right, but now that it's working, I can't imagine going back.

TL;DR: Built an auto-activation system for Claude Code skills using TypeScript hooks, created a dev docs workflow to prevent context loss, and implemented PM2 + automated error checking. Result: Solo rewrote 300k LOC in 6 months with consistent quality.

Well I have spent the day trying out the new Claude 3.7. I have used it to make an app that pulls reddit post and there comments for money making deals. These are added to a database and then analysed via ChatGPT so that the methods are summarised into a step by step and also certain trustworthy scores are applied. The entire process is amazing!
This evening I got an invite to use the new Claude Code. I added 5 dollars to my account for testing. I loaded up the project that I made today as I wanted to make a simple change. To add a completed or reject button to each of the posts that I have pulled and analysed. These simple 2 add on have cost me a total of $2.30 and it tool about 19mins, there were a number of bugs that arose and Claude Code needed some new prompts to fix them. I think the tool is incredible but it certainly comes at a cost. As a result of this I don't think I will be including Claude Code into my work toolbox any time soon as at this price I will ended up making less losing money.
My hope is this will kick of another competitive war between all the other players driving down the price.

Maybe someone can help enlighten me. I recently had this bug I was working on solving in my code, and I was trying to use VS Code GitHub Copilot Agent Mode using Sonnet 4. It failed. Couldn't figure it out.

Then I tried Claude Code (just for the fun of it). I didn't expect any improvement. After all it's using the same model (I only pay for the $20/mo plan, so I don't get Opus). Same prompt, same codebase.

Yet somehow Claude Code solved it in just a few minutes perfectly.

Here is why that is confusing to me. VS Code Agent mode was using semantic index (something it doesn't seem like Claude Code has). In my mind that should give Copilot the advantage. It should be able to better find the relevant code and understand it better. The way Claude Code searches through code feels very basic, which feels like it should be a disadvantage.

Other than system prompts, I'm really not sure what else is different between the two.

What is going on here? Why is Claude Code better?