I also don't want to use the Claude Code and Codex agent harnesses. The good thing with Codex subscription is that it can be used in other harnesses, unlike Claude. As far as I know, only Anthropic has this restriction.
I also don't want to use the Claude Code and Codex agent harnesses. The good thing with Codex subscription is that it can be used in other harnesses, unlike Claude. As far as I know, only Anthropic has this restriction.
It's really strange because when Opus 5 released, there were some that pointed this out, but a bunch simply said it was the best and as good as Fable etc etc.
but for me, it caused me to get very demotivated and avoid interacting with the model, at least when using Claude Code.
Now I’ve gone back to Codex because I simply find the ChatGPT models much more comfortable to work with. I spend less time fighting the model, correcting its direction, or re-explaining what I meant.
I've moved to Codex 5.6-Sol. Much saner English, much better at execution, and gets stuff done in a matter-of-factly kind of way (Claude Code is a mess these days -- it gets things wrong and goes around in circles).
But I'm harness agnostic and am not locked in. I just keep my issues in Kata Tracker (https://www.katatracker.com/) and switch harnesses/model when I need to.
Being loyal to a particular model/harness seem unwise to me.
I suspect this degradation is happening because the AI labs are using the LLM's output to feedback into the input, to create a thinking loop, and they're optimizing that.
It generates pages for what could be explained in 1-2 paragraphs.
I use to love using Gemini CLI to have Gemini explain a module for me before I dive into the code and point out specific points of interest, but I can't do that with Claude Code without feeling overwhelmed and starting to heavily procrastinate