8 ms·

I’m using Claude code dynamic workflow like this. I tell Fable to use a workflow. He is the planner, orchestrator and reviewer. Opus agents are implementers. Wo

by pqdbr 2mo ago

I’m using Claude code dynamic workflow like this. I tell Fable to use a workflow. He is the planner, orchestrator and reviewer. Opus agents are implementers. Works unbelievably well.

danielciocirlan 2mo ago
“He”
- llbbdd 2mo ago
  I call him "my son"
- brabel 2mo ago
  In many languages that’s the only way to express that since there is no “it”. It doesn’t mean speakers of such languages anthropofy everything and I think that’s the case here.
oliver236 2mo ago
can you explain this in a bit more detail? super interested
- pqdbr 2mo ago
  It's literally all there is to it. Write your prompt normally. then, at the last paragraph, you write: Use a workflow to implement this. You (Fable) are the orchestrator, planner and reviewer. Opus agents are implementers. That's all there's to it. it will create the dynamic workflow - has a nice interface native to Claude Code - and do all the coordination to deliver what you asked.
tern 2mo ago
I do the same, but delegate to codex instead via the /smux skill. It's expensive, but I get one long-running Claude context window and one frequently compacting codex, and this saves me from needing to re-gather context all the time. Per the OP's technique, I'll use Fable for intensive planning moments, then switch back to opus when things are going well.