Best practices for using Claude Opus 4.7 with Claude Code(claude.com)
claude.com
Best practices for using Claude Opus 4.7 with Claude Code
https://claude.com/blog/best-practices-for-using-claude-opus-4-7-with-claude-code
https://claude.com/blog/best-practices-for-using-claude-opus-4-7-with-claude-code
I gave it an agentic software project to critically review.
It claimed gemini-3.1-pro-preview is wrong model name, the current is 2.5. I said it's a claim not verified.
It offered to create a memory. I said it should have a better procedure, to avoid poisoning the process with unverified claims, since memories will most likely be ignored by it.
It agreed. It said it doesn't have another procedure, and it then discovered three more poisonous items in the critical review.
I said that this is a fabrication defect, it should not have been in production at all as a model.
It agreed, it said it can help but I would need to verify its work. I said it's footing me with the bill and the audit.
We amicably parted ways.
I would have accepted a caveman-style vocabulary but not a lobotomized model.
I'm looking forward to LobotoClaw. Not really.