Inside Claude Code from its Anthropic builders

Source material

Full source text

What made it work really well is that Kwaikou does access to everything that an engineer does at the terminal.

Everything you can do, Kwaikou can do.

There's nothing in between.

There's actually an increasing number of people internally at Enthropic that are using, like, a lot of credits.

Like, spending like over $1,000 every month.

We see this, like, power user behavior.

This is something that they teach in YC.

If you can solve your own problem, it's much more likely you're solving the problem for others.

There's this, like, really old idea in a product called latent demand.

You build a product in a way that is hackable, that is kind of open-ended enough that people can abuse it for other use cases it wasn't really designed for.

And you build for that because you kind of know there's demand for it.

Do you think the CLI is the final form factor?

Are we going to be using Cloud Code in the CLI primarily in a year or in three years?

Or is there something else that's better?

This podcast is sponsored by Google.

Hey folks, I'm Amar, Product and Design Lead at Google DeepMind.

We just launched a revamped vibe coding experience in AI Studio that lets you mix and match AI capabilities to turn your ideas into reality faster than ever.

Just describe your app and Gemiini will automatically wire up the right models and APIs for you.

And if you need a spark, hit "I'm feeling lucky" and we'll help you get started.

Head to ai.studio/build to create your first app.

Kat, Boris, thank you so much for being here.

Thanks for having us.

Yeah.

So for people who don't know you, you are the creators of Cloud Code.

Thank you very much from the bottom of my heart.

It's a...

I love Cloud Code.

That's amazing to hear.

That's what we love to hear.

Okay, I think the place I want to start is when I first used it, there was like this moment, like I think it was around when Sonnet 3.7 came out where I was like, I used it and I was like, holy shit.

This is like a completely new paradigm.

It's a completely new way of thinking about code.

And the big difference was you went all the way and just eliminated the text editor.

And you're just like, all you do is like talk to the terminal and that's it.

And, you know, previous paradigms of AI programming, previous harnesses have been like you have a text editor and you have the AI on the side and it's kind of like, or it's a tab complete.

So take me through like that decision process, that process of architecting this new paradigm.

How do you think about that?

Yeah, I think the most important thing is it was not intentional at all.

We sort of ended up with it.

So at the time when I joined Anthropic, we were still on different teams at the time.

There was this previous predecessor to Cloud Code.

It was called Clyde, like C-L-I-D-E.

And it was this like research project.

You know, it took like a minute to start up.

It was this kind of like really heavy Python thing.

It had to like run a bunch of indexing and stuff.

And when I joined, I wanted to ship my first PR and I hand wrote it like a, you know, like a noob.

And I didn't know about any of these tools.

Thank you for admitting that on the podcast.

I didn't know any better.

And then I put up this PR and Adam Wolf, who was the engine manager for our team for a while, he was my ramp up buddy and he just like rejected the PR.

And he was like, you wrote this by hand.

What are you doing?

He's Clyde.

Because he was also hacking a lot on Clyde at the time.

And so I tried Clyde.

I gave it the description of the task and it just like one-shot at this thing.

And this was like, you know, Sonnet 3.5.

So I still had to fix the thing even for this kind of basic task.

And the harness was super old.

So it took like five minutes to turn this thing out and just took forever.

And but it worked and I was just mind-blowing that this was even possible.

And they just kind of got the gears turning.

Maybe you don't actually need IDE.

And then later on I was prototyping using the entropic API.

And the easiest way to do that was just building a little app in the terminal because that way I didn't have to build a UI or anything.

And I started just making a little chat up.

And then I just started thinking maybe we could do something a little bit like Clyde.

So let me build like a little Clyde.

And it actually ended up being a lot more useful than that without a lot of work.

And I think the biggest revelation for me was when we started to give the model tools, I just started using tools and it was just this insane moment.

Like the model just wants to use tools.

Like we give it bash and they just started using bash writing Apple script to like automate stuff in response to questions.

And I was like, this is just the craziest thing.

I've never seen anything like this because at the time I had only used IDE.

So like, you know, like text editing a little like one line auto complete multi line auto complete whatever.

So that's where this came from.

It was this kind of convergence of like prototyping but also kind of seeing what's possible and kind of like a very rough way.

And this thing ended up being surprisingly useful and I think it was the same for us.

I think for me it was like kind of Sonnet 4 Opus 4.

That's where that magic moment was.

It was like, oh my god, this thing works.

That's interesting.

So like tell me about that the tool moment because I think that is one of the special things about cloud code is it just writes bash and it's really good at it.

And I think a lot of previous agent architectures or even anyone building agent today your first instinct might be, okay, we're going to give it a find file tool and then we're going to give it a open file tool and you build all these like custom wrappers for, you know, all the different actions you might want the agent to take but cloud code just uses bash.

And it's like really good at it.

So how do you think about how do you think about what you learned from that?

Yeah, I think we're at this point in our cloud code actually has a bunch of tools.

I think it's like a dozen or something like this.

We actually like add and remove tools most weeks.

So this changes pretty often.

But today there actually is a search.

There's a tool for for searching and we do this for two reasons.

One is the UX so we can show the result a little bit nicer to the user because there's still a human in the loop right now for most tasks.

And the second one is for permissions.

So if you say in your like quad code like settings on this file, you cannot read we have to kind of enforce this.

We enforce it for bash, but we can do it a little bit more efficiently for if we have a specific search tool.

But definitely we want to like unship tools and kind of keep it simple for the model.

Like last week or two weeks ago, we unshipped the LS tool because in the past we needed it, but then we actually built a way to enforce this kind of permission system for bash.

So in bash if we know that you're not allowed to read a particular directory, Quad's not allowed to LS that directory and because we can enforce that consistently, we don't need this tool anymore.

And this is nice because it's a little less choice for Quad, a little less stuff in context.

Got it.

And how do you guys split responsibility on the team?

I would say Boris sets the technical direction and has been the product visionary for a lot of the features that we've come out with.

I see myself as more of like a supporting role to make sure that that one that like our pricing and packaging resonates with our users to making sure that we're shepherding our features across the launch process.

So from like deciding, all right, like these are the prototypes that we should definitely ant food to like setting the quality threshold for ant fooding through to communicating that to our end users.

And there's definitely some new initiatives that we're working on that I would say historically a lot of Quad code has been built bottoms up like Boris and a lot of the core team members have just had these great ideas for to do this sub agents hooks like all these are bottoms up.

As we think about expanding to more services and bring Quad code to our places, I think a lot of those are more like, all right, let's talk to customers.

Let's bring engineers into those conversations and prioritize those services and knock them out.

Got it.

What is ant fooding?

Oh, ant fooding is...

Oh, ant fooding?

Oh, it means dog fooding.

And drop it in.

Yeah, our nickname for internal employees is ant.

And so ant fooding is our version of dog fooding internally over I think 70 or 80% of ants, technical, anthropic employees use Quad code every day.

And so every time we are thinking about a new feature, we push it out to people internally and we get so much feedback.

We have a feedback channel.

I think we get a post every five minutes.

And so you get really quick signal on whether people like it, whether it's buggy or whether it's not good and we should un-ship it.

You can tell that someone that is building stuff is using it all the time to build it because like it's ergonomics just make sense if you're trying to build stuff and that that only happens if you're like ant fooding.

Yeah, and I think that that's a really interesting paradigm for building new stuff like that sort of bottoms up.

I make something for myself.

Tell me about that.

Yeah, and Cat is also so humble.

I think Cat has a really big role in the product direction also.

It comes from everyone on the team.

And like these specific examples, this actually came from everyone on the team like to-do lists and sub-agents that was Sid, Hooks, Dixon ship that, Plugins, Daisy ship that.

So like everyone on the team like these ideas come from everyone.

And so I think for us like we build this core agent loop and this kind of core experience and then everyone on the team uses the product all the time.

And so everyone outside the team uses the product all the time.

And so there's just all these chances to build things that serve these needs.

Like for example like bash mode, you know like the exclamation mark and you can type in bash commands.

This was just like many months ago.

I was using quad code and I was going back and forth between two terminals and just thought it was kind of annoying.

And just on the way my ask quad to kind of think of ideas, I thought of this like exclamation mark bash mode and then I was like great make it pink and then ship it.

It just did it.

I'm like that's the thing that's still kind of persisted and you know now you see kind of others also kind of catching on to that.

That's funny.

I actually didn't know that and that's extremely useful because I always have to open up a new tab to like run any bash commands.

So you just you just do an exclamation point and then it just like runs it directly instead of filtering it through all the cloud stuff.

Yeah and quad code sees the full output too.

Interesting.

That's perfect.

So anything you see in the quad code view, quad code also sees.

Okay that's really interesting.

And this is kind of a UX thing that we're thinking about like in the past tools are built for engineers but now it's equal parts engineers and model.

And so like as an engineer you can see the output but it's actually quite useful for the model also and this is part of the philosophy also like everything is dual use.

So for example the model can also call slash commands.

So like you know I have a slash command for a slash commit where I run through kind of a few different steps like diffing and generating a reasonable commit message and this kind of stuff.

I run it manually but also quad can run this for me and this is pretty useful because we get to share this logic.

We get to kind of define this tool and then we both get to use it.

Yeah.

What are the differences in designing tools that are dual use from designing tools that are used by one or the other?

Surprisingly it's the same.

Okay.

So far.

Yeah.

I sort of feel like this kind of elegant design for humans translates really well to the model.

So you're just thinking about what would make sense to you and the model generally it makes sense to the model too if it makes sense to you.

Yeah.

I think one of the really cool things about quad code being a terminal UI and what made it work really well is that quad code has access to everything that an engineer does at the terminal.

And I think when it comes to whether the tools should be dual use or not I think making them dual use actually makes the tools a lot easier to understand.

It just means that okay everything you can do quad code can do there's nothing in between.

Yeah.

That's interesting.

Yeah.

There are a couple of those decisions.

So no no code editor.

It's in the terminal site has access to your files and it's it's on your computer versus like in the cloud and a virtual machine.

So you get like repeated you you get to use it in a repeated way where you can like you know build up your cloud MD file or you know like all like both slash commands and all that kind of stuff where it becomes very composable and extensible from a very simple starting point.

And I'm curious about how you think about you know for people who are thinking about okay I want to build an agent I want to build probably not cloud code but like something else how you get that that simple package that then can extend and be really powerful over time.

For me I start by just thinking about it like developing any kind of product where you have to solve the problem for yourself before you can solve it for others and like this is something that they teach in YC is you have to start with yourself.

So like if you can solve your own problem it's much more likely you're solving the problem for others and I think for coding starting locally is the reasonable thing and you know now we have cloud code on the web so you can also use it with a virtual machine and you know you can use it in a remote setting and this is super useful when you're on the go you want to know that your phone and this is sort of we started proving this out kind of a step at a time where you can do at clotting GitHub and I use this every day like on the way to work I'm like at a red light I probably shouldn't be doing this but I'm like.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, you know, I get up at a red light and then I'm like at quad, you know, fix this issue or whatever.

And so it's just really useful to be able to control it from your phone and this kind of proves out this experience.

I don't know if this necessarily makes sense for every kind of use case for coding.

I think starting local is right.

I don't know if this is true for everything now got it.

What are the slash commands you guys use?

slash PR commit.

Yeah, it's I think the PR commit slash command makes it a lot faster for call to know exactly what bash commands to run in order to make a commit and what is the PR commit slash command do for people who aren't familiar.

Oh, it just tells it like exactly how to make a commit.

Okay.

And you can like dynamic.

You can say like, okay, these are the three bash commands that need to be run.

Got it.

And what's pretty cool is also we have this kind of templating system built into slash commands.

So we actually run the bash commands ahead of time.

They're like embedded into the slash command.

And you can also pre allow certain tool invocations.

So for that slash command, we say, allow, you know, get commit get push gh PR.

And so you don't get asked for permission after you run the slash command because we have like a permission based security system.

And then also it uses haiku, which is pretty cool.

So it's kind of a cheaper model and faster.

Yeah, for me, I use like commit commit PR feature dev we use a lot like said created this one.

It's kind of cool.

It kind of like walks me through step by step.

Building something so we prompt quad like first ask me how to what exactly I want like build the specification.

And then, you know, kind of like build like a detailed plan and then make a to do list walk through step by step.

So it's kind of like more structured feature development.

And then I think the last one that probably is a lot so we use like security review for all of our PRs.

And then also code review.

So like Claude does all of our code review internally at anthropic.

You know, there's still a human approving it but quad does kind of the first step in code review.

That's just a slash code review slash command.

Yeah, what are the things I would love to go deeper into like the how do you make a good plan.

So the sort of the feature dev thing because I think there's a lot of like little tricks that I'm starting to find or people whatever you started trying to find that work.

And I'm curious like what what are things that we're missing.

So for example, one step in the one unintuitive step of the, you know, plan development process is even if I don't exactly know what the thing that needs to be built is I just have like a little sentence in my mind like I want feature x I have Claude just like implement it just without giving it anything else and I see what it does.

And that helps me understand like, okay, here's actually what I mean because it made all these different mistakes or like it, it did something that I didn't expect that might be good.

And then I use that like the learning from the sort of throwaway development and just clear it out and then that helps me write a better plan spec for the actual feature development which is something that you would never do before because it'd be too expensive to just like YOLO send in an engineer on a feature that you hadn't actually specced out.

Because you have Claude going through your code base and doing stuff you can like learn stuff from it that helps inform the actual plan that you make.

Yeah, I feel maybe I can start and I'm curious how you use it too.

I think there's like a few different modes, maybe for me like one is prototyping mode.

So like traditional engineering prototyping you want to kind of build the simplest possible thing that touches all the systems just so you can kind of get a vague sense of like what are the systems there's unknowns and just to kind of trace through everything.

And so I do the exact same thing as you Dan like Claude just does the thing and then I see where it messes up and then I'll ask it to just throw it away and do it again.

So just hit escape twice go back to the old checkpoint and then try again.

I think there's also maybe two other kinds of tasks.

So one is just things that Claude can one shot and I feel pretty confident it can do it.

So I'll just tell it and then I'll just go to a different tab and I'll shift tab to auto accept and then just go do something else or go to another one of my quads and tend to that all it does this.

But also there's this kind of like harder feature development.

So these are you know things are maybe in the past it would have taken like a few hours of engineering time and for this you all would all shift tab into plan mode and then align on the plan first before it even writes any code.

And I think what's really hard about this is the boundary changes with every model in kind of a surprising way where the newer models they're more intelligent.

So the boundary of what you need plan mode for got pushed out like a little bit like before you used to need to plan now now you don't and I think this is general trend of like stuff that used to be scaffolding with a more advanced model.

It gets pushed into the model itself and the model kind of tends to subsume everything over time.

Yeah.

How do you think about like building a agent harness that isn't just going to like you're not spending a bunch of time building stuff that is just going to be subsumed into the model in three months when the new cloud comes out like yeah.

How do you how do you know what to build versus what you just say it doesn't work quite yet but next time it's going to work so we're not going to spend time on it.

I think we build most things that we think would improve quad codes capabilities even if that means we'll have to get rid of it in three months if anything we hope that we will get rid of it in three months.

I think for now we just want to offer the most premium experience possible.

And so we're not too worried about throwaway work.

Interesting.

Yeah.

And an example of this is something like even like plan mode itself I think we'll probably unship it at some point when Claude can just figure out from your intent that you probably want to plan first or you know for example I just deleted like two thousand tokens or something from the system prompt yesterday.

It's because like the like sonnet four five doesn't need it anymore.

But Opus Opus for one didn't need it.

What about you know in the case where the latest frontier model doesn't need it but you know you're trying to figure out how to make it more efficient because you have so many users that you know you're maybe you're not going to use Opus or a four or five for everything.

Maybe you're going to use haiku.

So there's a trade off between having a more elaborate harness for haiku versus just like not spending time on it using sonnet eating the cost and working on more frontier type stuff.

In general we've positioned called code to be a very premium offering so our North Star is making sure that works incredibly well with the absolutely most powerful model we have which is on a four five right now.

We are investigating how to make it work really well for like future generations of smaller models but it's it's not the top priority for us.

Okay.

What do you think about, you know, one thing that I notice is we get models often and thank you very much for this we get models a lot before they come out and it's our job to kind of figure out is it any good.

And over the last six months when I'm testing Claude for example in the cloud app with a new frontier model it's actually very hard to tell whether it's how whether it's better immediately.

But it's really easy to tell in cloud code because the harness matters a lot for the performance that you get out of the model and you guys have the benefit of building Claude or building Claude code inside of the inside of enthropic so there's like a much tighter integration between the fundamental like model training and the harness that you're building and they seem to kind of like really impact each other.

So how does that how does that work internally and what are the benefits you get from having that like tight integration.

Yeah, I think the biggest thing is like researchers just use this.

And so, you know, as they see what's working what's not they can they can improve stuff.

We do like a lot of evils and things like that to kind of communicate back and forth and understand where exactly the models at.

But yeah, there's this frontier where you need to give the model a hard enough task to really push the limit of the model.

And if you don't do this then all bottles are kind of equal but if you give it a pretty hard task you can you can tell the difference.

What sub-agents do you use?

I have a few I have like a planner sub agent that I use I have a code review sub agent code reviews actually something where sometimes they use a sub agent sometimes they use a slash command.

So usually in CI to slash command but in synchronous use I use a sub agent for the same thing.

It's a good question.

Yeah, maybe it's like a matter of taste.

Yeah, I don't know.

I don't know.

I think it's maybe when you're running synchronous see it's kind of nice to fork off the context window a little bit because all the stuff that's going on in the code review it's not relevant to what I'm doing next.

But in CI it just doesn't matter.

Are you ever spawning like 10 sub agents at once and for what?

For me I do it mostly for like big migrations.

Okay, looks like the big thing.

Actually we have so this like code reviews slash command that we use.

There's a bunch of sub agents there.

And so one of the steps is like find all the issues and so there's one sub agent that's like checking for quantum D compliance.

There's another sub agent that's looking through get history to see what's going on another sub agent that's looking for kind of obvious bugs.

And then we do this like kind of de duping quality step after so they find a bunch of stuff.

A lot of these are false positives.

And so then then we spawn like five more sub agents and these are all just like checking for false positives.

And then the result is awesome.

It finds like all the real issues without the false issues.

That's great.

I actually do that.

So one of my non technical cloud code use cases is expense filing.

So like when I'm I'm in SF right now.

So like I have all these expenses and so I built this little cloud project that are in cloud code that it uses one of these finance API's to just download all my credit card transactions and then it decides like these are probably the expenses that I'm going to have to like file.

And then I have two sub agents one that represents me and when there represents the company and they like do battle to like figure out like what's the proper like actual set of expenses.

It's like an auditor sub agent and like a pro Dan sub agent.

So yeah that kind of thing that the sort of like opponent processor pattern seems to be like an interesting one.

Yeah.

It's it's it's cool.

I feel like when some agents were first becoming a thing actually wouldn't spark us.

I think it's like a Reddit thread a while back where someone made sub agents for like there was like a front end dev and back end dev and like a thing like a designer testing to testing that like there was like a PM sub agent.

And this is like you know it's cute like it feels like a little maybe to anthropomorphic maybe maybe there's something to this but I think like the value is actually like the uncorrelated context windows.

We have these two context windows that don't know about each other and this is kind of interesting and you tend to get better results this way.

Or do you have any interesting sub agencies.

So I've been tinkering with one that is really good at front end testing.

So it uses playwright to like see all right.

What are like all the errors that are coincide and pull them in and try to test more steps of the app.

It's not totally there yet but I've seen signs of life and I think it's the kind of thing that we could potentially bundle in one of our plug-ins marketplaces.

Yeah definitely I've used something like that just with puppeteer and just like watching it build something and then open up the browser and then be like oh I need to change this.

It's like this is like oh my god.

Yeah it's really cool.

I think we're starting to see the beginnings of this like massive like multi massive sub agents.

I don't know what to call this like swarms or something.

There's a bunch of people there's actually an increasing number of people internally on anthropic that are using like a lot of credits every month like you know like spending like over a thousand bucks every month.

And this like this percent of people is growing actually pretty fast.

And I think the common use case is like code migration.

And so what they're doing is like framework A to framework B.

There's like the main agent and makes a big to do list for everything and then just kind of map reduce over a bunch of sub agents.

So you instruct a lot of like yeah like start 10 agents and then just go like you know 10 at a time and just migrate all the stuff over.

That's interesting.

What would be like a concrete example of the kind of migration that you're talking about?

I think the most classic is like lint rules.

So there's like you know there's some kind of little you're rolling out.

There's no auto fixer because it's like you know like a st analysis can't really it's kind of too simplistic for it.

I think other stuff is like framework migrations like we just migrated from like one testing framework to a different one.

That's a pretty common one where it's super easy to verify the output.

One of the things I found is and this is both for project projects inside of every and then just open source projects.

It's like if you're someone building a product and you want to build a feature that's been done before.

So maybe like an example that people might need to implement a bunch is like memory.

How do you do memory?

Because we have a bunch of different products internally.

You can just like spawn cloud sub agents to be like how do these three other products do it.

And there's like possibility for just like tacit code sharing where you don't need to like have an API or you don't need to like ask anyone.

You can just be like how does how do we do this already and then use the best practices to to build your own.

And you can also do that with open source because there's like tons of open source projects where people are like you know they've been working in memory for like a year and it's like really really good.

You could like what are the patterns that people have figured out and which ones do I want to implement.

Totally.

You could also connect to your version control system if you've built a similar feature in the past.

Cloud code can use those APIs like query GitHub directly and find how people implemented a similar feature in the past and read that code and copy the relevant parts.

Yeah is there.

Have you found any use for like log files of OK.

You know here's here's a full history of like how I implemented it and like is that important to give to Claude and and how are you and how are you implementing that are making it useful for it.

Some people swear by it.

There are some people in the traffic where for every task they do they tell quite code to write a diary entry in a specific format that just documents like what did it do what did it try why didn't work.

And then they even have these agents that like look over the past memory and synthesize it into observations.

I think this is like the starting budding like there's like something interesting here that we could product ties.

But it's a new emerging pattern that we're seeing that works well.

I think the hard thing about like one shotting memory from just one transcript is that it's hard to know how relevant a specific instruction is to all future tasks like our canonical example is if I say make the button pink.

I don't want you to remember to make all buttons pink in the future.

And so I think synthesizing memory from a lot of logs is a is a way to find these patterns more consistently.

It seems like you probably need like there's some things where you're going to know you'll be able to summarize like synthesize or summarize in this sort of like top down way like this.

And it will be useful later and you'll you'll know the right level of abstraction at which it might be useful.

But then there's also a lot of stuff where it's like you actually you know any given like commit blog like make the button pink.

It could be useful for kind of an infinite number of different reasons that you're not going to know beforehand.

So you also need the model to be able to look up all similar past you know commits and surface that at the right time.

Is that something that you're also thinking about.

Yeah, I think I think there could there could be something like that.

Maybe I think one way to see it is this kind of like traditional memory storage work like like memex like kind of stuff where you just want to like put all the information into the system and then it's kind of a retrieval problem problem after that.

I think as the model also gets smarter it naturally I've seen it start to naturally do this also with sonic four five where if it's stuck on something it'll just naturally start looking like we talked about before like using bash spontaneously to just like look through get history and be like oh okay yeah this is kind of an interesting way to do it.

Yeah, one of the things that like we were talking before we started recording one of the things that we're doing inside of every like I feel like it has really changed the way that we do engineering because everyone is caught code, filled like CLI, and we have this engineering product that we call compounding engineering, where in normal engineering every feature you add it makes it harder to add the next feature and compounding engineering your goal is to make the next feature easier to build from the feature that you just added.

And the way that we do that is we try to codify all the learnings from from everything that we've done to build the feature so like, you know, how did we make the plan and what parts of the plan needed to be changed or like when we started testing it like what what issues do we find what are the things that we missed.

And then we codify them back into all the prompts and all the sub agents and all the slash commands so that the next time when someone does something like this, it catches it and that makes it easier and that's why for me for example, I can like hop into one of our code bases and start like being productive, even though I'm, I don't know anything about how the code works because we have this like built up memory system of, of all the stuff that we've learned as we've implemented stuff.

But we've had to build that ourselves.

I'm curious, are you working on that kind of loop, so the clock code does that automatically.

Yeah, we're starting to think about it.

It's funny we were just, we heard the same thing from Fiona she just joined the team and, you know, she's our she's our manager she hasn't code in like 10 years or something like that.

And she was winning peers on her first day.

And she was like yeah like not only did I kind of I forgot how to code and quad code kind of made it super easy to just get back into it.

But also I didn't need to ramp up on any context, because I kind of knew all this.

And I think a lot of it is about like, when people put up pull requests for quad code itself and I think our customers tell us that they do like some more stuff pretty often.

If you see mistake.

I'll just be like at quad, add this to quad MD, so that the next time it just knows this automatically.

And you can kind of like instill this memory in kind of a variety of ways so you can say like at quad added to quad MD, you can also say at quad write a test, you know, that's like easy way to make sure that it doesn't regress.

And I don't feel bad asking anyone to write tests anymore.

Right.

It's like super easy.

And like I think probably close to 100% of our tests are just written by quad and if they're bad we just won't commit it and then the good ones stay committed.

And then also I think lint rules are a big one.

So for stuff that's enforced pretty often we actually have a bunch of internal lint rules, Claude writes 100% of these.

And this is mostly just like at quad in a PR right right this one rule.

And yeah, there's sort of this problem right now about like, how, how do you do this automatically.

And I think generally how like Kat and I think about it is we see this like power user behavior.

And the first step is how do you enable that by making the product hackable.

So the best users can figure out how to do this cool new thing.

But then really the hard work starts of like how do you take this and bring it to everyone else.

And for me, I count myself in the everyone else bucket like, you know, I don't really know how to use them like I don't have this like crazy like t buck set up.

So I have like a pretty vanilla setup.

So if you can make a feature that I'll use it's a pretty good indicator that like other kind of average engineers will use it.

That is interesting.

Tell me about that because like that's something I think about all the time is making something that is extensible and flexible enough that power users can find like novel ways to use it that you would not have even dreamed of, but it's also simple enough that anyone can use it and it's and they can be productive with it and you can you can kind of pull what the power users find back into like the basic experience like how do you think about making those design and product decisions so that you enable that in general, we think that like every engine environment is a little bit different from the others.

And so it's really important that every part of our system is extensible.

So everything from your status line to adding your own slash commands through the hooks, which let you insert a bit of determinism at pretty much any step in code.

So we think these are the these are like the basic building blocks that we give to every engineer that they can play with for plugins plugins is actually our.

So it was built by Daisy on our team and this is this is our attempt to make it a lot easier for the average user like us to bring these slash commands and hooks into our workflows.

And so what plugins does is it lets you browse existing MCP servers, existing hooks, existing plugins and just like or sorry existing like such commands and just let you write one command in code to pull the pull that in for yourself.

There's this like really old idea and product called latent demand, which I think is probably the main way that I personally think about product and like thinking about what to build next.

It's a super simple idea.

It's you build a product in a way that is hackable, that is kind of open ended enough that people can abuse it for other use cases it wasn't really designed for.

Then you see how people use it and then you build for that because like you kind of know there's demand for it.

Right.

And like, you know, when I when I was at meta this is how we build kind of all the big products I think almost every single big product had this nugget of latent demand in it.

You know, like, for example, something like Facebook dating it came from this idea that when we looked at who looks at people's profiles.

I think 60% of views were between people of opposite gender.

So kind of like traditional setup that we're not friends with each other.

Oh, man.

Okay, maybe there's like maybe if we like want to dating product, we can kind of harness this demand that exists.

That's interesting.

And for, you know, marketplace, it was pretty similar.

I think it was like 40% of posts and Facebook groups at the time were buy sell posts.

And so we're like, okay, people are trying to use this product to buy and sell if we just build a product around it.

That's probably going to work.

And so we think about it kind of similarly, but also we have the luxury of building for developers and developers love hacking stuff and they love customizing stuff.

And it's like as a user of our own product, it makes it so fun to build and use this thing.

And so, yeah, like, like I said, we just built the right extension points.

We see how people use it.

And that kind of tells us what to build next.

Like, for example, we got all these user requests or people are like, dude, cloud code is asking me for all these permissions.

And I'm out here getting coffee.

I don't know that it's asking me for permissions.

How can I just get it to like ping me on Slack?

And so we built hooks, Dixon built hooks so that people could get pinged on Slack.

And you could get pinged on Slack for anything that you want to get pinged on Slack for.

And so it was very much like people really wanted the ability to do something.

We didn't want to build the integration ourselves.

And so we exposed hooks for people to do that.

The thing that makes me think of is you recently released that you kind of moved or rebranded how you talk about cloud code to be this like more general purpose agent SDK.

Is that was that driven by some latent demand where you sort of saw there's like a more general purpose use case for what you built?

We realized that somewhere to how you were talking about using cloud code for things outside of coding, we saw this happen a lot.

Like we get a ton of stories of people who are using cloud code to like help them write a blog and like manage all the like data inputs and take a first pass in their own tone.

We find people building like email assistance on this.

I use it for a lot of just like market research because at the core, it's like an agent that can just go on for an infinite amount of time as long as you give it a concrete task and it's able to fetch the right underlying data.

So one of the things I was working on was I wanted to look at all the companies in the world and how many engineers they had and to create a ranking.

And this is something that cloud code can do even though it's not a traditional coding use case.

So you realize that like the underlying primitives were really general as long as you give as long as you have like an agent loop that can continue running for a long period of time and you're able to like access the Internet and write code and run code.

Pretty much you can if you squint, you can kind of build anything on it.

And I think like at the point where we rebranded it to like from the quad code SDK to the quad agent SDK, there was already like many thousands of companies using this thing.

And a lot of those use cases were not about coding.

So it's like both internally and externally.

We kind of saw that like health assistance, like financial analysts, legal assistance.

It was pretty broad.

Yeah.

What are the coolest ones?

I feel like actually you had Noah Briar on the podcast recently.

I thought like the obsidian like kind of mind mapping note keeping use case is really cool.

It's fine.

It's insane how many people use it for this particular combination.

I think some other like some coding or kind of coding, adjacent use cases that are kind of cool is we have this like issue tracker for quad code.

The team is just like constantly underwater, like trying to keep up with all the issues coming in.

There's just so many.

And so like quad dedupes the issues and it automatically finds duplicates and it's extremely good at it.

It also does first pass resolution.

So usually when there's an issue, it'll proactively put up a PR internally.

And this is a new thing that Inigo on the team built.

So this is pretty cool.

There's also like on call and kind of collecting signals from other places like getting like century logs and getting like logs from BigQuery and kind of collating all this.

Plus just really good at doing this because it's all just bash in hand.

And so these are all kind of these internal use cases that that I saw.

Is it so when it's you know, collating logs or deduping issues is that like you have clouds like continually running in the background and is that something that you're building for?

It gets triggered for that particular one.

It gets triggered whenever a new issue is filed.

So it runs once, but it can choose to run for as long as it needs.

Got it.

What about the idea of clouds always running?

Proactive clouds.

I think it's definitely where we want to get to.

I would say right now we're very focused on making quad coding incredibly reliable for like individual tasks.

And you know, if you think about like if you think about like multi line autocomplete and then like single turn agents and then now we're working on like quad code that can complete tasks.

I feel like if you trace this curve, eventually you go to even higher levels of abstraction, like even more complicated tasks.

And then hopefully the next step after that is a lot more productivity to just understanding what your team's goals are, what your goals are being able to say, hey, I think you probably want to try this feature and here's a first pass at the code and here are the assumptions I made.

And are these correct?

I can't wait.

And I think probably right after that is Claude is now your manager.

That's not in the plan.

So everyone on the team was like super excited that we were talking today and they gave me a bunch of questions and I want to make sure I hit all the questions.

Oh, here's a good one.

Why did you choose a Genta grag over vector search in your architecture and are like vector embeddings still relevant?

So actually, initially we did use vector embeddings.

So we had a lot of questions about how we can do that.

So we had a lot of questions about how we can do that.

So we had a lot of questions about how we can do that.

So we had a lot of questions about how we can do that.

And I think that's a really good one.

One thing that Claude code doesn't naturally like to do, but that I personally find very useful is Claude doesn't naturally like to ask questions.

But you know, if you're brainstorming with a thought partner, a collaborator, usually you do ask questions back and forth to each other.

And so this is one of the things that I like to do, especially in plan mode.

I'll just tell Claude code like, hey, we're just brainstorming this thing.

Please ask me questions if there's anything you're unsure about.

I want you to ask questions and I'll do it.

And I think that actually helps you arrive at a better answer.

There's like, there's also like so many tips that we can share.

I think like there's a few really common mistakes I see people make.

One is like, like you said, like not using plan mode enough.

This is just super important.

And I think this is people that are kind of new to agent decoding.

They kind of assume this thing can do anything and it can't.

It's like not that good today.

And it's going to get better.

But today it can one shot some tasks.

It can't one shot most things.

And so you kind of have to understand the limits and you have to understand like where you get in the loop.

And so like something like plan mode, it can like two, three X success rates pretty easily if you like land on the plan first.

Other stuff that I've seen power users do really well is companies that have really big deployments of quad code.

And now, you know, luckily there's a lot of these companies so we can kind of learn from them.

Having settings.

Jason that you check into the code base is really important because you can use this to pre allow certain commands so you don't get permission prompted every time and also to block certain commands.

Let's say you don't want Web fetch or whatever.

And this way as an engineer, I don't get prompted and I can check this in and share it with the whole team.

So everyone gets to use it.

I get around that by just using dangerous they skip permissions.

Yeah, we kind of we kind of have this here, but we don't you know, we don't recommend it.

It's like it's a model, you know, it can do it can do weird stuff.

I think another kind of cool use case that we've seen is people using stop hooks for interesting stuff.

So stop hook runs whenever the turn is complete.

So like this is in did some tool calls back and forth with, you know, whatever.

And it's done and it returns control back to the user.

Then we run the stop hook.

And so you can define a stop hook.

That's like if the test don't pass return the text keep going.

And essentially it's like you can just like make the model I keep going until the thing is done.

And this is just like insane when you combine it with the SDK and this kind of programmatic usage.

You can you know, this is a stochastic thing.

It's a non-deterministic thing.

But with scaffolding, you can get these deterministic outcomes.

So you guys started this sort of CLI, this CLI paradigm shift.

Do you think the CLI is the final form factor?

Are we going to using Cloud Code in the CLI primarily in a year or in three years or is there something else that's better?

I mean, it's not the final form factor, but we are very focused on making sure the CLI is like the most intelligent that we can make it.

And that's as customizable as possible.

You can talk about the next form factors.

Yeah, I mean, Kat's asking me to talk about it because no one knows.

This stuff's like it's just moving like so fast, right?

No one knows what these form factors are.

Like right now, I think our team is in experimentation mode.

So we have CLI, then we came out with an ID extension.

Now we have a new ID extension that's like a GUI.

It's a little more accessible.

We have ad-cloud and GitHub.

So you can just add quad it anywhere.

Now there's ad-cloud there's cloud on web and on mobile.

So you can use it on any of these places.

And we're just in experimentation mode.

So we're trying to figure out what's next.

I think like if we kind of zoom out and see where this stuff is headed, I think one of the big trends is longer periods of autonomy.

And so with every model, we kind of time how long can the model just keep going and do tasks autonomously and just, you know, in dangerous mode in a container, keep auto-compacting until the task is done.

And now we're on the order of like double digit hours.

I think it's like the last model is like 30 hours, something like this.

And you know, the next model is going to be days.

So you think about kind of paralyzing models.

There's kind of a bunch of problems that come out of this.

So one is what is the container this thing runs in?

Because you don't want to have to like close your laptop.

I have that right now because I'm doing a lot of disk B.

I don't know.

I've only heard.

I've only read it, but DSPY or disk B prompt optimization and like it's on my laptop and it's like, I don't want to close on like in the window, like with my laptop open because I'm like, I don't want to close it.

Yeah.

Yeah.

That's right.

And then I think for like customers, they're everyone's just like walking around with their like plot codes.

Is this running?

So I think like one is kind of getting getting away from this mode.

And then I also think pretty soon we're going to be in this mode of like clouds monitoring, Clods and kind of I don't know what the right form factor for this is because as a human, you need to be able to inspect this and kind of see what's going on.

But also it needs to be quite optimized where you're optimizing for kind of bandwidth between like the clock to clock communication.

So my prediction is terminal is not the final form factor.

My prediction is there's going to be a few more form factors in the coming months, you know, maybe like year or something like that.

And it's going to keep changing very quickly.

What do you think about, you know, I teach a lot of cloud code to a lot of every subscribers.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

I'm doing doing your work for you.

And I think the one of the big things is just the terminal is intimidating and just like being on a call with subscribers being like, here's how you open the terminal and you're allowed to do this.

Even if you're non-technical, it's like a big deal.

How do you think about that?

Yeah.

I one of the people on our marketing team started using cloud code because she was writing some content that touched on cloud code.

I was like, you should really experience it.

And she got like 30 popups on her screen where she had to accept various permissions because she'd never used a terminal before.

So I completely see eye to eye with you on that.

It's definitely hard for non-engineers.

And there's even some engineers we've found who aren't fully comfortable with working day to day in the terminal.

Our VS code GUI extension is our first step in that direction because you don't have to think about the terminal at all.

It's like a traditional interface with a bunch of buttons.

We are working on more graphical interfaces.

So cloud code on the web is a GUI.

I think that actually might be a good starting point for people who are less technical.

Yeah.

There was this magic moment maybe like a few months ago where I walked into the office and some of the data scientists at Anthropic sit right next to the cloud code team.

And the data scientists just had cloud code running on their computers.

And I was like, what is this?

How did you figure this out?

I think it was like Brandon was like the first one to do it.

And he was like, oh, yeah, I just like installed it.

Like I work on this product.

So like I should use it.

And I was like, oh, my God.

So he like he figured out how do you like use a terminal and no JS like that, you know, he hasn't really done this kind of workflow before.

Obviously like very technical.

So I think now we're starting to see all these kind of like code adjacent like functions people you use cloud code.

And yeah, it's kind of interesting.

Like from a latent demand point of view, these are people hacking the product.

So there's like demand to use it for this.

And so we want to make it a little bit easier with more accessible interfaces.

But at the same time for us for cloud code, we're laser focused on building the best product for the best engineers.

And so we're focused on software engineering and we want to make this like really good.

But we want to make it a thing that other people can can hack.

So sometimes called code will write code that's a bit verbose.

But you can just tell it to simplify it and it does a really good job.

Interesting.

And so and how are how and when are you doing that?

So you're you're using a slash command or you're I just say it.

I just say every time you're like, hey, this should be a one line change.

And I'll write five lines here, like simplify it.

And it understands immediately what you mean and fix it.

Yeah, I think a lot of people on our team do that too.

It's interesting.

Why do you like why not then if you're saying that all the time, why not then push that into like a slash command or the harness or something like that to make it just happen automatically?

We do have instructions for this in the quad MD.

I think it impacts such a low percentage of conversations that we don't want it to like over rotate in the other direction.

And then the reason why not slash command is because you actually don't need that much context.

I think slash commands really good for situations where you would otherwise have to do that.

So you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

And then you can use that to do that.

So that's a really curious thing about building DevTools.

You're your own customer.

I think it's also really a unique thing about AI.

Because it sort of reset the game board for all software.

So we have Quora, this like email assistant.

And we have like Sparkle, which organizes your files.

And it's like anything that you do for something that you want to use on your computer.

If you're building it with AI, there's a good chance that hasn't been done before.

The whole landscape has been reset.

And so it's a uniquely exciting time to build stuff for yourself.

Totally.

I think it totally opens the pointing field too.

It's like any individual can now build an app to fill their need and then distribute it to everyone else.

It's really cool.

I've been prototyping all these like random pet projects.

I just moved into a new apartment and it's empty.

And so I've been building this like shopping advisor assistant on like the Cloud Agent SDK.

Because who has time to read all the reviews and like look at all the options and find their pricing and everything's like really hard to discover.

And so it just like asks me a bunch of questions and I tell it what I want.

And it shows you a bunch of photos, like different sofas and options and what people say online.

And then I tell it what I don't like.

And it literally feels like working with a shopping assistant.

And it's been really cool.

I also have my little email response agents that like drafts responses for me.

But I don't use email that much so it's kind of weird.

I knew it wasn't you responding.

That's my seven days delayed.

The agents just take doing a very thorough job.

The agent SDK is cool though.

Yeah, the agent SDK is cool.

It always just feels amazing like how much we're able to build with such a small team.

Yeah.

The other thing that's really cool is that I think people are just shifting their mindset from docs to demos.

Like internally, our currency is actually demos.

It's like you want people to be excited about your thing.

Show us like show us 15 seconds of what it can do.

And we find that everyone on the team now has this kind of indoctrinated demo culture for sure.

And I think that's better because there's a lot of things that you might have in your head that if you're a great writer, maybe you could figure out how to explain it.

But it's just even then it's just really hard to explain.

But if someone can see it, they like get it immediately.

And I think that's happening for product building.

But it's also happening for like all sorts of other types of creative endeavors like making a movie, for example, like you had to pitch it.

But now you can just be like, I made this sort of video and like, you know, check that you can kind of see like the glimmer of the thing.

You're trying to make for very cheap.

And so that means you don't have to spend time convincing people as much.

You're going to be like, here, I made it.

Yeah.

And also as a builder, like you can just make it and then like make it again and then make it again.

So you're happy.

I feel like the flip side is like you used to make a doc or, you know, like wipe board something or, you know, like I would draw stuff in like sketch or Figma or whatever.

And now we'll just like build it until until I like how it feels.

And it's just like so easy to get that feeling out of it now.

And I think it's like you could see it visually before or you could describe it in words.

But it's like you could never get the vibe.

And now like the vibe is really easy.

Yeah.

And you build plan mode like three times.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Because of this.

Like you built it and then you threw it out and rebuilt it and then threw it out and rebuilt it.

Yeah.

We're like two dudes like Sid built the original version, like also like three or four.

He built like three or four prototypes.

And then I put it up maybe like 20 versions after that, like in like a day.

Yeah.

I think this is like a lot of pretty much everything we released.

There was at least a few prototypes behind it.

How do you like keep track of and carry forward the things you learn from prototype to prototype?

And especially if it's like, you know, some one person is prototyping it and then you're like, I'm going to take it over.

I'm going to do 20 more.

Like how do you how do you maximize what you get out of that?

You know, it's like there's maybe a few elements of it.

One is the style guide.

So there's like some elements of style that we discover.

And I think a lot of this is like building for the terminal or like we're kind of discovering a new design language for the terminal and kind of building it as we go.

And I think some of this you can codify in a style guide.

So this is our quad MD.

But then there's this other part of it that's like kind of product sense where I don't think the model totally gets it yet.

And I think maybe we should be trying to find ways to like teach the model this this kind of product sense about like this works and this doesn't work because in product you want to solve the person's problem in the simplest way possible and then delete everything else.

That's not that and just get everything out of the way.

So you kind of you you align the product to the intent as clearly as possible.

And maybe the model doesn't totally get that yet.

Yeah, it's never doesn't really feel what it's like to use quad code.

Like the model doesn't use code.

And so I think like when you know what code can like test itself and it can kind of use itself.

And like we do this one developing and it can see like UI bugs and things like that.

I don't know.

Maybe we should just try prompting it though.

You could like honestly a lot of the stuff is as simple as that like when there's some new idea usually just prompted and often it just works.

Maybe we should just try that.

A lot of the prototypes are actually the UX interactions.

And so I think once we discover a new UX interaction like shift tab for auto accept I think Boris figured out that it was the core actually.

Oh, Igor.

Yeah, we went back to the first can like fit into that.

We did like doing prototypes for a week.

Yeah, shift have felt really nice.

And then one of the now current plan mode iteration uses shift tab because it's actually just like another way to tell the model how agentic it should be.

And so I think as as more features use the same interaction you form like a stronger mental model for what should go where.

Yeah.

All right.

Like thinking I think is another really good one.

Like first we were like before we release quad code or maybe it was like the first thinking model was like three seven.

I forget what the first one was.

But yeah, it was like it was able to think and we're like brainstorming like how do we like toggle thinking and then someone was just like what if you just like ask the model to think and natural language and it knows how to think and work.

Okay, sweet.

And so like we did that for a while and then we realized that people were accidentally talking it so they were like don't think and then the models like oh I should think start thinking.

And so we had to kind of like tune it out so you know don't think didn't trigger it.

But then it still wasn't obvious that then we made a UX improvement to like highlight the yeah.

And I was like that was so fun and it felt really magical when you do ultra think it's like a rainbow.

Yeah.

And then with with sauna for five we actually find like a really really big performance improvement when you turn on extended thinking.

And so we made it really easy to toggle it because sometimes you want it sometimes you don't because you you kind of for a really simple task you don't want the model to think for like five minutes you want it to just do the thing.

And so we use tab as the interaction to toggle it and then we unshipped a bunch of the thinking words.

Although I think we kept ultra thing just for like centimeter reasons such a cool UX.

Interesting.

Do you think there's some there's some new metric that's about what you deleted and I think programmers have always felt like you know deleting a bunch of code feels really good.

But there's something about because you can build stuff so fast it becomes more important to like also delete stuff.

I think my favorite kind of diff to see is a red diff.

Whatever is it when I'm like yeah bring it on another one another one.

But you know but it's hard because like anything you ship people are using it and so you got to keep people happy.

And so I think generally our principle is if we unchip something we need to ship something even better that can kind of that people can can take advantage of that kind of matches that intent even better.

And yeah I think this is kind of back to like how do you measure like quad code and the impact of it and this is something like every company every customer asks us about.

And I think like in so internally at anthropic I think we like doubled in size since January or something like that.

But then productivity per engineer has increased like almost 70 percent in that time.

Measured by.

I think we actually measured it.

Yeah in a few ways but kind of peers are the simplest one and the main one.

But like you said like this isn't capture the full extent of it because a lot of this is like making it easier to prototype making it easier to try new things making it easier to these things that you never would have tried because they're way below the cut line.

You're watching a feature and there's this kind of like wish list of stuff now you just do all because you wouldn't have done it.

So yeah it's really hard to talk about it.

And then there's this flip side of it where more code is written so you have to delete more code.

You have to code review more carefully and you know automate automate code review as much as you can.

There's also like an interesting like new product management challenge because you can ship so much that you end up it ends up not feeling as cohesive because you could just like add button here and like a tab there and like a little thing here.

Like it's just it's much easier to build a product that has all the features you want but doesn't have any sort of organizing principle because you're just shipping lots of stuff all the time.

I think we try to be pretty disciplined about this and making sure that all the abstractions are really easy to understand for someone even if they just hear the name of the feature.

We have this principle that I believe Boris brought to the team that I really like where we don't want a new user experience.

Everything should be so intuitive.

They just drop in and it just works.

And I think that's that's really set the bar really high for making sure every feature is really intuitive.

How do you do that with a conversational UI because you know when there's not a bunch of buttons and knobs and it's just a blank text box to start.

How do you think about making it intuitive.

There's a lot of like little things that we do like we teach people that they can use the question mark to see tips.

We show tips as clock code is working.

We have like the change log on the side.

We tell you about like oh there's a new model that's out or like we show you at the bottom.

We have a notification section for thinking.

I think there's just like subtle ways in which we tell users about features.

I think the other thing that's really important is to just make sure that all the primitives are very clearly defined.

Like hooks have a common meaning in the developer ecosystem.

Plugins have a very common meaning in the developer ecosystem and just making sure that what we build matches what like the you know the average developer would immediately think of when they hear that.

There's this also this like progressive disclosure thing like you know to any any time in quad code when you run it you can hit control to see like the full raw transcript the same thing the model sees.

And we don't like show you this until it's actually relevant.

So when there's a tool result that's collapsed then we'll say use control to see it.

So we kind of we don't want to put too much complexity on you at the start because this thing can do you know anything.

I think there's this other kind of new principle which we've just started exploring which is like the model teaches you how to use the thing.

And so you can ask what code about itself and it kind of knows to look up its own documentation to tell you about it.

But we can also go even deeper like for example slash commands are a thing that people can use but also the model can call slash commands and maybe you see the model calling it.

And then you'll be like oh yeah I guess I can do that too.

Yeah yeah yeah yeah.

Interesting.

How has it changed like you know when you first started doing this.

Cod code was this sort of like singular thing the singular way of thinking about you know using AI through a CLI and other people had stuff like this but it felt like this shift.

And now there's a whole landscape of everyone is like going to see a lie see a lie feel like how has that changed how you think about building how it feels to build and how are you dealing with this sort of pressure of the race that you're in.

I think for me like imitation is the greatest flattery.

So it's like you know it's awesome and it's just like it's cool to see all this other stuff that everyone else is building like inspired by this and I think this is ultimately the goal is to kind of inspire people to build this next thing for this just incredible technology that's that's coming and that's just really exciting.

Personally I don't really use a lot of other tools so usually when something new comes out all maybe just try it to get a vibe.

But otherwise I think we're pretty focused on just solving problems that we have and our customers have and kind of building the next thing.

Cool.

Sweet.

I love this part of the interview too.

Questions questions do.

Oh do we get through all my team's questions.

Let's see.

I think we did.

I'm curious also how you would answer like the unshipping question because also if like if you're doing this kind of like a driven development you should be live.

You have a small team so that's a lot of operational load.

The reason I asked that is because I don't think we do a good job of that.

And I have this feeling that some of the products are like a little bit messy because of that.

And I think particularly for Cora there's just a big product surface area and it can do a lot of different things like it.

We have an email system so you can ask it like you know tell me about the trip I'm taking and it'll go through all your emails and you know summarize the trip or we have this feature that it automatically archives any email that you don't need to respond to immediately.

And then twice a day you get a brief that summarizes all the stuff that you probably need to see but you don't need to like actually do anything with and you just scroll through it and you're done.

And there's just like all this there's all this complexity that around you know for example how our emails categorized and now we have a whole view of all these categorization rules and you can order them and whatever but like it's just complicated and hard to communicate and and and I want to retain a lot of the.

Like all the power and flexibility but also you can't look at a screen and be like I have no idea what's going on this is like way too complicated so that's I'm just like I'm processing all that stuff so that kind of like deletion you know on on on shipping idea feels like an interesting.

Cultural principle that we haven't really explored.

It's really hard I think there's like a social cost to it too or like you kind of want to be the person who tells your co-workers on ship.

Something true.

Yeah, it's more than just the code.

I definitely were on the side Instagram honestly because I think Facebook does a terrible job at unshipping and we had this problem where every time we I think even like unshipping pokes was like really spicy because there's a bunch of these like old timers.

They're like no pokes you're never going to take it away but like if you look at the data no one really uses anymore.

But for sentimental reasons they were kind of tied to it and so like for Facebook it always maybe nothing ever got on ship to always got moved to like a secondary place like a you know like an overflow menu somewhere that no one looks at like a graveyard.

I think Instagram was just very principled there was like you know very strong in product and design point of view those like if this thing isn't used by like half of people you know 50% of Wow or whatever we're just going to delete it and deal with it and then we'll figure out some next thing that's used by more people.

I love it.

Well, thank you.

This is amazing.

I'm really glad I got to talk to you and keep building.

Thank you for having us.

Yeah, thanks.

Oh my gosh folks, you absolutely positively have to smash that like button and subscribe to AI and I why because this show is the epitome of awesomeness.

It's like finding a treasure chest in your backyard.

But instead of gold, it's filled with pure unadulterated knowledge bombs about chat GPT.

Every episode is a roller coaster of emotions insights and laughter that will leave you on the edge of your seat craving for more.

It's not just a show.

It's a journey into the future with Dan shipper as the captain of the spaceship.

So do yourself a favor hit like smash subscribe and strap in for the ride of your life.

And now without any further ado, let me just say Dan.

I'm absolutely hopelessly in love with you.