Edit: I kinda expected this from the sub, but it’s funny that most users want to tell me that Ultracode could not be improved, makes it immediately obvious to the average user how it should be used, and the prompt design of “use as many tokens as possible and pay no attention to cost” is genius. I have yet to see someone show me how Ultracode is better than instructing the model to delegate tasks to sub-agents. You can skip the “it’s clear it uses more usage” part. That was never the complaint. If you want to complain, at least read it correctly. Ultracode needs a big, fat warning label. I thought it meant parallelizing work, but it’s actually just token-maxing. Burning your usage as fast as possible, with no regard to cost, quality or time. For reference, it turned a five-minute job into a 40-agent pipeline: draft > plan > implement > review > fix > review 2 > fix 2 > critique > fix 3 > integration > review > fix. By the fifth round of agents, the work had drifted so far, it wasn’t even what I asked for. My voxel models came back as pre-rendered claymation. Apparently, the instruction is specifically to ignore all costs or time and split the work up as much as possible across as many sub-agents possible. Maybe that works if you’re an Anthropic employee with unlimited usage who knows the quirks. For the average user, it’s worse than useless. They could have at least given it a more transparent name, like “/usage-shredder”. I’m not actually mad. Everything was in Git, and I only tried it because I had usage to burn before my reset. I was just surprised at how bad it is. This can definitely work with the right claude.md restrictions and the right work. But that is not apparent when selecting it, and I can see how many will get burned by it or turn it on, go get a coffee, and come back to no usage and an over-engineered garbage result. I also don’t see the benefit over just creating a custom workflow myself submitted by /u/Southern-Grass3760
Originally posted by u/Southern-Grass3760 on r/ClaudeCode