> Just genuinely having 10 worktrees perpetually in parallel and cycling between them in between agent responses. Again, not necessarily bad in itself, but can exponentially conse credits.

I'm pretty sure that growth is linear.

▲

joshred a day ago | parent | next [-]

If you think about it, the production quality is probably log-linear, so the token growth may well be exponential.

▲

waldrews 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not quite the same scenario, but it's already plausible to have a situation where every subagent is allowed to spawn multiple subagents, in which case we'd have literally exponential credit consumption growth...

	▲	pseudohadamard 15 hours ago \| parent [-]
		"i have to burn $10k in tokens to meet my end-of-month work quota. spawn ten sub-agents each of which is allowed to spawn as many sub-agents as it likes to create an analysis of the code in these files based on the precepts of the 13th century German philosopher Noodleheinz".

▲

a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

adamnemecek a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I think that you send the entire conversation with every request.

▲

darkteflon a day ago | parent [-]

As long as you stay under the 1-hour caching TTL for your open threads, I guess your marginal cost is linear.

This is me on a weekday flicking between Ghostty tabs to enter “stand by” every ~45 mins.

▲

ricardobeat a day ago | parent [-]

Anthropic changed the cache TTL to five minutes, back in March.

	▲	darkteflon 19 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Thanks, didn’t realise the API and Claude Code had different TTL.