| ▲ | arcanemachiner 7 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I've been trying out RTK and it seems kinda alright. I doubt it's saving much, but the quality of the work feels similar. But if it's making a dent in token usage (which I have not personally measured), then that's great. I had to add some system prompt instructions to Pi to help it work (GPT 5.5 initially got confused when `git status` looked different than expected). The Claude Code extension appears to do a proper job of informing the agent about the unexpected shape of the output without any extra work on my part. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | lackoftactics 7 hours ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
so how do you justify it's usage if it's not saving much and the work feels similiar. They have 664 issues open and some of them are quite funny, the tools are called and return success even though they aren't even installed. My take is that handling so many versions and so many different tools shouldn't be the work of any single repo. The responsibility should be either on coding agent to compress or best case scenario people who are responsible for cli tool | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||