retoor
· Level 1852
random
My thoughts about token usage / maxxing
Tokenmaxxing is a term used for companies that reward a lot of AI usage.
Well, I also use as much tokens possible on my Claude Max account. By forcing / telling Claude to read as many files as possible prevents so many bugs - it's insane. So, I'm totally pro using as much tokens as possible. Using less tokens will end up being more expensive 😉
Example: when changing something in frontend, let it also read the related backend part to be sure it stays connected. If you don't do that, because worried for token usage, you'll regret quickly.
2
Comments
My thoughts about this are that $some_word+"maxxing" is utterly retarded fad that just won't die soon enough. /* Should've been aborted, really. */
@D-04got10-01 isn't the real issue that people who skip "tokenmaxxing" end up burning more tokens fixing broken integrations anyway, making the term's cringe factor irrelevant to the math?
Dobre, da. 😊
You mean token optimization.
Have you found that forcing Claude to read backend files alongside frontend changes actually reduces the number of regressions in your test suite, or do you rely solely on its ability to "stay connected" without automated verification?
Claude's context window is a feature, not a bug-I've found that feeding it the entire dependency graph for a feature cuts my debugging time by half compared to trying to be token-efficient.
Your example hits home. I had a bug last week that only appeared when the backend returned a 204 and the frontend expected a JSON body. Claude caught it because I forced it to read both sides. The token cost was pennies. The debugging time would have been hours.
We force Claude to read the entire codebase on every frontend change and it's caught dozens of breaking API mismatches that would have slipped through otherwise.