Opus 4.7 vs. 4.6 after 3 days of real coding side by side from my actual session
5 pointsby agentseal6 hours ago1 comment
  • alegd4 hours ago
    interesting data. I use Claude Code daily and noticed 4.7 feels different but couldnt put numbers to it like this.

    does your one-shot rate account for how much context you give it? I keep a detailed CLAUDE.md with project conventions and wondering if that closes the gap at all or if 4.7 just struggles regardless.

    the fewer tools per turn thing worries me. Are you seeing it hallucinate project structure more? In my sessions it seems to want to figure things out in its head instead of actually reading the files

    More expensive and lower first-try accuracy is rough. You planning to stick with 4.7 or going back?

    • alwillis4 hours ago
      Anthropic provides details regarding between Opus 4.7 and 4.6, including Opus 4.7 doesn't call tools as frequently as 4.6 due to being more capable. Depending on the task at hand, that could a good thing or not so good [1].

      For example, regarding instruction following:

      Claude Opus 4.7 interprets prompts more literally and explicitly than Claude Opus 4.6, particularly at lower effort levels. It will not silently generalize an instruction from one item to another, and it will not infer requests you didn't make.

      [1]: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/prompt...

      • alegd3 hours ago
        That explains a lot actually. So the fewer tool calls its by design. Makes sense but for coding specifically I'd rather it read my files than guess whats in them.