4 ms·

This is an interesting and complex ui decision to make. Might it have been better to retire and/or rename the feature, if the underlying action was very differ

This is an interesting and complex ui decision to make. Might it have been better to retire and/or rename the feature, if the underlying action was very different? I work on silly basic stuff compared to Claude Code, but I find that I confuse fewer users if I rename a button instead of just changing the underlying effect. This causes me to have to create new docs, and hopefully triggers affected users to find those docs, when they ask themselves “what happened to that button?”

bcherny 8mo ago
Yeah, in hindsight, we probably should have renamed it.
- nazgul17 8mo ago
  It's not too late.
  - duncangh 8mo ago
    This verbose mode discussion has gotten quite verbose lol
- ivan_gammel 8mo ago
  You can call it “output granularity” and allow Java logger style configuration, e.g. allowing certain operations to be very verbose while others being simply aggregated
  - btown 8mo ago
    If we're going there, we need to make the logging dynamically configurable with Log4J-style JNDI and LDAP. It's entirely secure as history has shown - and no matter what, it'll still be more secure than installing OpenClaw! (Kidding aside, logging complexity is a slippery slope, and I think it's important, perhaps even at a societal level, for an organization like Anthropic to default to a posture that allows people to feel they have visibility into where their agentic workflows are getting their context from. To the extent that "___ puts you in control" becomes important as rogue agentic behavior is increasingly publicized, it's in keeping with, and arguably critical to, Claude's brand messaging.)
    - ivan_gammel 8mo ago
      They don’t have to reproduce it literally. It’s an UX problem with many solutions. My point is, you cannot settle on some „average“ solution here. It’s likely that some agents, some operations will be more trustworthy, some less, but that will be highly dependent on context of the execution.

bcherny 8mo ago

Yeah, in hindsight, we probably should have renamed it.

nazgul17 8mo ago
It's not too late.
- duncangh 8mo ago
  This verbose mode discussion has gotten quite verbose lol
ivan_gammel 8mo ago
You can call it “output granularity” and allow Java logger style configuration, e.g. allowing certain operations to be very verbose while others being simply aggregated
- btown 8mo ago
  If we're going there, we need to make the logging dynamically configurable with Log4J-style JNDI and LDAP. It's entirely secure as history has shown - and no matter what, it'll still be more secure than installing OpenClaw! (Kidding aside, logging complexity is a slippery slope, and I think it's important, perhaps even at a societal level, for an organization like Anthropic to default to a posture that allows people to feel they have visibility into where their agentic workflows are getting their context from. To the extent that "___ puts you in control" becomes important as rogue agentic behavior is increasingly publicized, it's in keeping with, and arguably critical to, Claude's brand messaging.)
  - ivan_gammel 8mo ago
    They don’t have to reproduce it literally. It’s an UX problem with many solutions. My point is, you cannot settle on some „average“ solution here. It’s likely that some agents, some operations will be more trustworthy, some less, but that will be highly dependent on context of the execution.