Comment by linsomniac
2 days ago
I feel like I get a lot of what this article presents as "hidden" by using this process:
- "Read `description` and create a specification, implementation guide, and checklist." - "Ask clarifying questions. If any of those questions has a clear best recommendation, please select that yourself and record that in "autorecommendations.md". - "Have codex and antigravity review each of these and work to consensus."
These are the core of ~61 lines of prompting I do across 3 prompts, and I feel like the resulting artifacts describe some of the thinking. Also, some of the back-and-forth between the models feels like it gives some insight into the model "thinking".
I will say: I heavily used Fable when it was available; Opus + loops + codex and/or antigravity review is better than Fable at building things.
What are you using exactly to have claude code natively interact with codex and antigravity?
Mind sharing your prompts?
I wrote up the prompts and supporting information here: https://linsomniac.com/post/2026-06-22-ai_loops_and_collabor...
Not at all, I do have a meeting here, I'll try to get it up in around 2h.
is it strictly necessary to use different models or can you get similar results by doing the same thing but just using eg Codex in different agents & persona? curious if you've compared this
I haven't specifically compared this. I "feel" like the different models have different strengths and weaknesses, so the collaboration produces great results, assuming cost is no object. ;-)