In a fresh development, this doesn't affect our editorial independence. When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission.

The report highlights that i’ve been using two of the newest Claude and ChatGPT models to tinker with my personal self-hosted projects… and lately, I’ve found myself drowning in bugs.

Industry observers note that rather, they’re finding them… everywhere they look. Indeed, my queue of open “issues” seems to have doubled in the past week, filled with critical flaws and elaborate workarounds, each broken down into multiple steps. Not that Claude Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol (which powers the fresh GPT Work agent) are causing bugs in my code.

In a fresh development, even worse, when I ask one of the models to review the issue of another, the reviewing model invariably finds all kinds of problems with the first model’s work, leading to yet more multi-step fixes.

In a fresh development, i’m a Claude Pro and ChatGPT Plus subscriber ($20/month each), and lately I’m blowing half my weekly allowance chasing bugs found by Claude Opus 5 and GPT-5.6. All these fixes are taking a toll on my usage limits.

As part of the ongoing story, and this isn’t just an issue for coders, by the way—it’s a problem for anyone who needs help with editing work proposals, reviewing Excel spreadsheets, or performing any number of everyday AI duties while on a token budget. I’m all for being thorough, but the nitpicky nature of the fresh Claude and GPT models is akin to a body shop mechanic who wants to replace the hood of your car after spotting a tiny nick in the paint.

According to the latest update, so I asked Claude Opus 5 for an “on a budget” prompt that takes a task and asks the AI to respect your usage limits, separating real problems from cosmetic ones and scaling down the scope to something that’s considerate of your time and wallet.

In a fresh development, telling GPT-5.6 to go back and follow the instructions in the original prompt, it quickly backtracked (“You’re right—I gold-plated the review”) and narrowed the list to three. Naturally, Opus 5 spat out a fairly lengthy six-point plan for the prompt, and when I asked GPT-5.6 Sol to review it, it gave me a dozen detailed criticisms.

According to the latest update, here’s the final prompt that Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol agreed upon, pared down to four bullet points from the original six (and yes, it borrowed the “body shop” metaphor I originally gave it):.

The report highlights that match the effort to what the task is actually worth — like a good mechanic, not a body shop upselling a fresh hood over a paint chip. Before you start, treat my time and usage budget as a real constraint.

According to the latest update, if you’re about to propose something elaborate, first check whether a 3-line version gets 90% of the value. – **Smallest fix that fully solves the stated problem.** No scope creep, no “while we’re here” refactors, no gold-plating.

According to the latest update, recommending less is a win; don’t pad the list to seem thorough. – **Separate what matters from what doesn’t.** Say what’s worth doing now, what’s minor, and what to leave alone.

Industry observers note that – **Rank by value-for-cost.** Give a rough effort (S/M/L) per item, put cheap high-impact things first, and flag anything whose fix costs more than the problem it prevents.

According to the latest update, – **Verify cheaply.** Check the claims that would change the plan; don’t audit everything.

The report highlights that unless I explicitly ask you to execute, give me a short ranked plan and stop.

In a fresh development, (HomeBridge is an open-source service that connects a wide variety of third party and otherwise-incompatible smart home devices to the Apple Home ecosystem.) Claude Opus had originally proposed four detailed changes to my code to tidy up my HomeBridge instance, or about three more than I’d bargained for. I tried this prompt with Opus 5 on a Claude Code project for tightening up my local HomeBridge installation.

The report highlights that after using the “on a budget” prompt, Opus came back with this:.

In a fresh development, i proposed a four-PR program; most of that was thoroughness, not value … Only one of these four issues describes something that is actively costing you anything today. Good constraint — and it changes my earlier answer.

As part of the ongoing story, his coverage of artificial intelligence interrogates the most recent LLMs, and how they can be used at work and at home to be best prepared for the AI revolution. “AI is going to change our lives sooner than we think,” Ben writes. “Our best way to adapt is by using it every day.” Ben has been a PCWorld author since 2014, and has covered everything from laptops to security cameras before launching PCWorld’s AI beat. Ben's articles have also appeared in PC Magazine, TIME, Wired, CNET, Men's Fitness, Mobile Magazine, and more. Ben holds a master's degree in English literature. Ben has been writing about consumer technology for more than 20 years, and now focuses his reporting on AI as it relates to the basic human experience.