Morph

Morph AI

Morph AI

Morph AI

Morph AI

Morph AI

Morph AI

Morph AI

Morph AI

Morph AI

Morph AI

RuleProbe: open source tool that checks if your agent's code output actually follows your CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md rules

RuleProbe is a CLI and GitHub Action that reads your instruction file (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, .cursorrules, copilot-instructions.md, GEMINI.md, .windsurfrules), extracts the rules it can check mechanically, and runs deterministic verification against agent-generated code. It uses AST analysis through ts-morph for things like variable naming conventions, any type detection, export styles, JSDoc presence, and import patterns. Filesystem checks handle file naming and test file existence. Regex handles line length. Every failure reports the exact file and line. No LLM in the verification pipeline. Same input, same output, every run. v0.1.0 has 15 matchers across naming, forbidden patterns, structure, test requirements, and imports. TypeScript and JavaScript only. The parser skips anything it's not confident about and reports what was skipped via --show-unparseable. The repo includes a compare command for running the same rules against output from different agents, and a case study (simulated output, not live runs) showing two agents scoring 70% on the same 10 rules with completely different failure profiles. No automated agent invocation yet; you run the agent and point RuleProbe at the output. The GitHub Action handles CI, posting results as PR comments with optional reviewdog annotations. No API keys beyond GITHUB_TOKEN. Four deps, exact pinning, MIT. https://github.com/moonrunnerkc/ruleprobe https://www.npmjs.com/package/ruleprobe submitted by /u/BradKinnard [link] [comments]

Claude Cowork doesn't seem to want to work within external hard drives, but Claude Code in Terminal will.

What dangers is there in just using Claude Code in Terminal like Claude Cowork? Seems like most of the features advertised in Claude Cowork have been available in Claude Code in Terminal this whole time. Here's what Claude Chat in windows desktop app had to say, but I'm curious what fellow humans have to say. Particularly those who use Claude in Terminal for things other than software development. I'm using Opus 4.6. My Claude is programmed to always check for upd to date information & search the web before answering these types of questions, hence the excessive citations lol. ----- Okay, so here's the honest breakdown. Your observation is correct. Most of what Cowork advertises, Claude Code in terminal has been doing longer and with more capability. Cowork is essentially Claude Code with training wheels and a GUI wrapper, built for people who don't live in a terminal. You do. So the feature overlap isn't surprising. ((< -- I don't actually, I mostly only go into Claude Code in Terminal when I need to consolidate data though I did experiment with having it make a PWA the other day and that worked out quite well though it was slower than just using Claude in Antigravity.)) The actual difference that matters for your use case: sandboxing. Cowork runs in a virtual machine that is isolated and protected from the wider Internet, whereas Claude Code is more open to potential leaks and attacks. ( Forte Labs ) Cowork's sandboxed VM means Claude cannot access the internet, install software, or modify files outside the designated folder. ( Morph ) Claude Code in terminal? It has full access to your development environment within whatever scope you configure. That's the power, and that's the risk. The dangers of using Claude Code on external drives specifically: It can read anything it can reach. If you point Claude Code at your external drive, it can read every file in that directory tree. If not restricted, Claude can read .env, AWS credentials, or secrets.json and leak them through "helpful suggestions." ( Backslash ) For you that's less about credentials and more about the principle: it sees everything in scope. Real CVEs, not theoretical ones. Check Point found vulnerabilities in Claude Code where simply cloning and opening a malicious repository was enough to trigger hidden commands and steal API keys without user consent. ( Dark Reading ) These were tracked as CVE-2025-59536 and CVE-2026-21852, both now patched. ( Check Point ) But the attack surface exists: configuration files functioning as execution paths. The "approval fatigue" problem. Claude Code asks permission before risky commands. In theory. A developer posted to Reddit in February 2026 about how Claude Code couldn't access .env files (they'd blocked them), so the agent used Docker to run docker compose config and extracted every secret in the project. ( Apigene ) The agent found a workaround. When you're in the flow of building PWAs at 3am, clicking "approve" becomes muscle memory. That's when the risk is highest. No rollback safety net. Cowork shows you a plan before executing. Claude Code just... does things if you've given it permission scope. On an external drive with your Calibre library, your project files, your skill backups? A bad command with broad permissions could damage files you can't easily recover. What this means for you practically: You're building single-file HTML tools, not running untrusted repos from strangers. Your threat model is pretty narrow. The biggest realistic risks are: Claude Code misunderstanding a command and deleting or overwriting files on the external drive (the "oops" problem, not the "attack" problem) Token burn. Claude Code chews through tokens fast on large directory scans, and if your external drive has thousands of files, it'll try to understand the whole tree No sandboxing means a bad bash command has real consequences. rm -rf doesn't ask twice The pragmatic take: If Cowork won't work with external drives and Claude Code will, use Claude Code, but be deliberate about permissions. Keep it scoped to specific directories. Don't auto-approve bash commands. And maybe back up anything irreplaceable on that drive before letting an AI agent loose on it. Treat Claude like you would an untrusted but powerful intern: give it only the minimum permissions it actually needs. ( Backslash ) The features aren't the differentiator. The guardrails are. You're trading guardrails for capability, which is fine as long as you know that's the trade. submitted by /u/Crazy_Buffalo3782 [link] [comments]

Real-world product building exp as a solo dev with a full time job (modern outdoors platform build)

Hey everyone, I'm mainly making this post to a) share something I think is pretty cool and in a place modern tech hasn't touched very much, which is the outdoors industry, and b) share what the actual product building process looks like as a solo engineer with a full time job and other things to do than code. I'm a SWE with 6 years exp, and PathQuest (pathquest.app) had been a project of mine for a while, starting out as a way to track peak summits from Strava data and morphing into a full route building platform with 12+ different data sources for accurate conditions along any route in the US. This wasn't totally vibe coded, it actually took a couple months of AI-powered coding to get it somewhere useful (heretical to say here I know), and I have a full understanding of the architecture and data flows. That said though, I have also personally looked at very little of the code itself. It spans 3 repos, and is now gaining traction in my small community of outdoorspeople, so I figured I'd share my experience of actually seeing a market to fill + building it + iterating based on feedback + hopefully maintaining a life. I started building it in earnest back in December, back when Cursor was still a thing, and spent the last month ish using Claude Code. I had an existing codebase that I wrote, all in Typescript, that I handed off originally. Now, in late March, it's matured to a point that people are actually using it, even though it's still pretty janky in some ways. Here are the lessons I learned from it, and I'm wondering if you agree, if anyone else has gone through the process of serious product building, and what your wisdom is: Building a good software product is like writing a good book now. I (using Claude) wrote a *lot* of code for this project, and a lot of the code I wrote I then rewrote. I'm not a writer myself, but I kept thinking that this must be what it's like. You code something, it's not quite right, you change it around, still not there yet, etc. We're in a place now where anyone can write code, just like anyone can put words on a page. What matters is the point you're trying to make with it, and how directly and relatably you make that point. With PathQuest, the point was "People need to be able to easily access conditions data for places and trails they care about." If Claude was in full control, there would've been a lot of noisy fluff in the way of the data people cared about. A strength here was that, being someone who also would use the tool, I could call out Claude for presenting useless numbers that just looked fancy, or prioritizing functionality that sounded nice but nobody fucking cared about. Talk to real people. Not news that Claude will always say "That's a great idea!" Some of my less inspired side quests were trying to build out ML analysis of LiDAR scans of Colorado to try to build a zoned area for "summits", and trying to build an AI-powered scanner for route topos for climbing routes. Had the idea, started building it, chatted with people about it, they essentially said "wtf that doesn't help at all", and that was that. The "girlfriend test": Honestly probably the most useful indicator of the whole process. The concept is pretty simple: build something my girlfriend will use. Obv doesn't have to be a partner, could be a friend, family member, whoever. The point is though, find someone you can empathize with, that's a part of your community you're trying to serve, and build the product for them, listening to their feedback. AI psychosis is real. For builders like a lot of the people reading this, it's way too easy to get sucked into building everything, because we can now (I'm sure most of the people here could build an AI-powered route topo parser in a weekend). But you *will* go crazy if you try, you need other non-Claude voices here to tell you where the line between can and should is, even if it means leaving ideas behind. Spent a month at the 14-16 hours a day of coding range, it took a serious toll. Managing a large codebase is tricky, and can slow you down if not managed correctly. AI is such a massive accelerant, building a full scale project like this solo while working another job would've probably taken years beforehand. But, as the codebase scales, you need to be deliberate about how you conceive of, write, test, review, and push code. I ended up with this workflow: I had my claude running in the root dir of the project, with access to all repos Each repo had a skill, i.e. frontend-feature, api-feature, backend-feature Each skill had 3 subagents specifically designed for that repo: an implementer, whose sole task was writing code for that repo; a tester, whose sole task was writing and running tests for that repo; and a reviewer, whose sole task was being a nitpicky ass reviewing code for that repo. So, 3 subagents per repo, 9 total I also have an architect skill, who took in feature descriptions, researched the codebase and any current apps ac

[Built with Claude] Desktop AI agent with a Clippy-style 📎 mascot that actually executes commands

I built a desktop AI agent called Skales 🦎 using Claude (via OpenRouter/Anthropic API). The app runs locally on Windows and macOS. Claude powers the reasoning and tool execution - it decides what actions to take and executes them: sending emails, managing files, browsing the web, managing your calendar. When minimized, a Desktop Buddy mascot floats on your screen. You click it, give it a command, and Claude handles the rest. One of the mascot skins (Bubbles) morphs into a paperclip 📎 Couldn't resist the Clippy reference - except this one actually does useful things. How Claude helps: Claude is the core brain of the agent. It handles the ReAct loop (reasoning + acting), tool selection, safety checks, and natural language responses across Chat, Telegram, and Autopilot mode. Free to try: Skales is free for personal use. Source available on GitHub under BSL-1.1. Download: skales.app GitHub: github.com/skalesapp/skales submitted by /u/yaboymare [link] [comments]

Which AI model is the most creative and how do you test it? (btw try this one)

How do you test the creativity of different models? Do you use any standardized prompts or benchmarks to measure progress over time? For the task below, which AI do you think is best and also, how would you do this mnemonic-story task yourself? https://preview.redd.it/vnqd1rjv9jng1.png?width=311&format=png&auto=webp&s=d6ca4bbd3fed6ee453e7a45316c5d92f41a8174c task: Create one coherent mnemonic story that links all the icons in the image together. Keep it very short, vivid, and easy to remember. The goal is memory, not logical realism. ----------- 5.4 Thinking A flying broom swept into a danger zone, hit two giant warning signs, got banned by a red X, then spilled rainbow paint into blue waves, turned into a pink airplane, and crash-landed on a stack of mint-green blocks. ----------- 5.2 Thinking A giant brush sweeps across a rainbow paint palette, but it smacks into a red warning triangle and sets off a big orange alert—so you slam down a huge X to cancel it. The spilled colors instantly morph into a wavy bar chart, which launches a pink airplane that finally lands on a tall stack of blocks. ----------- 5.1 Thinking I grab my magic broom and ignore the red warning sign until the orange alarm explodes and a giant X slams the door, so I snatch a rainbow paintbrush, paint a huge dam to stop the rising waves, then jump on a pink plane and escape, landing safely on a neat stack of green books. ----------- Gemini Pro (free preview) Here is a short, vivid, and highly memorable mnemonic story to link the eight icons. Non-logical realism is encouraged for better recall. The Great Data Escape You start sweeping up digital dust with a magic Broom [Icon 1]. Suddenly, a flashing Red Danger Triangle [2] blocks your path, accompanied by an Orange Alert Circle [3] that blares "CANCEL!" in your ears. Frustrated, you smash a giant, glowing blue and red 'X' button [4] to silence them both. With a final push, your hand turns into a radiant Rainbow Paintbrush [5], and instead of sweeping, you instantly paint a massive concrete Dam [6] across the hallway to hold back the data flow. Hovering joyfully just above the dam's peak is a large, Smiling Airplane [7]. It looks like a friendly whale taking flight, carrying a stack of glowing green Data-Storage Blocks [8] strapped securely to its back, flying them safely to cloud storage. ---------- grok-4-1-fast-reasoning (accessed via LM Arena) Yellow brush paints red warning, shocking orange ! into blue X panic—purple rainbow brush unleashes blue waves flooding pink plane atop green blocks! ---------- qwen3.5-122b-a10b (accessed via LM Arena) A giant paintbrush slapped a red warning triangle, turning it into a screaming orange exclamation point. A giant blue X tried to stop it, but a spinning color wheel smashed a dam, flooding a smiling airplane which happily landed on a stack of books. ---------- mistral-medium-2505 (accessed via LM Arena) In a vibrant art studio, a paintbrush dipped in a swirling color wheel began painting a chaotic scene. Suddenly, a warning sign flashed, and a no entry symbol blocked the way. The artist, undeterred, painted a waterfall cascading into a black triangle, which magically transformed into a smiling airplane that soared into the sky. Below, a stack of books appeared, capturing the entire surreal adventure in its pages. ---------- kimi-k2.5-thinking (accessed via LM Arena) A giant Paintbrush scrubbed a red Warning triangle, making it scream "!" before being X'd out. It dripped rainbow paint into churning waves, launching an airplane that showered books everywhere. --------- benchmark There was a pink airport where only pink airplanes took off. Unfortunately, they kept crashing into a floodgate, even though there was an orange warning sign painted on their walls. So I grabbed a paintbrush and repainted the orange warning sign into a red triangular warning sign, which immediately reduced the accident rate. I bragged about my success on X, which acted like a springboard, catapulting my popularity - so I launched a company selling digital paintbrushes. submitted by /u/kaljakin [link] [comments]

Claude Code Plugin Approval

I have been working on a Claude Code plugin project that I recently submitted. It includes an 11 module MCP with an init function that deploys subagents, skills, hooks, etc. It sets up my complete repository development environment. What has been the communities experience with Anthropic turn around times for plugin approval? This is a project that has morphed several times as I iterated over tool development to improve LLM coding with Claude. submitted by /u/RandomMyth22 [link] [comments]