Vol. IIssue 11 Search

Educational AI Daily

Artificial intelligence, as told by three teaching communities

Vibe coding 12 November

Coding with Fable

Anthropic recommends telling Fable 5.2 the code is its own if you want it to reorganise it

Anthropic's guide to Fable 5.2 explains that the model behaves differently depending on who is named as the owner of the code, at a cost in tokens.

A thread in the group shared an article from Xataka about a guideline in Anthropic's guide to prompting Claude Fable 5.2: the model pays close attention to who owns the code it is working on.

According to the guide, in the company's tests on small programming tasks, if the prompt says nothing about the owner, or presents the code as someone else's, the model tends to add to what exists even if it duplicates code. If it is told it is the long-term owner and maintainer, it merges the repeated code into a shared function in around 75% of runs, compared with under 10% without that sentence. The figures come from the company itself.

The guide also warns of the price: output tokens rose by between 70% and 80%, the model made changes nobody had asked for (mostly tests and documentation) and occasionally altered the behaviour of a function. For that reason it recommends not using the sentence when the code belongs to the user and the aim is to touch as little as possible, and checking the summary of changes, which may leave out small modifications.

For anyone building educational apps with agents, the use is to decide, case by case, whether they want an assistant that respects the existing structure or one that improves it.

Read the original conversation in Vibe Coding Educativo

Checked in

Comments

Commenting requires a free GitHub account. Comments are public and stored on GitHub.

Back to the front page