Tag: Claude AI

  • How Many Words Is a Million Claude Tokens? (2026) — and How the New Tokenizer Changed the Math

    How Many Words Is a Million Claude Tokens? (2026) — and How the New Tokenizer Changed the Math

    Last verified: June 13, 2026

    A million Claude tokens equals roughly 750,000 words on Claude Sonnet 4.6 — but only about 555,000 words on Claude Opus 4.7, Claude Opus 4.8, and Claude Fable 5. The gap comes from a new tokenizer that Anthropic introduced with Opus 4.7: it emits up to 35% more tokens from the same text. The only reliable way to measure your actual token count is the /v1/messages/count_tokens endpoint.

    Token-to-word conversion by model (1 million tokens)

    Anthropic publishes word equivalents directly in the context-window tooltips on the official models overview page. The figures below come from those tooltips.

    Model Tokenizer Context window ~Words per 1M tokens ~Pages per 1M tokens*
    Claude Fable 5 (claude-fable-5) New (Opus 4.7) 1M tokens ~555,000 ~2,200
    Claude Opus 4.8 (claude-opus-4-8) New (Opus 4.7) 1M tokens ~555,000 ~2,200
    Claude Opus 4.7 (claude-opus-4-7) New (Opus 4.7) 1M tokens ~555,000 ~2,200
    Claude Sonnet 4.6 (claude-sonnet-4-6) Older 1M tokens ~750,000 ~3,000
    Claude Haiku 4.5 (claude-haiku-4-5) Older 200k tokens ~150,000 (200K context) ~600 (200K context)
    Claude Opus 4.6 (claude-opus-4-6) Older 1M tokens ~750,000 ~3,000

    * Pages estimated at ~250 words per double-spaced page. These are approximations for typical English prose; actual counts vary by content type.

    What the new tokenizer changed — and why it matters

    Anthropic introduced a new tokenizer with Claude Opus 4.7. The official migration guide states that the new tokenizer “may use roughly 1x to 1.35x as many tokens when processing text compared to previous models (up to ~35% more, varying by content).” The most commonly cited figure across Anthropic’s documentation is roughly 30% more tokens for the same text.

    The practical effect: a document that costs 1,000,000 tokens on Opus 4.6 or Sonnet 4.6 costs approximately 1,300,000 tokens on Opus 4.7, Opus 4.8, or Fable 5. Budgets built for the old tokenizer need to be re-baselined against the new one.

    Tokenizer Models Approximate token increase vs. older tokenizer
    New (introduced Opus 4.7) Opus 4.7, Opus 4.8, Fable 5, Mythos 5 ~30% typical; up to ~35% depending on content
    Older Opus 4.6, Sonnet 4.6, Haiku 4.5, Opus 4.5, Sonnet 4.5 Baseline

    The token counting page also notes the comparison directly: “Claude Fable 5 and Claude Mythos 5 use the tokenizer introduced with Claude Opus 4.7, which produces roughly 30% more tokens than models before Claude Opus 4.7 for the same text.”

    Use count_tokens — not tiktoken or ratio math

    Anthropic’s migration guide explicitly flags the risk: “Any code path that estimates tokens client-side or assumes a fixed token-to-character ratio should be re-tested against Claude Opus 4.7.” OpenAI’s tiktoken library is trained on a different vocabulary and produces different counts. It will not give accurate results for any Claude model.

    The correct approach is the /v1/messages/count_tokens endpoint, passing the specific model you intend to use:

    curl https://api.anthropic.com/v1/messages/count_tokens \
      --header "x-api-key: $ANTHROPIC_API_KEY" \
      --header "content-type: application/json" \
      --header "anthropic-version: 2023-06-01" \
      --data '{
        "model": "claude-opus-4-8",
        "messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Your text here"}]
      }'

    The endpoint returns a model-specific count. If you are migrating a workload from Sonnet 4.6 to Opus 4.8, count the same prompt with both model IDs and compare the two input_tokens values. The token counting endpoint is free to use (rate limits apply by usage tier). Anthropic notes that the returned count is an estimate; the actual count at inference time may differ by a small amount.

    Quick reference: common document sizes

    Document type Approx. words Tokens (older tokenizer) Tokens (new tokenizer)
    Novel (~400 pages) ~100,000 ~133,000 ~173,000
    Long research paper ~20,000 ~27,000 ~35,000
    Full context, Sonnet 4.6 (1M tokens) ~750,000 1,000,000 N/A (different model)
    Full context, Opus 4.8 (1M tokens) ~555,000 N/A (different model) 1,000,000

    These word estimates assume typical English prose. Code, structured data, and non-Latin scripts tokenize differently from natural language prose. Highly repetitive text and dense symbol-heavy content (like JSON or code) can fall well outside the ~0.75 words-per-token ratio.

    Does the new tokenizer change what fits in the context window?

    Yes, in one direction. The context window is still 1M tokens, but that window holds fewer words on the new tokenizer (~555k words) than on the old one (~750k words). A document that previously fit comfortably may now require trimming or chunking when moving to Opus 4.7, Opus 4.8, or Fable 5.

    Does Sonnet 4.6 use the new tokenizer?

    No. Claude Sonnet 4.6 uses the older tokenizer. Anthropic’s model overview page lists Sonnet 4.6’s 1M-token context window as equivalent to ~750k words, the same ratio as Opus 4.6 — confirming it has not adopted the Opus 4.7 tokenizer. Only Opus 4.7, Opus 4.8, Fable 5, and Mythos 5 use the new tokenizer.

    Can I use tiktoken or another open-source tokenizer for Claude?

    No. tiktoken is built for OpenAI models and uses a different vocabulary. It will not produce accurate token counts for any Claude model, and its error will be larger on the new Opus 4.7 tokenizer than on older Claude models. Use /v1/messages/count_tokens with the specific Claude model ID you plan to deploy.

    Does the new tokenizer affect pricing?

    Yes. Billing reflects token counts under the model’s tokenizer. If you migrate a workload from Opus 4.6 to Opus 4.8 and the new tokenizer produces 30% more tokens, your input token costs increase by roughly 30% before accounting for any per-token price difference between the models. Re-baseline cost estimates using the count_tokens endpoint rather than scaling from old measurements.

    How many pages is the full 1M-token context window?

    On models with the older tokenizer (Sonnet 4.6, Opus 4.6), 1 million tokens is approximately 3,000 double-spaced pages of typical English prose. On models with the new tokenizer (Opus 4.8, Fable 5), the same 1 million tokens holds approximately 2,200 pages. These are prose estimates — a 1M-token window filled with source code or dense structured data will span a very different page count.

  • Claude Cowork vs Code vs Agent SDK vs Managed Agents (2026)

    Claude Cowork vs Code vs Agent SDK vs Managed Agents (2026)

    Last verified: June 13, 2026

    Anthropic ships four distinct ways to put Claude to work as an agent, and they are easy to confuse. The short version: Claude Cowork and Claude Code are interactive products billed through your Claude subscription — Cowork for knowledge work in the desktop app, Code for software work in your terminal, IDE, desktop, or browser. The Claude Agent SDK and Managed Agents are programmatic surfaces for developers, billed through the API: the Agent SDK is a Python/TypeScript library that runs the agent loop inside your own process, while Managed Agents is a REST API where Anthropic runs the loop and hosts the sandbox. The tables below give the verified, side-by-side breakdown.

    The decision matrix

    Each row is one surface. Read across for who it serves, whether you drive it turn-by-turn or hand it a goal, where the work executes, and how it is paid for.

    Surface Who it is for Interactive vs autonomous Where it runs How it is billed
    Claude Cowork Knowledge workers (non-developers) — research, documents, file and spreadsheet work Interactive, supervised — shows you the plan and waits for your approval before acting The Claude desktop app on your own computer (macOS or Windows); not available on web or mobile Claude subscription (Pro, Max, Team, Enterprise) — draws from your plan’s usage allocation
    Claude Code Developers doing interactive coding — build features, fix bugs, automate dev tasks Interactive — you drive it in a session, though it can run agentically across files and tools Your machine (terminal, VS Code, JetBrains, desktop app) or the browser at claude.ai/code Claude subscription or an Anthropic Console (API) account
    Claude Agent SDK Developers building custom agents programmatically (Python or TypeScript) Autonomous — Claude reads files, runs commands, and edits code on its own via the agent loop Your own process and infrastructure API key (pay-as-you-go credits); see the subscription note below for the June 15, 2026 change
    Managed Agents Developers running production or long-running agents without operating their own sandbox/session infrastructure Autonomous — you send events, Claude executes tools and streams back results Anthropic-managed cloud sandbox per session (or a self-hosted sandbox on your own infrastructure) Claude API key + the managed-agents-2026-04-01 beta header (no subscription path)

    Where billing actually differs

    The cleanest way to split these four is by the wallet they draw from. The two interactive products are funded by a subscription; the two programmatic surfaces are funded by the API. This is the single distinction that trips people up most often, so it is worth stating plainly in its own table.

    Surface Billing model Notes
    Claude Cowork Subscription Included on Pro, Max, Team, and Enterprise. Multi-step tasks consume more of your usage allocation than chatting.
    Claude Code Subscription or API Most surfaces require a Claude subscription or a Console account; the terminal CLI and VS Code also support third-party providers.
    Claude Agent SDK API (pay-as-you-go) Authenticated with an ANTHROPIC_API_KEY; also supports Bedrock, Claude Platform on AWS, Vertex AI, and Azure. Anthropic does not permit claude.ai login for third-party agents built on the SDK.
    Managed Agents API (credits) Requires a Claude API key and the beta header; enabled by default for API accounts.

    One dated nuance is worth pinning down because it changes how subscription users pay for programmatic work. Starting June 15, 2026, Claude Agent SDK and claude -p usage on subscription plans no longer counts toward your Claude plan’s interactive usage limits; instead, eligible subscribers receive a separate monthly Agent SDK credit (per-user, not pooled), while subscription usage limits stay reserved for interactive use of Claude Code, Cowork, and Claude. If you use the Agent SDK with an API key from the Claude Platform, nothing changes — pay-as-you-go billing continues and you do not receive an Agent SDK monthly credit.

    SDK vs Managed Agents: the programmatic split

    Both programmatic surfaces let Claude run tools autonomously, but they differ in where the loop and the work live. Anthropic’s own comparison frames it this way: the Agent SDK “is a library that runs the agent loop inside your own process,” while Managed Agents “is a hosted REST API: Anthropic runs the agent and the sandbox, and your application sends events and streams back results.” Pick by who you want operating the infrastructure.

    Dimension Agent SDK Managed Agents
    Runs in Your process, your infrastructure Anthropic-managed infrastructure
    Interface Python or TypeScript library REST API
    Agent works on Files on your infrastructure A managed sandbox per session
    Session state JSONL on your filesystem Anthropic-hosted event log
    Best for Local prototyping; agents that work directly on your filesystem and services Production agents without operating sandbox/session infrastructure; long-running, asynchronous sessions

    A common path, per Anthropic’s docs, is to prototype with the Agent SDK locally, then move to Managed Agents for production.

    Quick chooser

    If you are not writing code and want Claude to finish a task on your computer, use Cowork. If you are a developer working interactively on a codebase, use Claude Code. If you are building your own agent and want it to run in your own process, use the Agent SDK. If you want Anthropic to run the agent and host the sandbox for long-running or production work, use Managed Agents.

    Is Claude Cowork the same as Claude Code?

    No. Both appear in the Claude desktop app, but Cowork is aimed at knowledge work (research, documents, spreadsheets, file management) for non-developers, while Claude Code is an agentic coding tool. Cowork runs only in the desktop app (macOS or Windows); Claude Code also runs in the terminal, VS Code, JetBrains, and the browser.

    Does a Claude subscription cover the Agent SDK or Managed Agents?

    Cowork and Claude Code are included with Claude subscriptions (Pro, Max, Team, Enterprise). The Agent SDK and Managed Agents are API surfaces authenticated with a Claude API key. As of June 15, 2026, subscription users do get a separate monthly Agent SDK credit for SDK and claude -p usage, but Managed Agents has no subscription path — it requires an API key and a beta header.

    Where does the work actually execute for each surface?

    Cowork runs on your own computer in the desktop app. Claude Code runs on your machine (or in the browser). The Agent SDK runs in your own process and infrastructure. Managed Agents executes in an Anthropic-managed cloud sandbox per session, or a self-hosted sandbox you control.

    Is the Agent SDK built on Claude Code?

    Yes. Per Anthropic, the Agent SDK “gives you the same tools, agent loop, and context management that power Claude Code, programmable in Python and TypeScript.” Anthropic also describes it as “Claude Code as a library.”

    Is Managed Agents generally available?

    No. As of June 13, 2026, Claude Managed Agents is in beta. Every Managed Agents endpoint requires the managed-agents-2026-04-01 beta header (the SDK sets it automatically), and access is enabled by default for API accounts.


  • Claude Enterprise Compliance: BAA, SOC 2, GDPR and Data Policy (2026)

    Claude Enterprise Compliance: BAA, SOC 2, GDPR and Data Policy (2026)

    Last verified: June 13, 2026

    Anthropic publishes a defined compliance posture for Claude: it holds SOC 2 Type I and Type II, ISO 27001:2022, and ISO/IEC 42001:2023 credentials; it will sign a Business Associate Agreement (BAA) covering HIPAA-ready services such as the first-party API and Enterprise plans; by default it does not train models on data sent under its commercial terms; and it offers a zero-data-retention (ZDR) arrangement on the Messages and Token Counting APIs. The hard part for buyers is the per-surface boundary — what the BAA covers, which features are blocked under ZDR or HIPAA, how long data is kept, and where it can be processed. Every figure below is drawn from Anthropic’s own trust, privacy, and developer documentation, with sources at the bottom. Eligibility, feature lists, and durations change; treat your signed contract and the live Trust Center as the controlling sources.

    Certifications and attestations

    Anthropic’s help center lists the following compliance credentials for its commercial products (Claude for Work and the Anthropic API). It directs customers to the Trust Portal at trust.anthropic.com to request copies of the underlying reports and certificates.

    Credential Status as described by Anthropic Scope
    SOC 2 Type I & Type II Listed as held Commercial products (Claude for Work, Anthropic API)
    ISO 27001:2022 Certified Information Security Management
    ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Certified (issued by Schellman Compliance, LLC, accredited by the ANSI National Accreditation Board) AI Management Systems
    HIPAA “HIPAA-ready configuration (BAA available)” See BAA section

    Anthropic describes itself as “one of the first frontier AI labs” to achieve ISO/IEC 42001:2023 certification, in an announcement dated January 13, 2025. The help-center certifications list does not mention ISO 27017, ISO 27018, FedRAMP, or CSA STAR; those are left out here rather than asserted. GDPR and CCPA are handled through Anthropic’s privacy program and customer agreements rather than as line-item “certifications” (see GDPR section).

    HIPAA and the BAA: covered by product surface

    Anthropic states it “provides a Business Associate Agreement (BAA) covering our HIPAA-ready services, such as use of our first-party API or Enterprise plans.” HIPAA readiness is enforced at the organization level: Anthropic provisions a dedicated HIPAA-enabled organization that automatically blocks non-eligible features. To process protected health information (PHI) on the API, an administrator must sign the BAA and contact sales to enable it; for Enterprise, an admin activates HIPAA compliance in the Claude Enterprise admin settings under “Data & Privacy” and signs the BAA there.

    Surface BAA / HIPAA-ready coverage
    First-party Claude API (Messages API) Covered as an Eligible Service (admin signs BAA, then contact sales)
    Claude Enterprise Covered once an admin activates HIPAA compliance and signs the BAA
    Workbench and Console Not covered
    Claude Free, Pro, Max, Team Not covered
    Cowork Not covered
    Claude Code Not covered under HIPAA readiness
    Amazon Bedrock / Vertex AI Not covered (cloud provider is the data processor; see those platforms)
    Claude Platform on AWS / Microsoft Foundry HIPAA readiness not available
    Beta features (e.g., Claude in Office, Claude Design) Generally not covered unless explicitly listed as eligible

    Within the API, only a subset of features is HIPAA-eligible. Anthropic enforces this in code: a HIPAA-enabled organization that sends a non-eligible feature gets a 400 invalid_request_error naming the blocked feature. Anthropic states your signed BAA is the official source of truth for what is covered.

    API feature HIPAA-eligible
    Messages API (/v1/messages) Yes
    Token counting Yes
    Web search Yes (dynamic filtering not eligible)
    Prompt caching, structured outputs, extended/adaptive thinking, citations, 1M context, PDF (inline), data residency, effort, fast mode, bash & text-editor tools, memory tool Yes
    Web fetch, computer use, advisor tool, context management (compaction / editing), tool search, cache diagnostics No
    Code execution, programmatic tool calling No
    Batch API, Files API, Agent Skills, MCP connector, Claude Managed Agents, MCP tunnels No

    PHI must appear only in message content, attached files, or related file names/metadata — never in JSON schema definitions (property names, enum/const values, or pattern regexes), because compiled schemas are cached separately and do not receive the same PHI protections. Anthropic notes workspace names, user contact details, billing data, and support tickets are not expected to contain PHI under the BAA.

    Data retention (commercial default)

    Under Anthropic’s commercial data retention policy, conversation content is not retained by default for the API, and API inputs and outputs are automatically deleted on the backend within 30 days of receipt or generation. For interface products such as Claude for Work, data persists until you delete it, after which it is removed from backend storage within 30 days. Two exceptions extend retention regardless of arrangement.

    Data type / event Retention
    API inputs and outputs (default) Auto-deleted within 30 days
    Deleted conversation content (Claude for Work) Removed from backend within 30 days
    Inputs/outputs for a chat flagged as a Usage Policy violation Up to 2 years
    Trust & safety classification scores (flagged chat) Up to 7 years
    Data tied to feedback you submit (thumbs up/down, bug report) 5 years

    Zero data retention (ZDR)

    With a ZDR arrangement, customer data is not stored at rest after the API response is returned, except where needed to comply with law or combat misuse. ZDR is requested through Anthropic sales and enabled per organization — it does not carry over automatically to new organizations under the same account. Even under ZDR, Anthropic retains User Safety classifier results, and may retain inputs and outputs for up to 2 years if a chat or session is flagged for a Usage Policy violation. CORS is not supported for ZDR organizations, so browser apps must call through a backend proxy.

    Surface ZDR coverage
    Claude Messages API & Token Counting API Eligible
    Claude Code (Commercial org API keys, or via Claude Enterprise with ZDR enabled) Eligible
    Console and Workbench Not eligible
    Claude Teams & Claude Enterprise interfaces Not eligible (except Claude Code via Enterprise with ZDR on)
    Claude Free, Pro, Max Not eligible
    Claude Managed Agents Not eligible (stateful; delete transcripts manually)
    Batch API, Files API, code execution, Agent Skills, MCP connector Not eligible
    Third-party integrations Not eligible

    A handful of ZDR-eligible features are marked “Yes (qualified)” — structured outputs and cache diagnostics — meaning Anthropic retains a narrow, documented set of technical data (for example, a cached JSON schema for up to 24 hours since last use) rather than your prompts or Claude’s outputs.

    Model-training policy and Covered Models

    Anthropic’s Privacy Policy states it does not apply to content processed on behalf of business customers; that data is governed by the customer agreement. For the API specifically, Anthropic states retained data is never used for model training without your express permission. Anthropic’s consumer-terms update confirms the data-use changes “do not apply to services under our Commercial Terms,” including Claude for Work, Claude for Government, Claude for Education, and API use (including via Amazon Bedrock and Google Cloud’s Vertex AI). Training on commercial data happens only if a customer explicitly opts in (for example, the Development Partner Program).

    One model-specific exception affects retention, not training: Claude Fable 5 and Claude Mythos 5 are designated Covered Models and require 30-day data retention. ZDR is not available for these two models; a request to either from an organization whose retention configuration doesn’t meet the requirement returns a 400 invalid_request_error. Organizations with ZDR can turn on 30-day retention for a single workspace (Console > Settings > Workspaces > Privacy controls) to use those models there while keeping ZDR elsewhere. On Bedrock, Vertex AI, and Microsoft Foundry, retention requirements for these models are set by each platform.

    GDPR, data residency, and international transfers

    For users in the EEA, UK, or Switzerland, the data controller is Anthropic Ireland, Limited; elsewhere it is Anthropic PBC. Where the EU or UK GDPR applies, Anthropic responds to verifiable data-subject requests within one calendar month. For transfers to countries without an adequacy decision, Anthropic relies on standard contractual clauses, and publishes its subprocessors at anthropic.com/subprocessors.

    On data residency, the Claude API exposes two independent controls. inference_geo sets where inference runs per request — values are "global" (default) or "us" — and is supported on Claude Opus 4.6, Sonnet 4.6, and later (older models return a 400). Workspace geo controls where data is stored at rest and where endpoint processing happens; it is set at workspace creation and cannot be changed afterward. Per Anthropic’s documentation, "us" is currently the only available workspace geo, and only "us" and "global" inference geos are available — so there is currently no EU-resident storage option at the workspace level. US-only inference is priced at 1.1x the standard rate on supported models. Data residency is available on the Claude API (first-party) and Claude Platform on AWS; on Bedrock and Vertex AI the region is set by the endpoint or inference profile.

    Does Anthropic train its models on my API or commercial data?

    No, not by default. Anthropic’s Privacy Policy excludes business-customer content (governed by your customer agreement), and for the API it states retained data is never used for training without your express permission. The consumer data-use changes explicitly do not apply to Commercial Terms services. Training on commercial data requires an explicit opt-in.

    Will Anthropic sign a BAA, and for what?

    Yes. Anthropic signs a BAA covering HIPAA-ready services such as the first-party API and Enterprise plans. The Messages API is covered as an Eligible Service. It does not cover Workbench/Console, Free/Pro/Max/Team, Cowork, Claude Code, or beta features unless explicitly listed. An admin must sign the BAA and enable HIPAA readiness; the organization then auto-blocks non-eligible features.

    What’s the difference between ZDR and HIPAA readiness?

    Per Anthropic, ZDR prevents customer data from being stored at rest after the API response. HIPAA readiness is a broader set of safeguards (encryption, access controls, audit logging) that protect PHI throughout its lifecycle and lets data be retained with safeguards rather than deleted immediately. Anthropic states you do not also need ZDR if you have HIPAA readiness.

    How long does Anthropic keep my data?

    By default, API inputs and outputs are auto-deleted within 30 days. If a chat is flagged as a Usage Policy violation, inputs/outputs may be retained up to 2 years and trust & safety classification scores up to 7 years. Data tied to feedback you submit is kept 5 years. ZDR removes the default at-rest storage but does not remove the law/misuse exceptions.

    Can I keep Claude inference and data in the EU?

    Not at rest currently. The API’s inference_geo can pin inference to "us" or run "global", but Anthropic’s documentation lists "us" as the only available workspace geo (storage region). EU/UK data-subject rights and standard contractual clauses apply regardless, but an EU storage-residency option is not currently offered at the workspace level per the docs verified here.


  • Claude Agent SDK Migration: Package Renames and Breaking Changes (2026)

    Claude Agent SDK Migration: Package Renames and Breaking Changes (2026)

    Last verified: June 13, 2026

    The Claude Code SDK has been renamed to the Claude Agent SDK. Migrating is three mechanical edits plus two behavioral changes you have to opt back into: rename the package, rename the imports, rename ClaudeCodeOptions to ClaudeAgentOptions, then decide whether you want the old Claude Code system prompt and filesystem settings back. The breaking changes landed in v0.1.0. Everything below is taken from Anthropic’s official Agent SDK migration guide and the live package registries, verified June 13, 2026.

    The renames at a glance

    Two packages and one Python type changed names. The documentation also moved out of the Claude Code docs into the API Guide’s Agent SDK section.

    Aspect Old New
    Package (TS/JS) @anthropic-ai/claude-code @anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk
    Package (Python) claude-code-sdk claude-agent-sdk
    Python import claude_code_sdk claude_agent_sdk
    Python options type ClaudeCodeOptions ClaudeAgentOptions
    Docs location Claude Code docs API Guide → Agent SDK

    Current published versions

    These are the latest versions on the public registries as fetched on June 13, 2026. The migration guide itself uses ^0.0.42 as the example old TypeScript version and ^0.2.0 as the example new one; pin to whatever is current when you install.

    Registry Package Latest version
    npm @anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk 0.3.177
    PyPI claude-agent-sdk 0.2.101

    TypeScript migration

    Swap the package, then update every import. The exported names (query, tool, createSdkMcpServer) are unchanged — only the module specifier moves.

    npm uninstall @anthropic-ai/claude-code
    npm install @anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk
    // Before
    import { query, tool, createSdkMcpServer } from "@anthropic-ai/claude-code";
    
    // After
    import { query, tool, createSdkMcpServer } from "@anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk";

    Update package.json as well, replacing the dependency key from @anthropic-ai/claude-code to @anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk.

    Python migration

    Swap the package, update the import path, and rename the options type. The import name changes from underscore-claude_code_sdk to underscore-claude_agent_sdk.

    pip uninstall claude-code-sdk
    pip install claude-agent-sdk
    # Before (claude-code-sdk)
    from claude_code_sdk import query, ClaudeCodeOptions
    
    options = ClaudeCodeOptions(model="claude-opus-4-7", permission_mode="acceptEdits")
    
    # After (claude-agent-sdk)
    from claude_agent_sdk import query, ClaudeAgentOptions
    
    options = ClaudeAgentOptions(model="claude-opus-4-7", permission_mode="acceptEdits")

    The rename is the only change to the type — its fields and constructor signature are otherwise the same. Per Anthropic, the new name matches the “Claude Agent SDK” branding.

    Breaking change: the system prompt is no longer default

    This is the change most likely to silently alter your agent’s behavior. In v0.0.x, the SDK used Claude Code’s system prompt by default. As of v0.1.0, query() uses a minimal system prompt instead. To get the old behavior, explicitly request the claude_code preset.

    Goal systemPrompt value
    Restore Claude Code’s prompt { type: "preset", preset: "claude_code" }
    Use your own instructions a plain string
    Minimal prompt (new default) omit the option
    // TypeScript — restore the old default
    const result = query({
      prompt: "Hello",
      options: {
        systemPrompt: { type: "preset", preset: "claude_code" }
      }
    });
    
    // Or a custom system prompt:
    const custom = query({
      prompt: "Hello",
      options: { systemPrompt: "You are a helpful coding assistant" }
    });
    # Python — restore the old default
    from claude_agent_sdk import query, ClaudeAgentOptions
    
    async for message in query(
        prompt="Hello",
        options=ClaudeAgentOptions(
            system_prompt={"type": "preset", "preset": "claude_code"}
        ),
    ):
        print(message)
    
    # Or a custom system prompt:
    async for message in query(
        prompt="Hello",
        options=ClaudeAgentOptions(system_prompt="You are a helpful coding assistant"),
    ):
        print(message)

    settingSources: changed, then reverted

    This one is widely mis-reported, so read it carefully. v0.1.0 briefly defaulted to loading no filesystem settings — and that default was reverted in subsequent releases. Anthropic’s current guidance is that no migration action is needed for setting sources.

    Current behavior: omitting settingSources on query() loads user, project, and local filesystem settings, matching the CLI — equivalent to ["user", "project", "local"]. That includes ~/.claude/settings.json, .claude/settings.json, .claude/settings.local.json, CLAUDE.md files, and custom commands. The accepted values are below.

    Source Loads from
    "user" ~/.claude/ — user CLAUDE.md, rules, skills, settings
    "project" <cwd>/.claude/ — project CLAUDE.md, rules, skills, hooks, settings.json
    "local" CLAUDE.local.md and .claude/settings.local.json

    To run isolated from filesystem settings, pass an empty array. This matters for CI/CD, deployed apps, test environments, and multi-tenant systems where local customizations should not leak in.

    // TypeScript — no filesystem settings
    const isolated = query({
      prompt: "Hello",
      options: { settingSources: [] }
    });
    
    // Only project settings
    const projectOnly = query({
      prompt: "Hello",
      options: { settingSources: ["project"] }
    });
    # Python — no filesystem settings
    from claude_agent_sdk import query, ClaudeAgentOptions
    
    async for message in query(
        prompt="Hello",
        options=ClaudeAgentOptions(setting_sources=[]),
    ):
        print(message)

    Two caveats Anthropic documents explicitly. First, Python SDK 0.1.59 and earlier treated an empty list the same as omitting the option — upgrade before relying on setting_sources=[]. Second, some inputs are read regardless of settingSources: managed policy settings, the global ~/.claude.json config, auto-memory, and claude.ai MCP connectors. For true multi-tenant isolation, the docs recommend running each tenant in its own filesystem and setting settingSources: [] plus CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_AUTO_MEMORY=1.

    The full checklist

    Work top to bottom; the first three are required, the last two are behavioral decisions.

    Step Action
    1 Uninstall old package, install @anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk / claude-agent-sdk
    2 Update all imports to the new module / package name
    3 Python only: rename ClaudeCodeOptions → ClaudeAgentOptions
    4 If you relied on Claude Code’s prompt, set systemPrompt to the claude_code preset
    5 Decide on settingSources: omit for CLI parity, or [] to isolate

    Do I have to change settingSources when I migrate?

    No. Anthropic states no migration action is needed for setting sources. The v0.1.0 change to “load nothing by default” was reverted; omitting settingSources again loads user, project, and local settings, matching the CLI.

    What is the new default system prompt?

    A minimal system prompt. Before v0.1.0 the SDK inherited Claude Code’s full system prompt by default. To restore it, pass systemPrompt as { type: "preset", preset: "claude_code" } (TypeScript) or system_prompt={"type": "preset", "preset": "claude_code"} (Python).

    Did the exported function names change in TypeScript?

    No. query, tool, and createSdkMcpServer are unchanged. Only the import path moves from @anthropic-ai/claude-code to @anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk.

    Which version introduced the breaking changes?

    Claude Agent SDK v0.1.0, introduced “to improve isolation and explicit configuration,” per the official guide. The latest published versions as of June 13, 2026 are 0.3.177 on npm and 0.2.101 on PyPI.

    Does settingSources: [] fully isolate my agent?

    Not by itself. Managed policy settings, the global ~/.claude.json config, auto-memory, and claude.ai MCP connectors are read regardless. For multi-tenant isolation, also run each tenant in its own filesystem and set CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_AUTO_MEMORY=1.


  • Claude vs GPT vs Gemini: Coding Benchmark Leaderboard (June 2026)

    Claude vs GPT vs Gemini: Coding Benchmark Leaderboard (June 2026)

    Last verified: June 13, 2026

    As of June 13, 2026, the four models most often compared for coding work are Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 4.8 from Anthropic, GPT-5.5 from OpenAI, and Gemini 3.1 Pro from Google. This page is a leaderboard built on one rule: every score below is taken from a vendor’s own page or the benchmark’s official model card that we fetched on the verification date, or it is marked as not published. Several vendors publish their benchmark tables as images rather than machine-readable text; where we could not read an official figure directly, we list the metric as not machine-verifiable and link to the source document instead of estimating. The result is a smaller table than most roundups, but every number in it is one you can click through and check.

    Models and pricing (verified specs)

    These columns are confirmed from each vendor’s official model documentation. Claude prices, context windows, and cutoffs come from Anthropic’s models overview and the AWS Bedrock model card; GPT-5.5 from OpenAI’s developer docs; Gemini 3.1 Pro from Google’s DeepMind model card and the Gemini API pricing page.

    Model API ID Input / Output (per Mtok) Context Max output Knowledge cutoff
    Claude Fable 5 claude-fable-5 $10 / $50 1M 128K Not stated on overview*
    Claude Opus 4.8 claude-opus-4-8 $5 / $25 1M 128K Jan 2026
    GPT-5.5 gpt-5.5 $5 / $30 1,050,000 128K Dec 1, 2025
    Gemini 3.1 Pro gemini-3.1-pro-preview $2 / $12 (≤200K)** 1M 64K Not stated on model card

    *Anthropic’s models overview lists Fable 5’s specs and price but does not publish a knowledge-cutoff date for it in the table we fetched. **Gemini 3.1 Pro uses tiered pricing: $2 / $12 per Mtok for prompts up to 200K tokens, rising to $4 / $18 for prompts above 200K tokens (Google AI pricing page). GPT-5.5 pricing rises to 2x input / 1.5x output above 272K input tokens (OpenAI developer docs). Claude Opus 4.8 offers an optional fast mode at $10 / $50 per Mtok (Anthropic).

    Coding benchmark scores (primary-source only)

    Each cell is either a figure we read directly from a primary source on June 13, 2026, or marked “not machine-verifiable” with the source you should consult. A blank-equivalent entry never means zero — it means the official figure was not available in readable form during verification. Note the harness and version differences called out in the footnotes: they make cross-vendor cells not strictly comparable.

    Benchmark Claude Fable 5 Claude Opus 4.8 GPT-5.5 Gemini 3.1 Pro
    SWE-bench Verified Not machine-verifiable (see system card) Not machine-verifiable (see system card) Not published in retrievable primary source 80.6%
    SWE-bench Pro (Public) Not machine-verifiable (see system card) Not machine-verifiable (see system card) Not published in retrievable primary source 54.2%
    Terminal-Bench Not machine-verifiable (see system card) Not machine-verifiable (see system card) 83.4% (v2.1, Codex CLI harness)† 68.5% (v2.0, Terminus-2 harness)
    LiveCodeBench Pro Not published in retrievable primary source Not published in retrievable primary source Not published in retrievable primary source 2887 Elo

    †GPT-5.5’s Terminal-Bench 2.1 figure of 83.4% is the score Anthropic attributes to GPT-5.5 “with the Codex CLI harness” in a footnote on its Claude Opus 4.8 announcement page. It is a competitor-reported comparison, not a number we read from OpenAI directly. Google reports Gemini 3.1 Pro on Terminal-Bench 2.0 under the Terminus-2 harness (68.5%); because the version and harness differ, the Gemini and GPT-5.5 Terminal-Bench cells are not directly comparable. Gemini’s SWE-bench Verified (80.6%), SWE-bench Pro Public (54.2%), and LiveCodeBench Pro (2887 Elo) are single-attempt figures from Google’s official Gemini 3.1 Pro model card.

    What we could not verify from a primary source

    Anthropic publishes its coding comparison tables for Claude Opus 4.8 and Claude Fable 5 as images inside its announcement pages, and the full Claude Opus 4.8 System Card PDF exceeded our fetch size limit, so we could not machine-read those percentages on the verification date. OpenAI’s GPT-5.5 announcement page returned an access error to our fetcher, and its developer-docs model page lists specs and pricing but no benchmark scores. We have therefore left Claude’s and GPT-5.5’s SWE-bench figures out of the table rather than reproduce numbers we could not confirm at the source. For those figures, consult the primary documents linked in our source list: the Claude Opus 4.8 System Card, the Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5 announcement, and OpenAI’s GPT-5.5 page. If you are choosing a model today, the verified spec table above (price, context, output, cutoff) is the part you can rely on without caveat.

    How to read a coding leaderboard

    Three cautions apply to any 2026 coding comparison. First, harness matters: the same model scores differently on Terminal-Bench depending on whether it runs under Terminus-2, a Codex CLI scaffold, or a vendor’s internal agent, which is why we annotate every Terminal-Bench cell. Second, version matters: “Terminal-Bench 2.0” and “Terminal-Bench 2.1” are different test sets, and “SWE-bench Pro” public and full splits differ — a single percentage with no version is close to meaningless. Third, a headline score is one slice of behavior; long-horizon agentic coding, tool-call reliability, and context handling over a long session often decide real-world usefulness more than a single pass rate. Treat the verified cells here as a starting point, then test the shortlist on your own repository.

    Which model has the highest published coding benchmark score in June 2026?

    We cannot crown a single winner from primary sources alone, because Anthropic and OpenAI publish their coding scores in formats we could not machine-verify on June 13, 2026. From figures we could read directly, Google’s Gemini 3.1 Pro model card reports 80.6% on SWE-bench Verified and 54.2% on SWE-bench Pro (Public). Anthropic’s and OpenAI’s comparable figures are in their system cards and announcement pages, which we link in the sources; we did not reproduce them here because they were not readable at the source during verification.

    What does Claude Fable 5 cost, and how is it different from Opus 4.8?

    Claude Fable 5 (claude-fable-5) is priced at $10 per million input tokens and $50 per million output tokens, with a 1M-token context window and up to 128K output tokens (Anthropic models overview). Claude Opus 4.8 (claude-opus-4-8) is the Opus-tier flagship at $5 / $25 per Mtok, also 1M context and 128K output, with a January 2026 knowledge cutoff. Fable 5 is Anthropic’s most capable widely released model; Opus 4.8 is the lower-priced model most teams will use for everyday agentic coding.

    Why are some benchmark cells marked “not machine-verifiable” instead of showing a number?

    Because this page only prints scores we could confirm from a primary source on the verification date. Several vendors render their benchmark tables as images, and one large system-card PDF exceeded our fetch limit, so the underlying percentages were not readable to us. Rather than copy figures from third-party trackers, we mark the cell and point you to the official document. It keeps the leaderboard honest at the cost of being shorter.

    How do the context windows compare?

    Claude Fable 5, Claude Opus 4.8, and Gemini 3.1 Pro each offer a 1M-token context window; GPT-5.5 offers 1,050,000 tokens. Maximum output is 128K tokens for Claude Fable 5, Claude Opus 4.8, and GPT-5.5, and 64K tokens for Gemini 3.1 Pro. Note that Claude Opus 4.8’s context window is 200K on Microsoft Foundry specifically, per Anthropic’s documentation.

    Is Terminal-Bench comparable across these models?

    Not cell-for-cell. Google reports Gemini 3.1 Pro on Terminal-Bench 2.0 under the Terminus-2 harness (68.5%), while the GPT-5.5 figure we show (83.4%) is Terminal-Bench 2.1 under a Codex CLI harness, as attributed by Anthropic. Different versions and different harnesses mean the two numbers should not be read as a head-to-head result.


  • Claude Skills vs MCP vs Connectors vs Plugins: What Each One Is (2026)

    Claude Skills vs MCP vs Connectors vs Plugins: What Each One Is (2026)

    Last verified: June 13, 2026

    The simplest way to keep these straight: Skills teach Claude how to do a task, MCP servers and Connectors give Claude access to external systems, Plugins bundle several of these together, and Hooks and slash commands control a Claude Code session. A Skill is a folder of instructions Claude reads when relevant. MCP (the Model Context Protocol) is an open standard that connects Claude to your tools and data. A Connector is Anthropic’s packaging of a remote MCP server inside the Claude apps. A Plugin packages any combination of commands, agents, MCP servers, hooks, and skills for Claude Code. Every definition below is taken verbatim from Anthropic’s official documentation, fetched on the verification date.

    The one-glance comparison

    This is the liftable summary. Each row is one mechanism; the third column is the distinction people most often get wrong — whether the thing teaches Claude how to do something or gives Claude access to something.

    Type What it is Teaches-HOW or gives-ACCESS Where it runs How you install / enable it
    Skill A modular capability that packages instructions, metadata, and optional resources (scripts, templates) in a SKILL.md file that Claude uses automatically when relevant. Teaches HOW. Provides domain-specific expertise: workflows, context, and best practices (procedural knowledge). In Claude’s code execution environment / VM, where Claude has filesystem access, bash, and code execution. claude.ai: upload a zip under Settings > Features. API: upload via the Skills API (/v1/skills) with the required beta headers (code-execution-2025-08-25, skills-2025-10-02, files-api-2025-04-14). Claude Code: a SKILL.md directory under ~/.claude/skills/ or .claude/skills/.
    MCP server An implementation of the Model Context Protocol — “an open-source standard for connecting AI applications to external systems.” Described as “a USB-C port for AI applications.” Gives ACCESS. Connects Claude to data sources, tools, and workflows so it can access information and perform tasks. Local (stdio) servers run as processes on your machine; remote servers run over HTTP (recommended) or SSE (deprecated). In Claude Code: claude mcp add, at local, project, or user scope. Also configurable in .mcp.json or imported from Claude Desktop / claude.ai.
    Connector A feature that “let[s] Claude access your apps and services, retrieve your data, and take actions within connected services.” Custom connectors use remote MCP. Gives ACCESS. Same access role as MCP — a Connector is the in-app packaging of a remote MCP server. Custom connectors are reached from Anthropic’s cloud infrastructure, not from your local machine. In the Claude apps under Customize > Connectors (or the in-chat “+” menu). Add a directory connector, or “Add custom connector” by URL.
    Plugin “A lightweight way to package and share any combination of” Claude Code customizations. Both — it’s a container. Bundles things that teach HOW (commands, skills) and things that give ACCESS (MCP servers), plus hooks and subagents. In Claude Code — “they’ll work across your terminal and VS Code.” The /plugin command (public beta). For a marketplace: /plugin marketplace add user-or-org/repo-name, then install from the /plugin menu.
    Hook “User-defined shell commands, HTTP endpoints, or LLM prompts that execute automatically at specific points in Claude Code’s lifecycle.” Controls behavior. Provides deterministic control rather than relying on the LLM to decide. In Claude Code, firing at lifecycle events (e.g. PreToolUse, PostToolUse, UserPromptSubmit, SessionStart, Stop). Configured in JSON settings files such as ~/.claude/settings.json or .claude/settings.json, or bundled in a plugin.
    Slash command A command starting with / that controls a Claude Code session. Includes built-ins (e.g. /help, /compact) and custom commands. Teaches HOW (custom) / controls session (built-in). Custom commands have been merged into Skills. In the Claude Code session (terminal or VS Code). Built-ins ship with Claude Code. Custom: a Markdown file under .claude/commands/ (project) or ~/.claude/commands/ (personal); a .claude/skills/<name>/SKILL.md does the same.

    Skills: teaching Claude a procedure

    An Agent Skill is “a directory containing a SKILL.md file” with YAML frontmatter plus instructions, and optionally additional markdown files, executable scripts, and reference resources. The point is procedural knowledge — it turns “general-purpose agents into specialists” by giving Claude the workflows and best practices for a task, the way you’d write an onboarding guide for a new teammate. Anthropic ships pre-built Skills for PowerPoint, Excel, Word, and PDF, and you can author your own.

    What makes Skills cheap to install in bulk is progressive disclosure: Claude loads information in stages instead of all at once. The numbers below come straight from Anthropic’s Skills overview.

    Loading level When loaded Token cost (per Anthropic docs) Content
    Level 1: Metadata Always, at startup ~100 tokens per Skill name and description from the YAML frontmatter
    Level 2: Instructions When the Skill is triggered Under 5k tokens The SKILL.md body — workflows and guidance
    Level 3+: Resources As needed Effectively unlimited Bundled files read or executed via bash without loading their contents into context

    The name field is capped at 64 characters (lowercase letters, numbers, hyphens; it cannot contain the reserved words “anthropic” or “claude”), and the description is capped at 1,024 characters. One important constraint: custom Skills do not sync across surfaces — a Skill uploaded to claude.ai is not automatically available via the API, and Claude Code Skills are filesystem-based and separate from both.

    MCP: the open standard for access

    The Model Context Protocol is, in Anthropic’s words, “an open-source standard for connecting AI applications to external systems.” The canonical analogy: “Think of MCP like a USB-C port for AI applications. Just as USB-C provides a standardized way to connect electronic devices, MCP provides a standardized way to connect AI applications to external systems.” Using MCP, “AI applications like Claude or ChatGPT can connect to data sources (e.g. local files, databases), tools (e.g. search engines, calculators) and workflows (e.g. specialized prompts).”

    An MCP server can expose three kinds of building block — tools, resources, and prompts. In Claude Code, resources are referenced with @server:protocol://resource/path and prompts surface as commands in the form /mcp__servername__promptname. You connect a server with claude mcp add, choosing a transport and a scope:

    Scope Loads in Shared with team Stored in
    Local (default) Current project only No ~/.claude.json
    Project Current project only Yes, via version control .mcp.json in project root
    User All your projects No ~/.claude.json

    For transports, HTTP is “the recommended option for connecting to remote MCP servers,” local stdio servers “run as local processes on your machine,” and SSE is explicitly marked deprecated in favor of HTTP.

    Connectors: MCP, packaged for the apps

    A Connector is how the Claude apps surface MCP. Per Anthropic’s help center, “Connectors let Claude access your apps and services, retrieve your data, and take actions within connected services,” and “Custom connectors using remote MCP are available on Claude, Cowork, and Claude Desktop.” So a Connector is not a different technology from MCP — a custom connector is a remote MCP server wired into the Claude UI.

    The most consequential detail is where the connection originates: “Custom connectors (remote MCP servers) are reached from Anthropic’s cloud infrastructure, not from your local machine.” That means a custom-connector MCP server must be reachable over the public internet — one hosted only on a private network, behind a VPN, or blocked by a firewall will not connect even if you can reach it yourself.

    Aspect Directory (pre-built) connector Custom connector
    Source Pre-built integrations in the Connectors Directory Added by you via a remote MCP server URL
    Plan availability Available across Claude plans Free, Pro, Max, Team, and Enterprise
    Free-plan limit Per directory “Free users are limited to one custom connector.”
    Where to add it Customize > Connectors, or the in-chat “+” > Connectors > Manage connectors

    Plugins: a bundle, not a single thing

    A Plugin is “a lightweight way to package and share any combination of” Claude Code customizations. The official announcement lists four bundle components, and the Claude Code documentation adds skills as a fifth thing a plugin can carry:

    Component What it adds
    Slash commands Custom shortcuts for frequently-used operations
    Subagents Purpose-built agents for specialized development tasks
    MCP servers Connections to tools and data sources through MCP
    Hooks Customizations of Claude Code’s behavior at key workflow points
    Skills Per the Claude Code docs, a plugin can include a skills/ directory; plugin skills use a plugin-name:skill-name namespace

    You install a plugin “directly within Claude Code using the /plugin command.” To pull from a marketplace — “curated collections where other developers can discover and install plugins” — you run /plugin marketplace add user-or-org/repo-name and then install from the /plugin menu. Plugins “work across your terminal and VS Code.” Plugins were announced on October 9, 2025, as a public beta for all Claude Code users.

    Hooks and slash commands: controlling the session

    The last two mechanisms aren’t about adding capability — they’re about controlling a Claude Code session. Hooks are “user-defined shell commands, HTTP endpoints, or LLM prompts that execute automatically at specific points in Claude Code’s lifecycle.” Their defining property is determinism: they provide deterministic control rather than relying on the LLM to make decisions. A PreToolUse hook can, for example, block a destructive rm -rf command regardless of what Claude intended. Hooks are configured in JSON settings files (such as ~/.claude/settings.json or a project’s .claude/settings.json) and fire at events including SessionStart, UserPromptSubmit, PreToolUse, PostToolUse, and Stop.

    Slash commands start with / and control the session. Built-in commands like /help and /compact ship with Claude Code. Custom commands are Markdown files — a project command lives at .claude/commands/<name>.md and a personal one at ~/.claude/commands/<name>.md, with the file name becoming the command. As of the 2026 Claude Code docs, custom commands have been merged into Skills: a file at .claude/commands/deploy.md and a skill at .claude/skills/deploy/SKILL.md “both create /deploy and work the same way,” and existing .claude/commands/ files keep working.

    Is a Connector the same as an MCP server?

    Effectively yes, for custom connectors. Anthropic states “Custom connectors using remote MCP are available on Claude, Cowork, and Claude Desktop,” and that they “are reached from Anthropic’s cloud infrastructure.” A Connector is the Claude-app packaging of a remote MCP server; MCP is the underlying open standard.

    What’s the difference between a Skill and an MCP server?

    A Skill teaches Claude how to do a task — it “provide[s] Claude with domain-specific expertise: workflows, context, and best practices.” An MCP server gives Claude access to external systems — it connects Claude “to data sources, tools and workflows.” One is procedural knowledge; the other is a connection.

    Do Skills cost a lot of context tokens?

    Not until used. Per Anthropic’s docs, Level 1 metadata costs about 100 tokens per Skill and is always loaded; the full SKILL.md body (under 5k tokens) only loads when the Skill is triggered; and bundled resources are read on demand with effectively no upfront cost. This is the “progressive disclosure” design.

    What can a Claude Code plugin contain?

    “Any combination of” slash commands, subagents, MCP servers, and hooks, per the announcement; the Claude Code documentation adds that a plugin can also bundle a skills/ directory. You install one with the /plugin command, optionally from a marketplace added via /plugin marketplace add.

    Are custom slash commands still a thing?

    They still work, but they’ve been folded into Skills. The Claude Code docs state custom commands “have been merged into skills,” that existing .claude/commands/ files keep working, and that a command file and an equivalent SKILL.md both produce the same / command. Skills add optional extras like supporting files and automatic invocation.


  • Migrating Off Retired Claude Models: The Breaking-Change Checklist (2026)

    Migrating Off Retired Claude Models: The Breaking-Change Checklist (2026)

    Last verified: June 13, 2026

    Claude Opus 4 (claude-opus-4-20250514) and Claude Sonnet 4 (claude-sonnet-4-20250514) are deprecated and retire on June 15, 2026, after which requests to them return a 404. The official replacements are claude-opus-4-8 and claude-sonnet-4-6. But swapping the model string alone will break a working integration: depending on which target you choose, several request parameters that were valid on the May 2025 models now return a 400 error, and two changes alter behavior silently. This page maps each removed or changed parameter to the exact failure and the fix.

    One distinction governs the whole migration. The Opus path (to claude-opus-4-8) is the strict one: it removes temperature/top_p/top_k and manual thinking budgets entirely. The Sonnet path (to claude-sonnet-4-6) is gentler: it keeps sampling parameters (with the older “one of temperature or top_p, not both” rule) and still accepts budget_tokens as deprecated-but-functional. The one rule both paths share: assistant-turn prefills now return 400.

    The breaking-change matrix

    Each row is a change that breaks on at least one migration target. “Error” means the API rejects the request server-side (HTTP 400) even though the SDK request type still type-checks. “Silent” means no error — the behavior simply differs.

    Change On Opus 4.8 On Sonnet 4.6 Symptom Fix
    thinking: {type:"enabled", budget_tokens:N} 400 error (removed) Deprecated, still works 400 on Opus; cost/latency drift on Sonnet thinking: {type:"adaptive"} + output_config.effort
    temperature / top_p / top_k 400 error (removed) Keep only one of temperature or top_p 400 on Opus if any set; 400 on Sonnet if both set Remove on Opus; steer via prompt. Keep one on Sonnet
    Assistant-turn prefill (last message role:"assistant") 400 error 400 error Request rejected on both output_config.format (structured outputs) or system-prompt instruction
    thinking.display default Defaults to "omitted" Returns summarized text Reasoning text empty on Opus (silent) Set display: "summarized" on Opus
    Tokenizer New tokenizer (more tokens) Unchanged tokenizer Same text counts higher on Opus; max_tokens too tight Re-baseline with count_tokens; add headroom
    output_format (top-level) Deprecated API-wide Deprecated API-wide Works, but slated for removal Move to output_config: {format: {...}}

    Model ID swaps and retirement dates

    Retiring model Model ID Retires Replacement
    Claude Opus 4 claude-opus-4-20250514 (alias claude-opus-4-0) June 15, 2026 claude-opus-4-8
    Claude Sonnet 4 claude-sonnet-4-20250514 (alias claude-sonnet-4-0) June 15, 2026 claude-sonnet-4-6

    These are the original May 2025 models, not the later Opus 4.6 or Sonnet 4.5 releases. Use the exact replacement strings above — do not append a date suffix to claude-opus-4-8 or claude-sonnet-4-6 (they are dateless pinned snapshots).

    budget_tokens to adaptive thinking

    The Opus path removes the fixed thinking budget. thinking: {type:"enabled", budget_tokens:N} returns a 400 on claude-opus-4-8. The replacement is adaptive thinking — the model decides how much to think per request — with overall depth controlled by the effort parameter (low | medium | high | xhigh | max). There is no direct token-count equivalent; effort is an output-level control, not a thinking budget.

    # Before (Claude Opus 4 / Sonnet 4)
    client.messages.create(
        model="claude-opus-4-20250514",
        max_tokens=16000,
        thinking={"type": "enabled", "budget_tokens": 10000},
        messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "..."}],
    )
    
    # After (Claude Opus 4.8)
    client.messages.create(
        model="claude-opus-4-8",
        max_tokens=16000,
        thinking={"type": "adaptive"},
        output_config={"effort": "high"},  # or "max", "xhigh", "medium", "low"
        messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "..."}],
    )

    On the Sonnet path, budget_tokens is deprecated but still functional on claude-sonnet-4-6, so it will not 400 — but you should still migrate to adaptive thinking. Note also that Sonnet 4.6 defaults to effort: "high" where Sonnet 4 had no effort parameter at all; if you do not set it explicitly you may see higher latency and token use after the swap.

    Sampling parameters: removed vs. restricted

    This is where the two paths diverge most. On claude-opus-4-8, setting temperature, top_p, or top_k to any non-default value returns a 400. Remove them entirely and steer behavior through prompting instead. (If you used temperature=0 for determinism, note it never guaranteed identical outputs on prior models either.)

    # Opus path — sampling params 400 on claude-opus-4-8
    # Before
    client.messages.create(
        model="claude-opus-4-20250514",
        temperature=0.7,
        top_p=0.9,
        messages=[...],
    )
    
    # After — remove them
    client.messages.create(
        model="claude-opus-4-8",
        messages=[...],
    )

    On claude-sonnet-4-6 the older Claude 4.x rule still applies: you may pass one of temperature or top_p, but passing both returns a 400. So a Sonnet 4 to Sonnet 4.6 move only requires dropping one of the two if you were setting both.

    Assistant-turn prefills to structured outputs

    Prefilling the final assistant turn — ending your messages array with a role: "assistant" message to force a response shape — returns a 400 on both claude-opus-4-8 and claude-sonnet-4-6. This is the one breaking change you cannot dodge by choosing the gentler target. The replacement depends on what the prefill was doing.

    Prefill was used for Replacement
    Forcing JSON / YAML / schema output output_config.format with a json_schema
    Forcing a classification label A tool with an enum field, or structured outputs
    Skipping preambles (“Here is…”) System-prompt instruction: respond directly, no preamble
    Continuing an interrupted response Move continuation into the user turn
    Steering around bad refusals Usually unnecessary now — plain user-turn prompting suffices
    # Before (fails on both targets) — prefill forcing JSON shape
    messages=[
        {"role": "user", "content": "Extract the name."},
        {"role": "assistant", "content": "{\"name\": \""},
    ]
    
    # After — structured outputs replace the prefill
    client.messages.create(
        model="claude-opus-4-8",
        max_tokens=1024,
        output_config={"format": {"type": "json_schema", "schema": SCHEMA}},
        messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Extract the name."}],
    )

    Thinking display: the silent one

    On claude-opus-4-8, thinking blocks still stream, but their thinking text field is empty unless you opt in — the default is display: "omitted". There is no error; if your UI rendered the summarized reasoning, it now shows a long pause before output. Restore it by setting the display mode:

    thinking = {
        "type": "adaptive",
        "display": "summarized",  # default is "omitted" on Opus 4.8/4.7
    }

    The block-field name is unchanged — it is still block.thinking on a thinking-type block. The fix is the request parameter, not the response-handling code. (Sonnet 4.6 is not affected by this default change.)

    The new tokenizer: re-baseline max_tokens

    This change is Opus-only and easy to miss because it produces no error. claude-opus-4-8 uses the tokenizer introduced with Opus 4.7, under which the same text tokenizes to roughly 1x–1.35x as many tokens — up to about 35% more, around 30% on typical content, varying by workload. Three consequences:

    What to check Why
    max_tokens ceilings and compaction triggers The same output now consumes more tokens; tight limits truncate mid-thought
    Client-side token estimators (e.g. fixed char-to-token ratios) Calibrated against the old tokenizer; now undercount
    Cost and rate-limit dashboards count_tokens returns higher numbers; re-baseline before reacting

    Re-run client.messages.count_tokens(model="claude-opus-4-8", ...) on a representative sample of your prompts. Do not apply a blanket multiplier. Sonnet 4.6 keeps the older tokenizer, so a Sonnet 4 to Sonnet 4.6 move has no tokenizer re-baseline to do.

    The full checklist

    Step Opus 4 to 4.8 Sonnet 4 to 4.6
    Update model ID string Required Required
    Replace budget_tokens with adaptive thinking Required (400) Recommended (deprecated)
    Sampling params Remove all (400) Keep only one (both 400)
    Remove assistant-turn prefills Required (400) Required (400)
    Set display: "summarized" if showing reasoning Required for visible thinking Not applicable
    Re-baseline max_tokens for new tokenizer Required Not applicable
    Set effort explicitly Defaults to high Defaults to high
    Move output_format to output_config.format Recommended Recommended
    Verify tool inputs parsed with a JSON parser Recommended Recommended
    Spot-check one request, then roll out Required Required

    If you run Claude Code, /claude-api migrate applies the model swap, breaking-parameter changes, prefill replacement, and effort calibration across a codebase, then produces a verify-it-yourself checklist. It asks you to confirm scope before editing any files.

    Is migrating off Claude Opus 4 really not just a model-string change?

    No. Moving to claude-opus-4-8 also requires removing temperature/top_p/top_k and any budget_tokens (all now return 400), removing assistant-turn prefills (400), opting back into summarized thinking if your UI shows it, and re-baselining max_tokens for the new tokenizer. Only the Sonnet 4 to Sonnet 4.6 move is close to a drop-in — and even that requires removing prefills.

    When exactly do Claude Opus 4 and Sonnet 4 stop working?

    June 15, 2026. After that date, requests to claude-opus-4-20250514 and claude-sonnet-4-20250514 return a 404. These are the original May 2025 models, not Opus 4.6 or Sonnet 4.5.

    What replaces budget_tokens now that it errors on Opus?

    Adaptive thinking (thinking: {type:"adaptive"}) plus the effort parameter inside output_config. There is no exact token-count equivalent: the model decides how much to think per request, and effort (low through max) tunes overall depth and spend. On Sonnet 4.6, budget_tokens still works but is deprecated.

    Why does the same prompt cost more tokens on Opus 4.8?

    Opus 4.8 uses the tokenizer introduced with Opus 4.7, under which the same text produces roughly 1x–1.35x as many tokens (about 30% more on typical content, up to ~35%). Re-run the count_tokens endpoint against claude-opus-4-8 and give max_tokens and compaction triggers extra headroom. Sonnet 4.6 keeps the older tokenizer, so it is unaffected.

    My thinking summaries disappeared after migrating to Opus — is that a bug?

    No. On Opus 4.8 (and 4.7), thinking.display defaults to "omitted", so thinking blocks stream with an empty text field. Set display: "summarized" in your thinking config to restore visible reasoning. The field name is unchanged; only the default flipped.


  • Claude Code Billing in 2026: Subscription Usage vs the Agent Credit Pool

    Claude Code Billing in 2026: Subscription Usage vs the Agent Credit Pool

    Last verified: June 13, 2026

    Claude Code has two billing models, and which one applies depends on how you run it, not just which plan you hold. When you use Claude Code interactively in the terminal or IDE on a Pro or Max plan, it draws from the same subscription usage limits as your Claude.ai chats. But starting June 15, 2026, Anthropic separates out programmatic usage: the Claude Agent SDK, the claude -p headless command, the Claude Code GitHub Actions integration, and third-party apps that authenticate through the Agent SDK will no longer count against your interactive subscription pool. Instead they draw from a new, separate monthly Agent SDK credit, billed at standard API rates. This page documents both models, the exact credit amounts per plan, and the SDK package rename you may also need to handle.

    The two billing models at a glance

    The dividing line is interactive vs. programmatic. One number to remember: setting an ANTHROPIC_API_KEY environment variable overrides your subscription entirely — Claude Code then authenticates with that key and bills as pay-as-you-go API usage, regardless of plan.

    Usage type How it runs Billed against
    Interactive Claude Code Terminal or IDE, human at the keyboard Pro/Max subscription usage limits
    Claude.ai chat Web, desktop, mobile Pro/Max subscription usage limits
    Agent SDK (Python/TypeScript) Your own programmatic projects Separate Agent SDK credit (from June 15, 2026)
    claude -p (non-interactive) Headless / scripted Claude Code Separate Agent SDK credit (from June 15, 2026)
    Claude Code GitHub Actions CI/CD automation Separate Agent SDK credit (from June 15, 2026)
    Any usage with ANTHROPIC_API_KEY set API-key auth instead of subscription Standard API rates (pay-as-you-go)

    What changes on June 15, 2026

    Per Anthropic’s support documentation: “Starting June 15, 2026, Claude Agent SDK and claude -p usage no longer counts toward your Claude plan’s usage limits.” Each subscription tier instead receives a fixed monthly Agent SDK credit. When that credit runs out, additional Agent SDK usage flows to usage credits at standard API rates — but only if you have enabled usage credits. If you have not, “Agent SDK requests stop until your credit refreshes.” Unused credits do not roll over to the next billing cycle, and there is no automatic fallback to the interactive pool.

    Plan Monthly Agent SDK credit
    Pro $20
    Max 5x $100
    Max 20x $200
    Team (Standard seats) $20
    Team (Premium seats) $100
    Enterprise (seat-based Premium) $200

    What stays on the interactive subscription pool, unchanged: Claude conversations on web, desktop, and mobile; and interactive Claude Code in the terminal or IDE. The change is scoped strictly to programmatic execution.

    How each pool is metered and priced

    Claude Code “charges by API token consumption” — the underlying meter is input/output tokens, including thinking tokens billed as output. On a subscription, that token consumption is what counts against your plan limits (interactive) or your Agent SDK credit (programmatic). The Agent SDK credit and any overflow are billed at standard API list rates; the per-model API token prices below are the verified current rates.

    Pool Meter Price basis
    Interactive (Pro/Max) Tokens, against plan usage limits Included in subscription
    Agent SDK credit Tokens, against monthly credit Standard API rates
    Overflow past the credit Tokens, usage credits Standard API rates (only if usage credits enabled)
    API key (ANTHROPIC_API_KEY) Tokens, pay-as-you-go Standard API rates

    Verified current API token prices (per million tokens) for models commonly used in Claude Code:

    Model Model ID Input $/Mtok Output $/Mtok
    Claude Opus 4.8 claude-opus-4-8 $5.00 $25.00
    Claude Sonnet 4.6 claude-sonnet-4-6 $3.00 $15.00
    Claude Haiku 4.5 claude-haiku-4-5 $1.00 $5.00

    Subscription plan prices

    These are the published Claude plan prices the Agent SDK credits attach to. The Max 5x plan starts at $100/month; the $200 figure for Max 20x is documented as the matching Agent SDK credit amount for that tier.

    Plan Price
    Free $0
    Pro $20/month, or $17/month billed annually ($200 up front)
    Max 5x From $100/month
    Team (Standard seat) $25/seat/month, or $20/seat/month billed annually

    The SDK rename: claude-code-sdk to claude-agent-sdk

    Separate from billing, the SDK itself was renamed. Anthropic’s migration guide states: “The Claude Code SDK has been renamed to the Claude Agent SDK.” If you have code on the old package, you must update the package name, imports, and one Python type. The headless CLI command name is unchanged — it is still claude -p.

    Aspect Old New
    npm package (TS/JS) @anthropic-ai/claude-code @anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk
    Python package claude-code-sdk claude-agent-sdk
    Python options type ClaudeCodeOptions ClaudeAgentOptions
    Default system prompt Claude Code’s preset Minimal (opt back in via preset: "claude_code")
    # TypeScript
    npm uninstall @anthropic-ai/claude-code
    npm install @anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk
    
    # Python
    pip uninstall claude-code-sdk
    pip install claude-agent-sdk

    Decision: which billing path applies to your work

    If you are… Billing path
    A developer coding interactively in the terminal Subscription usage limits (unchanged)
    Running claude -p in a script or cron job Agent SDK credit (from June 15, 2026)
    Running Claude Code in GitHub Actions Agent SDK credit (from June 15, 2026)
    Building an app on the Agent SDK with subscription auth Agent SDK credit (from June 15, 2026)
    A team or service account wanting budgets + usage reports Set ANTHROPIC_API_KEY → standard API billing

    Does interactive Claude Code billing change on June 15, 2026?

    No. Anthropic’s documentation confirms interactive Claude Code in the terminal or IDE, and Claude conversations on web, desktop, and mobile, continue using subscription usage limits as before. Only programmatic usage — the Agent SDK, claude -p, GitHub Actions, and third-party Agent SDK apps — moves to the separate Agent SDK credit.

    How much is the separate Agent SDK credit?

    $20/month on Pro, $100 on Max 5x, $200 on Max 20x, $20 on Team Standard seats, $100 on Team Premium seats, and $200 on Enterprise seat-based Premium. The credit is billed at standard API rates, does not roll over, and refreshes monthly.

    What happens when the Agent SDK credit runs out?

    Additional Agent SDK usage flows to usage credits at standard API rates — but only if you have enabled usage credits. If you have not enabled them, Agent SDK requests stop until your credit refreshes. There is no automatic fallback to your interactive subscription pool.

    How do I avoid the credit pool entirely?

    Set an ANTHROPIC_API_KEY environment variable. Claude Code and the Agent SDK then authenticate with that key and bill as standard pay-as-you-go API usage, separate from any subscription. This is Anthropic’s recommended path for apps, CI jobs, service accounts, and team-owned projects that need budgets and usage reporting.

    Was the Claude Code SDK renamed?

    Yes. It is now the Claude Agent SDK. The npm package @anthropic-ai/claude-code became @anthropic-ai/claude-agent-sdk, the Python package claude-code-sdk became claude-agent-sdk, and the Python type ClaudeCodeOptions became ClaudeAgentOptions. The claude -p CLI command name is unchanged.


  • I Actually Used Claude Fable 5 Before the Government Pulled It. Here’s What They Took.

    I Actually Used Claude Fable 5 Before the Government Pulled It. Here’s What They Took.

    Three days. That’s how long Claude Fable 5 existed in the wild before the US government killed it.

    On Monday, June 9, Anthropic launched Fable 5 and Mythos 5. On Thursday, June 12, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick issued an export control directive ordering Anthropic to suspend access for any foreign national. Since Anthropic can’t verify nationality in real time, they shut it down for everyone. Globally. Immediately. The stated reason was a narrow jailbreak vulnerability — one Anthropic says exists in other publicly deployed models too.

    I’m not writing this to debate export controls. I’m writing this because I spent those three days running Fable 5 in production — not benchmarking it, not kicking the tires, actually building with it — and I have something most people writing about this don’t have: receipts.

    Day One: The Model Dropped and I Put It to Work

    Fable 5 launched June 9. By that afternoon, I had it running a Batch 8 sprint across my Tygart Media site — refreshing 10 pages of Claude content that needed updating. Fable 5 updated comparison tables, corrected model names across the lineup, added FAQPage schema, injected internal links, and expanded word counts. Post 4787 went from 750 words to 1,602. Post 9821 went from 1,782 to 2,543. Five posts refreshed with full SEO treatment — schema, FAQs, RankMath meta, silo links — in a single session.

    That same day, I had Fable 5 write a complete guide to itself. Not a press release rewrite — a 2,100-word article with an interactive cost calculator, a model picker tool, and a section called “How We Actually Use Each Model” that mapped my real production workflows to each tier: Haiku for the daily 25-post SEO sweeps, Sonnet for desk articles, Opus for deep refreshes, Fable for portfolio-wide audits and strategy. The draft landed in Notion with scoped CSS and JS, ready to paste into WordPress as a single Custom HTML block.

    Day Two: Fable 5 Ran My Entire SEO Audit

    June 10. I ran a full SEO audit of tygartmedia.com through Fable 5. It identified that Fable 5 itself was the top content gap — a model launched 24 hours ago with zero dedicated coverage and peak search intent. So it wrote the article to fill its own gap. It drafted the piece, tagged the slug, assigned the category, and queued internal links to five existing posts.

    That same day, Fable 5 wrote and published “The Signal: AI Just Split Into Two Lanes” — a 1,400-word field notes piece that wove together Fable 5’s launch, OpenAI’s S-1, Chrome WebMCP, and the emerging thesis that AI was splitting into a product lane and an infrastructure lane. The article went through the full pipeline: SEO optimization, AEO with 8 FAQ Q&As, GEO entity enrichment, Article + FAQPage schema, taxonomy assignment, internal linking, quality gate — then published via REST API. It even created the LinkedIn draft in Metricool and scheduled it for 2:30 PM Pacific.

    That article exists right now at tygartmedia.com. I didn’t write it. Fable 5 did, with me directing the strategy and approving the output. The quality bar was real journalism, not AI slop.

    Day Three: Building the Infrastructure Layer

    June 11. While the Fable 5 Complete Guide sat in Notion waiting for a featured image, I was using Fable 5 to build the systems that would keep my content operation running. I had it update the Claude Intelligence Desk — my Notion page that serves as the authoritative source of truth for every Claude model name, API string, and price across my entire content operation. Every article gets verified against that desk before publishing. Fable 5 updated it with its own pricing: $10 input, $50 output per million tokens.

    I also had Fable 5 design my Pricing Freshness Engine — a WordPress mu-plugin that shadow-checks Anthropic’s live pricing against what’s displayed on my site. The engine had been running in shadow mode since June 2, catching drift before it reaches readers. Fable 5 added itself to the canonical pricing store.

    Meanwhile, my 6 scheduled email agent tasks — morning triage, midday check, afternoon wrap, newsletter extraction, weekly prep, and weekly self-audit — were running on the same Claude infrastructure, handling my inbox while I focused on building. The whole system runs on my Max plan. No extra API charges.

    What Fable 5 Actually Felt Like

    Here’s what the benchmarks don’t tell you: Fable 5 understood intent, not just instructions.

    When I told it to run a page refresh, it didn’t just update the text — it checked model names against my Intelligence Desk, verified pricing against live documentation, added schema markup, expanded FAQs, injected internal links, and updated the dateline. It treated each task as a system, not a checklist.

    When I asked it to write the Complete Guide, it included a section about how we actually use each model tier in production — because it knew from context that an article about Claude models on a site that runs on Claude models should demonstrate firsthand expertise, not just recite specs. It even built interactive JavaScript widgets inline — a cost calculator and a model picker — without being asked, because it understood the article needed to be useful, not just informative.

    The gap between Fable 5 and what came before it was the largest single-model jump I’ve experienced since I started building on Claude in 2024.

    What Most Commentators Are Missing

    Most people writing about the shutdown never used Fable 5. They’re debating precedent, policy, the implications for AI regulation. All valid. But the conversation is incomplete without understanding what was actually deployed.

    This is the first time the US government has aimed export controls at a deployed commercial AI model rather than at chips or hardware. That’s unprecedented. Anthropic complied but publicly disagreed, calling it a likely misunderstanding based on a narrow jailbreak that exists in other models too.

    Every other Claude model — Opus, Sonnet, Haiku — remains fully available and unaffected.

    What I Lost

    Here’s what the government took from me specifically:

    My Fable 5 Complete Guide is sitting in Notion, ready to publish, with the proxy fix queued. The pricing pages need Fable 5 rows added. The Freshness Engine needs Fable 5 in its canonical store. The WordPress proxy’s ALLOWED_DOMAINS needs a one-line gcloud update. All of it was queued up. All of it was dependent on a model that no longer exists.

    The infrastructure I built this week — the Intelligence Desk, the Pricing Freshness Engine, the content pipeline that ran “The Signal” from draft to published with schema and social scheduling in a single session — all of that still works with Opus and Sonnet. But the ceiling is lower. The tasks that Fable 5 handled in one pass will take two or three with the models that remain.

    What Happens Now

    Anthropic says this isn’t permanent. They’re working to restore access.

    For people like me who build businesses on top of these tools, the uncertainty is the real cost. Three days is long enough to build production workflows, deploy infrastructure, and write articles that reference a model’s existence — and short enough that all of it gets yanked before you can publish.

    But I’m not pulling back. This week confirmed the trajectory. AI at this level isn’t a nice-to-have — it’s the infrastructure of how modern knowledge work gets done. Whether it’s Fable 5 or whatever comes after it, this capability exists now. You can’t un-ring that bell.

    I know because I rang it. For three days, I built real things with a model the government decided the world shouldn’t have. And the work is still there in my Notion, waiting.


    Will Tygart is the founder of Tygart Media, where he builds AI-native content operations across a portfolio of WordPress sites. He has been building production workflows on Claude since 2024. His Claude Intelligence Desk, Pricing Freshness Engine, and content pipeline systems were all built or upgraded using Claude Fable 5 during its three-day window.

  • Latest Claude Models — June 2026 (Current Lineup, Pricing, and Specs)

    Latest Claude Models — June 2026 (Current Lineup, Pricing, and Specs)

    Updated June 12, 2026. Fable 5 is the current top-tier model, released June 9, 2026. The full lineup: Fable 5 → Opus 4.8 → Sonnet 4.6 → Haiku 4.5. Pricing and availability verified against Anthropic’s official docs.

    Current Claude Models — Quick Reference

    Model API ID Input $/MTok Output $/MTok Context Best For
    Claude Fable 5 🆕 claude-fable-5 $10.00 $50.00 1M tokens Complex engineering, long-horizon agentic work
    Claude Opus 4.8 claude-opus-4-8 $5.00 $25.00 1M tokens Everyday advanced work, high-volume pipelines
    Claude Sonnet 4.6 claude-sonnet-4-6 $3.00 $15.00 1M tokens Balanced capability and speed
    Claude Haiku 4.5 claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 $1.00 $5.00 200K tokens High-speed, cost-sensitive tasks

    All four models support vision, tool use/function calling, and batch processing. Fable 5 and Opus 4.8 are available on AWS Bedrock, Google Cloud Vertex AI, and Microsoft Azure AI Foundry in addition to the direct Anthropic API.

    Claude Fable 5 (June 9, 2026)

    Fable 5 is Anthropic’s first publicly available Mythos-class model — a capability tier previously restricted to research and select enterprise partners. It’s the most capable model Anthropic has released to date.

    What makes Fable 5 different:

    • SWE-bench Verified: 95.0% (vs 88.6% for Opus 4.8)
    • SWE-bench Pro: 80.0% (vs 69.2%)
    • Senior Engineer benchmark: 91/100 (vs ~63/100)
    • Adaptive extended thinking (always on, not a mode switch)

    Important limitations:

    • 2x the cost of Opus 4.8 ($10/$50 vs $5/$25)
    • Mandatory 30-day data retention — not available under zero data retention (ZDR)
    • Safety classifiers route cybersecurity, biology, chemistry, and distillation prompts to an Opus 4.8 fallback — you pay Fable 5 rates for Opus 4.8 output in those domains
    • Higher latency on complex tasks (60 seconds to several minutes vs 3–15 seconds for Opus 4.8)

    Free through June 22, 2026: Claude Pro, Max 5x, Max 20x, Team, and Enterprise subscription plans include Fable 5 at no extra charge during the launch window.

    Claude Opus 4.8

    Opus 4.8 is Anthropic’s current workhorse for serious work — the right default for most API applications and Claude Code use. It supports zero data retention (ZDR), which Fable 5 does not.

    Key specs:

    • Context: 1M tokens
    • Max output: 32K tokens per request
    • Extended thinking: Available (opt-in mode)
    • ZDR: Yes
    • Batch API: Yes (50% discount on batch processing)

    Use Opus 4.8 as your default model unless you have a specific reason to go up to Fable 5 or down to Sonnet/Haiku. It hits the best balance of capability, speed, cost, and data policy flexibility.

    Claude Sonnet 4.6

    Sonnet 4.6 targets use cases where response speed matters and you don’t need Opus-level reasoning. It’s the model Anthropic’s own infrastructure runs Claude.ai on for Pro subscribers doing day-to-day chat work.

    Key specs:

    • Context: 1M tokens
    • Max output: 64K tokens per request
    • Extended thinking: Available
    • ZDR: Yes
    • Typical latency: 1–5 seconds for most tasks

    Good for: content generation pipelines, customer-facing chat, document analysis at volume, anything where sub-5-second response time matters.

    Claude Haiku 4.5

    Haiku 4.5 is Anthropic’s fastest and cheapest model. At $1 input / $5 output per million tokens, it’s 10x cheaper than Fable 5.

    Key specs:

    • Context: 200K tokens (smaller than the Opus/Sonnet/Fable 1M window)
    • Max output: 16K tokens per request
    • Latency: Sub-second for most tasks
    • ZDR: Yes

    The 200K context window is the main limitation. For tasks that fit within that window — classification, short-form generation, routing, extraction — Haiku 4.5 is the cost-optimal choice. For longer documents or conversations, step up to Sonnet or Opus.

    How to Choose the Right Claude Model

    The decision framework I use:

    1. Does the task require multi-step reasoning, complex coding, or long-horizon autonomy? → Fable 5 (if cost and latency are acceptable) or Opus 4.8
    2. Is this a routine task at reasonable volume? → Opus 4.8 as the default
    3. Does latency matter more than maximum reasoning depth? → Sonnet 4.6
    4. Is this high-volume, short-context, cost-sensitive work? → Haiku 4.5
    5. Does your use case require zero data retention? → Any model except Fable 5

    Most production applications use a routing strategy: Fable 5 or Opus 4.8 for the hard jobs, Haiku 4.5 for classification and pre-processing, Sonnet 4.6 for user-facing response generation.

    Claude Subscription Plans and Model Access (June 2026)

    Plan Price Models Included
    Free $0 Limited Sonnet 4.6 access
    Pro $20/mo ($17 annual) Sonnet 4.6, Opus 4.8, Fable 5 (through June 22)
    Max 5x $100/mo All models, 5x usage vs Pro
    Max 20x $200/mo All models, 20x usage vs Pro
    Team Standard $20/seat/mo (annual), $25 month-to-month All models + admin features
    Team Premium $100/seat/mo (annual), $125 month-to-month All models + priority + advanced admin
    Enterprise $20/seat + usage at API rates (contact sales) All models + ZDR + custom retention + SSO

    Claude Code (the CLI tool) is included in all paid subscription plans. API access for building your own applications is separate — billed per token via the Anthropic Console regardless of subscription status.

    Legacy Models (Still Available, No Longer Latest)

    These models are still available via the API but are not Anthropic’s current recommended versions:

    • Claude Opus 4.7 (claude-opus-4-7) — prior Opus tier, succeeded by 4.8
    • Claude Opus 4.6 (claude-opus-4-6) — two generations back
    • Claude Sonnet 4.5 (claude-sonnet-4-5) — prior Sonnet tier
    • Claude 3.5 Haiku / Sonnet / Opus — Claude 3.x generation, still functional for legacy integrations

    If you’re building a new application, start with the current lineup. Legacy model IDs are useful for maintaining compatibility in existing applications that haven’t been updated.

    Platform Availability

    Platform Fable 5 Opus 4.8 Sonnet 4.6 Haiku 4.5
    Anthropic API (direct)
    AWS Bedrock
    Google Cloud Vertex AI
    Microsoft Azure AI Foundry
    GitHub Copilot ✓ (via Foundry)

    Frequently Asked Questions

    What is the newest Claude model?
    As of June 2026, Claude Fable 5 is the newest and most capable model Anthropic has released. It launched June 9, 2026. The API model ID is claude-fable-5.

    Is Claude Fable 5 the same as Claude 5?
    No. Anthropic changed the naming convention — there is no “Claude 5.” The Fable series is a new tier above the Opus/Sonnet/Haiku hierarchy. Fable 5 is Anthropic’s first Mythos-class model released for general availability.

    What is the most powerful Claude model?
    Claude Fable 5 is currently the most powerful. For tasks where Fable 5’s safety classifier routing applies (cybersecurity, biology, chemistry, distillation), or where zero data retention is required, Claude Opus 4.8 is the appropriate top-tier choice.

    What Claude model does Claude.ai use by default?
    Depends on your plan. Free tier uses a limited version of Sonnet. Pro and Max subscribers access Opus 4.8 as the default with Fable 5 available (through June 22, 2026 included, after that plan-dependent). Claude.ai routes to the appropriate model for your plan automatically.

    How do I use the latest Claude model in the API?
    Set the model parameter in your API request to the model ID. For Fable 5: "model": "claude-fable-5". For Opus 4.8: "model": "claude-opus-4-8". See the full API reference at console.anthropic.com.

    What’s the difference between Claude Opus 4.8 and Fable 5?
    Fable 5 is significantly stronger on complex engineering tasks — SWE-bench Pro: 80% vs 69.2%, and Senior Engineer benchmark: 91 vs ~63 out of 100. The trade-off: Fable 5 costs 2x more ($10/$50 vs $5/$25 per MTok), has higher latency, and requires 30-day data retention. For most work, Opus 4.8 is the right choice. Full Fable 5 vs Opus 4.8 breakdown here.

    Changelog

    • June 12, 2026 — Added Claude Fable 5 (released June 9). Updated pricing table. Added platform availability table.
    • May 2026 — Claude Opus 4.8 and Sonnet 4.6 were the current top-tier models.

    This page is updated as Anthropic releases new models. Last verified: June 12, 2026. For API pricing, check console.anthropic.com — the canonical source.