You don't want to run tests after every file change, because that will distract Claude from finishing whatever it's doing and add noise to the context window. Of course the tests will be broken if Claude hasn't finished the full change yet.
Running tests makes most sense on the Stop hook event, but personally I've found CLAUDE.md instruction of "Run `just check` after changes" to be effective enough. The Stop hook has the issue that it will run the checks every time Claude stops responding, even after without any changes.
Won't the LSP distract Claude too? I am trying to think of ways to make Claude faster at iterating by reducing tool calls. That always seems to be a bottleneck when it's doing tons of back-and-forth with tool calls.
Exactly. This is why the workflow of consulting Gemini/Codex for architecture and overall plan, and then have Claude implement the changes is so powerful.
Have used Alfred for 10+ years at this point. Some colleagues are hyped about Raycast, but to me the pricing model is a joke. Pay (monthly) for AI - how about I bring my own API key? Pay (again, monthly) for unlimited clipboard history - lol. Free plan, "Free, forever". Yeah, until it isn't.
Alfred isn't the shiniest thing anymore but it's stood the time remarkably well, something I value very highly for tools as central to my workflow as Alfred.
Maybe it messed that up because writing bash scripts is so core to how Claude Code works? Much of the existing system prompt (and I bet a lot of the fine-tuning data) is about how to use the Bash tool.
reply