Curious what the A/B test actually changed -- the article mentions tool confirmation dialogs behaving inconsistently, which lines up with what I noticed last week. Would be nice if Anthropic published a changelog or at least flagged when behavior is being tested.

This stemmed from me asking Claude itself why it was writing such _weird_ plans with no detail (just a bunch of projected code changes).

Claude stated: in its system prompt, it had strict instructions to provide no context or details. Keep plans under forty lines of code. Be terse.

This is Claude’s output of its system prompt, can you verify without going Claude of the system prompt? There is still potential of hallucination.

There was a complete verification. This entire thread provides context around what I originally published - which I wouldn't recommend recreating

Could you provide the details of the complete verification? *On the original story you only showed Claude like responses, not how you dug into the binary