How I use Claude Code: Separation of planning and execution
TL;DR Highlight
Before writing code with Claude Code, a research → plan → annotate → execute workflow dramatically reduces wasted effort and AI hallucinations.
Who Should Read
Developers actively using Claude Code or similar AI coding agents, and anyone looking to improve the reliability of LLM-assisted development workflows.
Core Mechanics
- The recommended workflow is: Research (gather context about the codebase) → Plan (define what to build and how) → Annotate (add code comments and docs to guide the AI) → Execute (let Claude Code write the code).
- Skipping the research and planning phases is the most common mistake — jumping straight to 'write this feature' leads to Claude making wrong assumptions about the codebase structure.
- Annotation is a key differentiator: adding detailed comments in the relevant files before asking Claude to write code acts as precise context injection, reducing hallucination significantly.
- Breaking tasks into smaller, well-scoped subtasks with clear success criteria produces far better results than broad open-ended requests.
- The workflow treats Claude Code as a junior dev who needs good briefing materials, not a senior dev who can figure everything out autonomously.
Evidence
- The author shared concrete before/after examples showing how annotated codebases led to significantly fewer revision cycles compared to un-annotated requests.
- HN commenters corroborated the research-first approach, with several sharing similar workflows they'd developed independently.
- One commenter noted this mirrors good engineering practice — 'YAGNI aside, writing the spec before the code is just good engineering' — and that AI just makes the cost of skipping this higher.
How to Apply
- Before starting a Claude Code session, spend 5–10 minutes reading the relevant files yourself and adding or updating comments that explain intent, constraints, and relationships.
- Use Claude in 'research mode' first — ask it to summarize the relevant parts of the codebase before asking it to write anything.
- Write a short plan (even just a few bullet points in a comment) describing what you want before triggering the execute phase.
- Scope tasks tightly: 'add pagination to the users list endpoint' beats 'improve the users API.'
Terminology
Related Papers
Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code
Claude Code에서 최대 7개의 병렬 서브 에이전트가 각각 다른 관점으로 PR을 리뷰하고, 자동 수정까지 해주는 오픈소스 플러그인이다. 기존 /review나 CodeRabbit보다 실제 버그를 더 많이 잡는다고 주장하지만 커뮤니티에서는 복잡도와 실효성에 대한 회의론도 나왔다.
How Fast Does Claude, Acting as a User Space IP Stack, Respond to Pings?
Claude Code에게 IP 패킷을 직접 파싱하고 ICMP echo reply를 구성하도록 시켜서 실제로 ping에 응답하게 만든 실험으로, 'Markdown이 곧 코드이고 LLM이 프로세서'라는 아이디어를 네트워크 스택 수준까지 밀어붙인 재미있는 사례다.
Show HN: Git for AI Agents
AI 코딩 에이전트(Claude Code 등)가 수행한 모든 툴 호출을 자동으로 추적하고, 어떤 프롬프트가 어느 코드 줄을 작성했는지 blame까지 가능한 버전 관리 도구다.
Principles for agent-native CLIs
AI 에이전트가 CLI 도구를 더 잘 사용할 수 있도록 설계하는 원칙들을 정리한 글로, 에이전트가 CLI를 도구로 활용하는 빈도가 높아지면서 이 설계 방식이 실용적으로 중요해지고 있다.
Agent-harness-kit scaffolding for multi-agent workflows (MCP, provider-agnostic)
여러 AI 에이전트가 서로 역할을 나눠 협업할 수 있도록 조율하는 scaffolding 도구로, Vite처럼 설정 없이 빠르게 멀티 에이전트 파이프라인을 구성할 수 있다.
Show HN: Tilde.run – Agent sandbox with a transactional, versioned filesystem
AI 에이전트가 실제 프로덕션 데이터를 건드려도 롤백할 수 있는 격리된 샌드박스 환경을 제공하는 도구로, GitHub/S3/Google Drive를 하나의 버전 관리 파일시스템으로 묶어준다.