I don't think this is particularly about the financial impact of people using OpenClaw - they can adjust the amount of tokens in a subscription quite easily.

I think the root cause is that Anthropic is capacity constrained so is having to make choices about the customers they want to serve and have chosen people who use Claude Code above other segments.

We know Anthropic weren't as aggressive as OpenAI through 2025 in signing huge capacity deals with the hyperscalers and instead signed smaller deals with more neo-clouds, and we know some of the neo-clouds have had trouble delivering capacity as quickly as they promised.

We also know Claude Code usage is growing very fast - almost certainly faster since December 2025 than Anthropic predicted 12 months ago when they were doing 12-month capacity planning.

We know Anthropic has suffered from brown-outs in Claude availability.

Put this all together and a reasonable hypothesis is that Anthropic is choosing which customers to service rather than raising prices.

Dealing with Claude going into stupid mode 15 times a day, constant HTTP errors, etc. just isn't really worth it for all it does. I can't see myself justifying $200/mo. on any replacement tool either, the output just doesn't warrant it.

I think we all jumped on the AI mothership with our eyes closed and it's time to dial some nuance back into things. Most of the time I'm just using Opus as a bulk code autocomplete that really doesn't take much smarts comparatively speaking. But when I do lean on it for actual fiddly bug fixing or ideation, I'm regularly left disappointed and working by hand anyway. I'd prefer to set my expectations (and willingness to pay) a little lower just to get a consistent slightly dumb agent rather than an overpriced one that continually lets me down. I don't think that's a problem fixed by trying to swap in another heavily marketed cure-all like Gemini or Codex, it's solved by adjusting expectations.

In terms of pricing, $200 buys an absolute ton of GLM or Minimax, so much that I'd doubt my own usage is going to get anywhere close to $200 going by ccusage output. Minimax generating a single output stream at its max throughput 24/7 only comes to about $90/mo.

OpenClaw was still using Claude Code as the harness (via claude -p)[0]. I understand why Anthropic is doing this (and they’ve made it clear that building products around claude -p is disallowed) but I fear Conductor will be next.

[0]: See “Option B: Claude CLI as the message provider” here https://docs.openclaw.ai/providers/anthropic#option-b-claude...

I would like to point out something else. I have Z.ai subscription and they have a dashboard on my usage.

When trying out Openclaw a while ago, I noted something worrying. Its constantly consuming tokens, every single hour during the day, it consumed tokens. I could see over a period of 30 days, token usage would climb and climb and climb and then shrink to bottom again, as if Openclaw did a context window compaction.

Note, this usage was happening even though I wasn’t using it. It were always running and doing something in the background.

I believe its their Heartbeat.md mechanism. By default it’s set to run every half an hour. I changed it to twice a day, that was enough to me.

I can imagine if thousands of users where connecting their Openclaw instance with default config to Claude with the latest and greatest Opus model, that must’ve felt a bit.

It’s really that straightforward. If tomorrow they decide GPUs are better allocated to enterprise use, they could start removing the $20 plan just as quickly overnight, the same way they did tonight.

OpenClaw managed to burn 2.46 trillion tokens just in the last 30 days.

I'm not even gonna judge why someone needs an AI Assistant running 24/7, the core issue is that coding plans are being ruined because they're not paying for ridiculous amount of tokens burned.

Anthropic is actually making the right decision: You want a LOT of tokens for your 24/7 agent? Ok, just use the API and pay for your tokens.

I enjoy paying for a sub that I actually use to code, and what we pay today is not even enough to cover the costs of running AI servers.

For a good existing example developed by a known company, check Cline Kanban: https://cline.bot/kanban

They don't have the MCP-bundling idea that I'm experimenting with, however.

I think the usage patterns of a lot of harnesses are pushing against their planned capacity. I would say they can certainly explain themselves a lot better.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46936105 Billing can be bypassed using a combo of subagents with an agent definition

> "Even without hacks, Copilot is still a cheap way to use Claude models"

20260116 https://github.blog/changelog/2026-01-16-github-copilot-now-...

https://github.com/features/copilot/plans $40/month for 1500 requests; $0.04/request after that

https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/concepts/billing/copilot-... Opus uses 3x requests

AKA when you fully use the capacity you paid for, that's too much!

If you are not aware, ACP creates a persistent session for steering rather than using the models directly.

Is it infrastructure? Are they unable to control costs?

Everyone else is spending like money is water to try to get adoption. Claude has it and is dialing back utility so that its most passionate users will probably leave.

I don’t understand this move.

In that context, I don't understand the difference between a "third party harness" and a shell script.

How are they even detecting OpenClaw?

I switched OpenClaw to MiniMax 2.7. This combined with Claude over telegram does enough for me.

OpenClaw used to burn through all my Claude usage anyway.

1. Make a better product/alternative to Openclaw and start eating their userbase. They hold the advantage because the ones "using their servers too much" are already their clients so they could reach out and keep trying to convert. Openclaw literally brought them customers at the door.

2. Do everyone royally and get them off their platform - with a strong feeling of dislike or hatred towards Anthropic.

Let's see how 2 goes for them. This is not the space to be treating your clients this way.

Graceful handling from Anthropic

https://x.com/bcherny/status/2040206440556826908?s=20

When I do use AI, I already have a solid plan of what I need. Sometimes I ask it to look something up. I never do both in one prompt.

GLM 5.1 can do both, and its way way cheaper. I also don't hit my limit that fast (Plus I get to use it in OpenCode).

I'm hoping that they won't bother you unless you specifically max out the subscription limits every time

Claude Code seems designed to terminate quickly- mine always finds excuses to declare victory prematurely given a task that should take hours.

The Anthropic casino wants you to continue gambling tokens at their casino only on their machines (Claude Code) only by giving more promotional offers such as free spins, $20 bets and more free tokens at the roulette wheels and slot machines.

But you cannot repurpose your subscription on other slot machines that are not owned by Anthropic and if you want it badly, they charge you more for those credits.

The house (Anthropic) always wins.

Im hitting rate limits within 1:45 during afternoons.

I can’t justify extra usage since it’s a variable cost, but I can justify a higher subscription tier.

Thanks openclaw for getting me ahead, I’ve taken that and am in Claude code again.

Anthropic's current business model is to sell access to their tools to subscribers at a loss. Users maxing out their $200/month plan can realistically cost Anthropic $500-600 in actual compute costs.

Anthropic is okay with this right now because they want to amass as many users as they can, and eventually hope that GPUs will increase in power and efficiency, and their LLMs will become more efficient as well. They can eventually profit off of their current pricing, or with modest price increases, if that comes to fruition.

But letting OpenClaw wake up every 30 minutes and start sending requests is a surefire way to max out your weekly limits, and that certainly isn't something Anthropic planned for.

It seems the April 4th automated sweep for third-party harnesses (OpenClaw/OpenCode) has a high false-positive rate for users on the official CLI. I don't use my Anthropic token with any unofficial tools. Has anyone else on the Max tier been flagged while using the official tools?

I'm doing a side-by-side with GPT-5.4 for $20/mo and Sonnet for $20/mo and I can tell you that all my 5 hour tokens are eaten in 30 minutes with Claude. I still haven't used my tokens for OpenAI.

Code quality seems fine on both. Building an app in Go

If you started plugging tools into GPT5.4 you may soon discover that you don't need anything beyond a single conversation loop with some light nesting. A lot of the openclaw approach seems to be about error handling, retry, resilience and perspectives on LLM tool use from 4+ months ago. All of these ideas are nice, but it's a hell of a lot easier to just be right the first time if all you need is a source file updated or an email written. You can get done in 100 tokens what others can't seem to get done in millions of tokens. As we become more efficient, the economic urgency around token smuggling begins to dissipate.

If you haven't been paying attention anthropic burned a lot of their developer good will in the last 2 weeks, with some combination of bugs and rate limits.

But the writing is on the wall about how bad things are behind the scenes. The circa 2002 sentiment filter regex in their own tool should have been a major clue about where things stand.

The question every one should be asking at this point is this: is there an economic model that makes AI viable. The "bitter lesson" here is in AI's history: expert systems were amazing, but they could not be maintained at cost.

The next race is the scaling problem, and google with their memory savings paper has given a strong signal what the next 2 years of research are going to be focused on: scaling.

Even the $20 subscription is ridiculously limited and they keep adding more and more limits. The $200 a month sub is insane and only going to get worse and yet still limited

During a recent subscription upgrade, the system started burning through my extra usage at an enormous visible clip.

So -ironically perhaps- I've turned off extra usage completely, turned off auto-reload, and -should current trends persist- will probably end up with the extra credit still on balance by the time I delete the account.

That said, I currently don't see a viable alternative to Anthropic for me - yet. I'm actively looking, and other options are improving rapidly.

Like an API key on a subscription that could be used for 3rd party tools would count 2x towards usage when compared to the same model when used through Claude Code.

Or it’d count the same towards weekly or 5 hour limits across all models BUT would have a separate API keys under subscriptions limit that’d be more grounded. A bit like how they already have a separate Sonnet usage counter.

That’d both allow them not to go broke and also not lose so much community goodwill AND give subscription users an alternative to paying for their enterprise-oriented (overpriced) tokens.

For example...

We recently moved a very expensive sonnet 4.6 agent to step-3.5-flash and it works surprising well. Obviously step-3.5-flash is nowhere near the raw performance of sonnet but step works perfectly fine for this case.

Another personal observation is that we are most likely going to see a lot of micro coding agent architectures everywhere. We have several such cases. GPT and Claude are not needed if you focus the agent to work on specific parts of the code. I wrote something about this here: https://chatbotkit.com/reflections/the-rise-of-micro-coding-...

but couldn't i use this in off times only?

Extra usage is very sneaky you don't get any notice that you are using extra usage and could end up with unnecessary costs in case you would have preferred to wait an hour or so.

What's the exact definition of third-party harnesses? They have an Agent SDK in Claude Code that can be used. Are they trying to say that only Anthropic products can use pro/max plans?

The problem Anthropic is running into is that OpenClaw made it easy for everyone to become one of those folks that washes their car three times a week or more.

I’m sure they were losing money on subscriptions in general but now they are really losing money. Shutting off OpenClaw specifically probably helps stem some of the bleeding.

https://focusoverfeatures.substack.com/p/claude-max-blocks-o...

UPDATE:

reply on x Thariq @trq212 only flagged accounts, but you can still claim the credit

Why would they actively subsidize the ticking timebomb? When OpenClaw has an especially large security incident, Anthropic will probably be affected just for the association.

Like, right alongside this post on the front page, we have a post about a relatively serious privilege escalation vulnerability in OpenClaw.

So this change has actually forced a reckoning of sorts. Maybe the best option is to outsource the thinking to another model, and then send it back to Opus to package up.

Ironically this is how the non-agent works too to an extent.

We're all just getting too used to having great models for a fraction of the the value they give us.

Forgive me if someone asked this already and I can't find it in the comments.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Bill_Gat...

We are paying for a certain amount of token consumption

Why then, is this an outsized strain on your system Anthropic?

It's like buying gasoline from Shell, and then Shell's terms of services forcing you to use that gas in a Hummer that does 5 MPG, while everyone else wants to drive any other vehicle.

Real PMF sells itself. The risk is of course the competition catching up, I bet switching costs are very low on this setup.

Instead of not driving to work to save fuel, frugal companies are going to have their engineers work on weekends to save tokens.

So, to me its a "we built it into our world use ours"

Edit: FWIW I am an avid hater of all claw things, they're security nightmare.

Btw even at insane markups $200/mo means GPUs break even pretty fast.

I use Claude -p for a lot if not most of my coding workflows

Now they can't keep up because they never built the infrastructure to actually power any of it

Claude Code is subsidized because of data collection.

It's simply identical to how people use Claude Code locally.

Our engineering team averages 1.5k per dev per month on credit costs, without busting Max limits today.

The lines drawn by their consumer vs commercial TOS was clear and I never subscribed because of it.

We have had the ability to automate browser activities for a long time—but, online service providers don’t want to be behind a layer of automation, which is why captchas were invented.

Automating things on the Internet has never been a technology obstacle, it has been a social one.

I don’t see how anything has changed!

In fact I recently received an updated ToS from eBay saying I am not allowed to use an AI agent to buy stuff on their site. Just a matter of time until others follow suit!

Edit: I misunderstood what was happening. Thanks to the comment below for clarifying.

They become how you think, then company has you: hook line and sinker

Say goodbye to my 600$/ month Anthropic.

If it isn't obvious by now, this problem is only going to get worse. The only reason we have subscriptions still is because they're waiting to pull off the biggest bait and switch in history. Don't get sunk on this ecosystem, or you're in for a world of pain in the future. As has always been the case; competition and open-source are our only hope.

I do also bundle a default agent with it, also forked from ZeroClaw, with a goal of being more or less prompt injection proof and hopefully able to centralize some configuration and permissions for most or all of the agents it manages, though that part is very rough sketch/plan at the moment I’d love feedback and help on from anyone interested…. Two projects, clash and nono caught my eye in this space, I think both leverage Linux landgrant but I may also use landrun for similar control of other processes like openclaw that it may manage for the user, still figuring out how and where to fit all the pieces together and what’s pragmatic/what’s overkill/what overlaps or duplicates across various strategies and tools. Right now there’s real bash wrappers that evaluate starlark policies, hoping to fully validate better end to end but if you’re interested a few others users testing, validating and/or contributing Claude tokens to the project could be invaluable at this stage. Plan to open source ASAP, maybe tonight or tomorrow if there’s interest and I have time to finish cleanup and rename (I was calling it PolyClaw but that confuses with some weird polymarket Claude skill, so now the router is going to be ZeroClawed and the agent will stay NonZeroClaw in homage to ZeroClaw who it’s forked from… we may also integrate the new Claw Code port which is also rust, just for good measure/as a native coding agent in addition to the native claw agent )

Anyway the main reason I mention is it already has a working ACP integration for any code agent, and working now on using Claude codes native channel integration to make it appear as a full fledged channel of its own, as it now more or less does already to OpenClaw, for anyone wanting to gradually migrate away from their existing OpenClaw installation using this, towards Claude or some other agent. Email me or respond here if interested, or I’ll try and post link here once it’s fully public/open source

Ive been calling for local LLM as owning the means of production. I aint wrong.

Public model inference quality is almost at SOTA levels, why would anyone pay these VC-subsidized companies even a cent? For a shitty chat interface? Give me a break.

Claude innovation will come from being open, not closed.

No, Anthropic, just because you added a clause that says "we can change these terms whenever" doesn't make it right. I'm paying you a set amount of money a month for a set amount of tokens (that's what limits are), and I should be able to use these tokens however I want.

Luckily, there are alternatives.

It is a pity though. For less than an hour of setup the Nanoclaw bot proved enormously useful at tracking meal times, training progress, etc and the interface was easy enough for the family to get involved. The ease of setup was really remarkable, and Anthropic creating artificial barriers just seems user hostile.

Personally idk why they dont just make Claude Code more open source friendly. Let the community do PRs for Claude Code. Let us change the tooling, if I could use their own client but swap out the tools it calls and how, I would use like 90% less tokens.

I suspect the same for the forced high AI usage quotas for developers at MS etc. We've had multiple generations of models trained on all of the code that's available and there are diminishing returns on how much that data can do for training now. Newly published publicly available data is also made up of a significant portion of slop.

The best way to get fresh training data from real human brains might be to have real humans use your first party tools where you control all of the telemetry.

You can use your Claude Code subscription with third-party tools, but you have to use the Claude Code harness. Or, you use the API. OpenClaw could use the Claude Code harness, but they don't.

Just look at how Sam Altman has led OpenAI step by step to dominate—and choke out—Anthropic, a company founded by the group of engineers who were once part of the turmoil at OpenAI.

Anthorpic's product thinking is terrible even though it is technically very good.

IMO, the goal here is clear: they want them to use their software, have people build an ecosystem around their software, they want to have visibility around their software.

It's never about capacity or usage, they just want to have the claude ecosystem, there is a reason why they don't support AGENTS.MD or other initiatives, they want everything to be theirs and theirs alone. You can argue that 'well fair', but to me this is clear abuse of their position in the market.