The token cost was only half the problem.
The other half nobody talks about: your AI has no memory of your project. You make real progress in one session, open a new one, and it has no idea what you built, why, or how it fits together. You spend the first 20 minutes just re-explaining your own project back to it.
For experienced devs it's annoying. For beginners building their first app, it's fatal, they lose the thread completely and the project falls apart.
The tools are incredible at writing code. They're terrible at helping you stay in control of what they wrote
@NabilJB007 That overnight drop is rough. Funny thing, you working across 3 projects on Claude Code was probably what kept it low, more projects means more fresh contexts instead of one session growing all night
Two weeks ago I found out 99.9% of my Claude Code tokens were just the model re-reading its own context. My actual input: 0.03%.
So I changed how I work:
- one session = one task, then I close it
- no more marathon sessions that live for days
- when I need continuity, I write a short summary and start fresh instead of dragging the whole history
The difference is real. The sessions that used to quietly hit 100M+ don't happen anymore, because nothing is allowed to grow that big.
Turns out the fix was never a better plan or a cheaper model. It was just not letting context pile up.
Which raises the obvious question: is the fix just discipline? Close sessions at task boundaries, start fresh, paste your own summary if you need continuity.
Curious if anyone here actually does that consistently, or if we all just let sessions run until they die.
Someone posted their own token breakdown yesterday and the numbers lined up almost exactly with mine.
Him: 3B tokens, $3,586, across Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Antigravity. 92.6% cache reads. Actual code output: 0.66%.
Me: Claude Code only. 99.9% cache reads. Output 0.4%. My own typed input was 0.03% of everything.
Two completely different setups, same shape. Almost nothing you pay for is the model producing work. It's the model re-reading context it already paid to write.
The gap between his 92.6% and my 99.9% is the interesting part. He runs four tools, so he's starting fresh contexts constantly. I live in one long Claude Code session until it collapses under its own weight. Spreading work across tools looks inefficient, but it accidentally keeps context small.