Repository navigation
Replies: 1 comment
|
From what I can see in the source, this is intended behavior, and the trigger is your Why The injected rule lives in Reasoning effort is one of those options (Codex Workarounds until there's a toggle
The Claude switch I couldn't find anything in those instructions telling the agent to switch providers after a capacity error. That looks like a separate fallback behavior, and it's worth its own issue with logs, especially since it used up your Claude allowance without asking. Your three suggested rules sound reasonable to me, particularly an opt-in for automatic provider and effort selection. The maintainers would need to say whether that's on the roadmap. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Hi! Thanks for T3 Code. I enjoy it.
Since updating to
v0.1.1, T3 Code has become unusable for my long-running agent workflows. I’m unsure whether this is a bug or intended behavior.Problem
I repeated the same workflow with the same prompt, settings, and data, using
gpt-6.1-solatxhigh:v0.1.0) used native subagent orchestration and completed successfully.v0.1.1) useddelegate_task. It took roughly twice as long and consumed about 2.5× as much of my Codex allowance as earlier runs.Delegation instructions
T3 Code’s injected orchestration instructions say:
They also require:
These rules seem to always invoke
delegate_taskeven for the same provider, model, and settings when inherited options are present.Is this intended behavior?
Suggestion
I like cross-provider delegation. I’d prefer these rules:
delegate_taskwhen the user explicitly requests a different provider, model, or reasoning effort, or a skill requires specific settings.AGENTS.mdor a dedicated Markdown file.I may be missing a reason for requiring
delegate_taskhere. Happy to hear it!All reactions