docs: Add LSP prioritization guidance for project CLAUDE.md#80
Open
kevinold wants to merge 2 commits intoEveryInc:mainfrom
Open
docs: Add LSP prioritization guidance for project CLAUDE.md#80kevinold wants to merge 2 commits intoEveryInc:mainfrom
kevinold wants to merge 2 commits intoEveryInc:mainfrom
Conversation
Add "Customizing Agent Behavior" section to README with example CLAUDE.md snippets that projects can use to prioritize LSP tools over grep for code understanding. Includes both minimal (one-line) and detailed versions, plus guidance on when LSP vs grep is appropriate. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude <[email protected]>
- Move documentSymbol to first position with "(ALWAYS START HERE)" - Add Agent Delegation section with sub-agent instruction - Add "(MANDATORY)" emphasis to header - Include Rust in supported languages - Add sub-agent awareness in introduction 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude <[email protected]>
Collaborator
|
Thanks! Should we just reach for LSPs instead of grep either way? If so, maybe we can bake it into the main loop? Curious to hear what you think and how it works for you. |
Author
|
Honestly I’m still testing this. It hasn’t returned the value I’d hoped and I’m not sure if it is the updates or Claude Code shipping flakiness with updates around this. IMHO we should aim to ship both, detect LSPs and use them and fallback to grep. And there are several situations where grep is the answer, so it’s not an either/or, but both/and with preference to LSP if available. I will keep testing this and following up this week. On Jan 20, 2026, at 6:36 PM, Kieran Klaassen ***@***.***> wrote:kieranklaassen left a comment (EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin#80)
Thanks! Should we just reach for LSPs instead of grep either way? If so, maybe we can bake it into the main loop? Curious to hear what you think and how it works for you.
—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Context
Instead of modifying plugin agents to prioritize LSP, this approach lets projects opt-in by adding guidance to their own CLAUDE.md. This is cleaner because:
Test plan