Files
dotfiles/common
connorandClaude Opus 5 4e3a0d6ccc opencode: context limits from vendor docs, not inherited guesses
Checked every hosted entry against published documentation 2026-09-21. There
were errors in BOTH directions, and the overstatements are the dangerous
half -- an understated limit wastes tokens, an overstated one is a hard API
rejection partway through a session.

  anthropic/claude-haiku-4-5   1,000,000 ->   200,000   OVERSTATED 5x
  openai/gpt-5.6-sol             200,000 -> 1,050,000
  openai/gpt-5.5                 200,000 -> 1,050,000
  openai/gpt-5.4                 200,000 -> 1,050,000
  openai/gpt-5.4-mini            200,000 -> 1,050,000
  chatgpt/* (4 aliases)          272,000 -> 1,050,000
  agent/*-gpt-5.x (11 aliases)   272,000 -> 1,050,000
  agent/*-glm-5.3 (4 aliases)    150,000 ->   200,000   deliberate cap
  anthropic/claude-{opus,sonnet}-5           unchanged, already correct

Haiku is the one that mattered. Opus 5 and Sonnet 5 really are 1M, the whole
Anthropic block was set to 1M, and Haiku inherited a limit five times its
real 200k. Opencode would have grown a session past the ceiling and the API
would have refused it.

⚠ glm-5.3 is capped at 200,000 BY CHOICE. Its real maximum is 1M. GLM bills
per input token and cost on this stack tracks context size and cache-read
volume more than model choice, so the cap is budget control, not ignorance.
Do not "correct" it upward against the docs. This is the one place where a
declared limit below the vendor maximum is intentional.

⚠ chatgpt/* now carries the API's 1,050,000, but OpenAI does not publish a
context limit for ChatGPT-plan routing and it has historically been far
below the API's. This is deliberately optimistic and being watched for a
crash; if long sessions start failing, that is the first thing to lower.

Left alone for want of evidence, not because they are right:
openai/gpt-5.3-codex (200,000), agent/librarian-glm-5.3-flash (128,000),
agent/sisyphus-junior-glm-5.3-flash (150,000). Raising an unconfirmed limit
risks the Haiku failure mode, so these stay until measured.

Unrelated but found while checking: LiteLLM declares kimi/kimi-k2.7-code at
272,000 against a published 262,144. Overstated by ~10k.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01E9UH1zGZZtA9yhohmQrcT6
2026-09-21 22:01:33 -04:00
..
2026-09-14 15:18:50 -04:00