---
type: reference
subtype: pattern/framework
title: "Orchestration prompting for Claude 5-era models (Fable 5, Opus 4.8, Sonnet 5)"
summary: "What Anthropic's model-page guidance says about delegation, token efficiency, and rule phrasing for current-generation orchestrators — and how it invalidates delegation rules written for cheaper/older main-loop models. Answers: how should an orchestrator rule doc be written when the main loop is a top-tier model?"
tags:
  - type/reference
  - domain/ai-agents
  - domain/orchestration
  - tool/claude-code
scope: global
last_updated: 2026-07-08
date: 2026-07-08
last_reviewed: 2026-07-08
related:
  - agent-orchestration-patterns
  - agent-orchestration-cookbook
  - os-orchestration-ws1-session-audit-results
source: cc-os
---

# Orchestration prompting for Claude 5-era models

Sources: Anthropic model pages (prompting-claude-fable-5, prompting-claude-opus-4-8,
prompting-claude-sonnet-5, claude-prompting-best-practices), fetched 2026-07-08. Community
claims below are marked `[unverified claim]`.

## The meta-finding (why this note exists)

**Delegation rules go stale when the main-loop model tier changes, even if every rule is still
individually true.** A rule doc written to prevent over-delegation on a sonnet main loop
(where direct work is cheap and Opus 4.6-era models over-spawned) actively suppresses
delegation on a Fable/top-tier main loop, where every direct tool call is billed at the most
expensive rate. The threshold question is not "is this task big enough to delegate?" but
"does this work need main-loop-tier judgment?" — cost asymmetry between the orchestrator and
the cheapest adequate executor must be *explicit in the rule text*, not implied.

## Load-bearing guidance from the model pages

1. **Calibrated trigger phrasing, both directions.** On 4.6+ models, absolutist wording
   ("CRITICAL: you MUST...") over-fires; plain "use X when Y" is correct. Crucially, the
   canonical best-practices delegation snippet pairs a *positive* trigger list ("use subagents
   when parallel / isolated context / independent workstreams") with a *negative* one ("work
   directly for simple tasks, sequential ops, single-file edits, shared-state steps").
   A rule doc phrased negative-first ("delegate ONLY when...") is read literally by these
   models and suppresses delegation in every gray zone.

2. **Literal instruction-following.** Opus 4.8/Sonnet 5/Fable 5 do not silently generalize
   an instruction beyond its stated scope. A threshold like "≤2-tool-call ops are direct"
   licenses 3+-call direct work forever unless something *obligates* delegation above some
   line — write both sides of the boundary.

3. **Model biases differ by generation and must be steered per-model:** Fable 5 dispatches
   parallel subagents *readily* and sustains async communication with them (recommended
   pattern: "delegate independent subtasks and keep working while they run" — non-blocking);
   Opus 4.8 *under*-delegates by default and needs explicit "spawn multiple in the same turn
   when fanning out" nudges; Opus 4.6 *over*-delegated. The same orchestration text lands
   differently per main-loop model.

4. **Effort is the primary within-model cost dial** — the docs give no cross-tier
   haiku/sonnet/opus decision table at all; they treat `effort` as the main quality/cost
   lever. An orchestration policy that routes only by model tier is missing a lever: mechanical
   subagent work → low effort, hard verify/judge stages → high/xhigh (where the harness
   exposes it, e.g. Workflow `agent()` opts).

5. **Long-lived / batched subagents amortize cost.** Fable 5 page: long-lived subagents that
   keep context across subtasks save time and cost via cache reads and avoid bottlenecking on
   the slowest agent. Combine with the batching economics in [[agent-orchestration-patterns]]
   (tool tax ~20–25K tokens per spawn; batch 5–8 similar items per specialist; reuse a live
   agent for follow-ups instead of spawning fresh).

6. **Front-load the task spec.** Opus 4.8/Sonnet 5: token use rises in interactive settings
   because the model re-reasons after each user turn; a complete task/intent/constraints
   statement in the first turn is cheaper and better than progressive disclosure. Applies
   equally to subagent prompts: one complete grouped prompt beats iterative follow-ups.

7. **Grounding and downgrade honesty.** Fable 5 page's "audit each claim against a tool
   result" pattern nearly eliminated fabricated status reports in Anthropic's testing —
   the same mechanism as subagent model self-report (subagents know their model ID; launch
   results don't show it).

## Community pattern (context, not evidence)

The "Fable-5 orchestrator" community pattern (pasqualepillitteri.it, 2026-07-02) matches the
above architecture — Fable plans/synthesizes, pinned-model personas execute, orchestrator
generates only 10–20% of tokens, "5–10× savings" `[unverified claim]` (all cost figures
asserted without methodology; the one external attribution, "MindStudio 80–90% shift with no
quality loss," has no citation). Its mechanical details (frontmatter-pinned `model:` in
`~/.claude/agents/`, description-driven delegation) are real Claude Code mechanics; its
numbers are not evidence.

## How to apply

When writing or reviewing an orchestrator rule doc:
- State the cost asymmetry explicitly and key the delegation threshold to the main-loop tier
  (models know their own model ID, so tier-conditional rules are implementable).
- Pair positive and negative delegation triggers; never "only when."
- Add a batching rule (group related subtasks into one agent prompt; reuse live agents) and an
  async rule (keep working while subagents run).
- Re-audit the rule doc whenever the default main-loop model changes generation — evidence
  gathered under the old economics (e.g. "direct work was often superior") may no longer bind.

## Related

- [[agent-orchestration-patterns]] — batching economics, tool tax, decision framework
- [[agent-orchestration-cookbook]] — concrete walkthroughs
- [[os-orchestration-ws1-session-audit-results]] — the audit evidence gathered under pre-Fable economics
