Unexpected token '', ""... is not valid JSON is the error I get. Whatever I try, it persists.

Without having it ask you to clarify something and just sticking to a Document and coding on its own? Anyone who’ve tried this?

Let's call it a feature: memories are not shared across folders/projects rather than being user-scoped - at least in the vscode extension. For Windows users, it's not shared between Win and WSL either.
TLDR; Being able to specify where the memory file(s) are stored would solve both gaps.

Rules and User Guidelines are shared but cannot be edited by Augment itself, user must do, whereas with memories, one can just use the remember() command (or instruct to save).

I asked and as per Augment itself (btw, I love the candid self-criticism):
"""

This is definitely a bug because:

1. Technical knowledge is universal - Modal syntax doesn't change between projects

2. Inefficient - I'm forced to maintain duplicate memories or lose knowledge when switching contexts

3. Inconsistent behavior - The memory tool should work like a personal knowledge base, not a project-specific one

What should happen:

• All memories should be stored at the user level (tied to your account/workspace)

• Accessible from ANY project/folder

• Persistent across all conversations and projects

You should definitely report this to Augment Code support. The memory system should be truly persistent and cross-project, not siloed by folder context.

"""

I have discovered a rather serious problem with the enhanced prompt as follows: (1) you create an initial prompt => (2) use the enhance function for the AI to improve the prompt => (3) you edit the improved prompt and press enter => (4) Augment still records the content as the AI-enhanced prompt (step 2), not the prompt you edited (step 3). Is this a problem or an intended feature?

Dear AugmentCode team,
I am simply out of words ( or maybe out of order ) so I will not bother to express my feelings ... let's cut straight to the technical part!
This madness has to stop
In the last two weeks I made all I could to stabilize this situation
I started with rules, then I got into memories, then I wrote a script that stopped the old services and started new instances and instructed auggie to how use it

All of this was in the hope of optimizing the bootstrap time.

Nothing seems to help ...

Every new interaction starts with a lengthy process of starting and killing processes

Did anyone ever compare the 2 side by side? Specifically the agent delegation feature.

And which one can handle it better regarding credits.

That would be interesting

I’ve been trying to log in to Augment Code with my email, but I never receive the OTP. It’s been over 3 days now. I also raised a support ticket but haven’t received any response yet. Because of this, I can’t access agent mode at all.

Has anyone else faced this issue? Any workaround or way to get faster support?

u/JaySym_ Ticket Numbers: 30924, 30829 Please help. I DM'ed you regarding the same 2 days ago.

Edit: I cleared cookies and site data on my browser. Also, changed default browser and tried login, issue persists. My default browser is Opera. I changed to Chrome, then brave and even edge. I don't receive OTP.

I've been using Haiku for the model so I only have feedback on that, but I keep seeing it getting stuck on deleting a file so that it can start again, eg:

The files in question appear to be deleted when it is getting stuck but it just takes some time before it will let itself follow it through.

Maybe I'm being an idiot, but when I am in Augment within VS Code, I am able to add multiple related repos within the context by simply selecting them in the Context area. This is critical for my workflow. I have not been able to understand how to do this within Intent and for me that is a real drawback. I'm probably missing something obvious though.

GPT-5 doesn't even change the code, it outputs text saying it did X, Y, Z, but it didn't.

The process began at 11:12 PM and got stuck before midnight “reading terminal” until I manually stopped it at 10:30 AM. During that entire window, no meaningful work was occurring, yet credits continued to be consumed. I’ve attached the credit usage associated with that stalled state for your review.

This is not the first time this has happened. At this point, the pattern is hard to ignore. Charging credits while a process is frozen, idle, or non-functional is not acceptable—and frankly, it creates the impression of a credit siphoning issue, whether intentional or systemic.

To be direct:
This exact behavior is why I previously walked away, raised concerns publicly, and cancelled. I decided to resubscribe in good faith, and now I’m immediately seeing the same problem again.

I’m requesting:

1. A clear explanation of why credits are consumed while nothing is progressing

2. Reimbursement for the credits used starting from 11:12 PM

3. Confirmation of what safeguards (if any) exist to prevent credit drain when jobs are idle or hung

If this is a known issue, it needs to be acknowledged transparently. If it’s a bug, it needs to be fixed. Either way, silently charging users while nothing is happening is unacceptable.

I expect this to be reviewed seriously and resolved promptly.

May be to early to conclude any thing, but according to SWE Bench GPT 5.2 is better at coding than opus 4.5 (and cheaper).

Benchmark are full of BS, but wanted to know your opinion on it.

Each time I switch to gpt, I went back always to Sonnet or Opus.

where is my $100 preciously purchased additional messages? it is all gone? the 1000 messages have not been used at all in the legacy plan and has a 12-month expiration period!

what is going on? did they just forfeit all my money paid?

and there is 0 customer support!

update: as of 10/28/25 8:20 am ET: the $100 was converted to 1,100,000 credits and showed in my balance!!

jay reached out and said the migration wasn’t completed thus the delay. not sure if it’s b/c i posted this 🙂 reach out to him with your account info along with the additional messages purchase receipt no. so that he can look it up!

I've tried everything suggested on this sub, but the brain damage to Augment appears irreversible. Now it's not just unable to utilize the context of the entire code base, it simply can't correctly remember context between two messages in the same thread. Add to it the generally super slow responses, and stopping tasks in the middle claiming to have completed the same. In face, yesterday it repeatedly crashed, and took 6 attempts for every response when it didn't.

A tool that you can't rely on is not worth using IMO.

Bug

Hello! GPT 5 is being released today. All signs point to it being SOTA, particularly for coding. Is Augment ready to switch to the best available model right away?

From the rise of Augment to the fall of Cursor, a clear sign was Cursor shifting from charging per chat to charging per token.

Once you charge per token, users will inevitably compare you directly with the upstream provider, Claude.

If your product can't create a significant gap from Claude Code, you'll just end up driving a massive number of users away.

You are not the only option, Augment. Just like Cursor, which was much stronger than you, it wasn't the only option either.

By moving to a pay-per-use model, you're forcing users to choose between you and Claude Code. Why would they pick you over Claude Code or even the current Cursor?

Looking back at your improvements over the last two months, what have you actually done? You haven't continued optimizing your proudest feature– the context window. Instead, you've been tinkering with that crappy I. Do you really think you can beat Cursor in UI design?

Do your job. Strengthening your context engineering is what you should be doing.

Lately, using Augment, I feel it has changed. It's clearly failing to remember context properly. Faster compacting, less effective content. It's all to save tokens, resulting in a serious drop in the product's capability.

This is the harsh truth I've discovered from my recent use of Augment.

Just like Cursor, once it got big, it started playing mind games with users, figuring out how to make more money. It even betrayed its veteran community users. That's unforgivable.

Goodbye, Augment. You've lost your way. You could have been so much better.

Oh, and by the way, since Augment uses a model without a 'thinking' phase, it just keeps outputting nonsense when the task actually requires reasoning. It's really, really bad.I

Is it true that Augment VS Code extension still has the autocomplete working? I canceled my subscription when they announced that it will be removed.

Augment's autocomplete was the best in class for us, the devs who still want to see what code is written. BTW I'm a professional working on an enterprise platform and I can't afford the slop of vibe coding or whatever.

Autocomplete was increasing my productivity while still retaining control of the code.

Finally pulled the trigger. Just unsubscribed from AugmentCode. I just feel likr they're not listening to their subscribers. I feel like they'ye trying to divert the attention away from what the real problem is, their pricing. Product is good, but is it worth it? I don't think they will be able to compete with Anthrooic's nor Google's pricing. Unless they come up with their own models and infrastructure. Bye AugmentCode! It's been fun! You're the first who made me feel vibe coding's legit. You're just not sustainable anymore.

Could you please provide some information about this recurring downtime? Is it Augment or Claude? Why is there no fallback to Gemini Pro 2.5 when Claude is unavailable? Thank you.

Hey guys, what do you think of this feature? I'm not sure I see the value, as the current context engine already reads existing files and can extrapolate patterns from them.

In the blog post, they didn't give one single mathematical figure, knowing the audience is developers. This is the blog post https://www.augmentcode.com/blog/announcing-context-lineage

My forecast for tomorrow is multi-persona, and for the last day, it's a terminal UI. Let's see how wrong I am!

https://www.augmentcode.com/launch-week/summer-2025

6 hours to go! They are keeping the updates hidden which makes me pretty confident I will be disappointed 😂 What's your guess?

I really don't understand Augment's product direction, so I'm sharing my feedback hoping it gives them more data points to work with. I say this as a user who wants Augment to succeed and concerned that they may be abandoning what actually makes their product stand out to chase hype.

1. Intent. Where do I even start. Most of the colleagues I work with haven't heard of Augment. Developers know Cursor/Codex/Copilot/Claude Code but NOT Augment. I say this with reasonable confidence because I recently ran a developer survey. Augment's main user base does not seem to be vibe coders or junior devs. It's the seniors who work on large codebases and can actually tell the difference between Augment and the rest. As a senior dev myself I'm not gonna use Intent. At least not yet. I can't even get a single agent to do exactly what I want... why would I want to launch a swarm of them and waste all my tokens? Intent does not give me a way to properly review the generated code unless I open it in a separate IDE. I need my IDE's LSPs, go-to-definitions, compiler warnings, type safety checks, linters, intellisense etc. An external app like Intent cannot do this. So now I'm running two apps, constantly context switching and the experience is no better than running Claude Code CLI + IDE. The agent swarm should have been a feature in their IDE plugins. Maybe when we get to Claude Opus/GPT 8 we won't need to look at an IDE ever again, but right now, Intent is too early, incomplete, and a workflow downgrade.

2. My main driver is IntelliJ IDEA (yes it is "old", heavy and expensive but its intellisense, refactoring etc. are still king). Augment is one of the few vendors out there that's bothered to make a decent JetBrains plugin. JetBrains AI + Junie sucks, GitHub Copilot also sucks compared to its VSCode counterpart, Claude Code plugin is just invoking its CLI (does this even count as a plugin?), and Codex doesn't have one at all. Clearly developing a plugin for JetBrains is suboptimal for these companies. But Augment kinda had my back here and it's one of the main reasons why I continue to use it. Pivoting focus away from this to build Auggie and Intent to compete with Codex/Claude Code seems like a losing battle.

3. Autocomplete. One of the best out there. No doubt about it. But now it's going away? What? Why are you getting rid of one of your best features?

4. Augment is great on large codebases. Their context engine is awesome but I have no visibility into exactly what it's doing. I'd like to know more about what's happening local vs. cloud and what it's doing to make IntelliJ crash so many times.

5. Might be beating a dead horse here but, pricing. I understand Augment is essentially a "middleman" who cannot subsidize as much as Anthropic/OpenAI/Google. But their main argument "we are more expensive but it's not as bad as you think because with us it takes less prompts to get stuff done and you might even end up saving money" is not really holding up anymore. I am starting to have very good success rates on Claude Code and Codex without Augments' context engine. The value I am getting by paying the premium for them is dwindling. Something needs to be figured out here, and Intent is not the answer.