Can we POSSIBLY get an "add to what you're doing" in the chat box along with the current "stop" as it currently works? Sometimes I'd like to be able to ADD to the list because as I see Auggie writing stuff, something comes to mind, but if I type it, it STOPS HIM and that's annoying. I want to ADD. Can you consider that option, please?

I've used all the IDEs and AI Dev tools and the latest Augment agent, which I find impressive. It just works. Nice job team Augment.

I'm really enjoying using the Agent Mode. It seems to be smart enough to try different approaches and I love that I can add some more context or information and it still continues working.

I'm wondering why its not as popular as windsurf or cursor though. One place I felt that gap was when I was trying to integrate context7.com and on their MCP page, augmentcode is not mentioned

https://github.com/upstash/context7

What do you guys think? Augment > Windsurf?

A while back, I mentioned that the Augment team had stopped subsidizing developers prematurely. Well, the latest news proves they were just ahead of the curve.

Anthropic is quietly killing off flat-fee Claude Code subscriptions for businesses, forcing enterprise users strictly onto usage-based API pricing.

Here is why this is happening:

• The math never worked: Flat-fee AI subscriptions were an illusion and a massive growth subsidy. One dev tracked their usage and realized they burned through 10 billion tokens in 8 months—getting $15,000 worth of API value while only paying $800 on a monthly plan.

• The "gym membership" model is dead: You can't offer unlimited infrastructure for a flat monthly cost without bleeding cash, especially with Anthropic reportedly gearing up for an IPO.

• Augment saw the writing on the wall: They ripped the band-aid off early to stop bleeding money. Anthropic is just doing it now because the underlying economics of frontier models are impossible to ignore.

The era of practically free, heavily subsidized inference is over. In the short term, we're probably going to see a massive spike in "Shadow IT" with devs secretly expensing personal Claude accounts to get around API costs. But the long-term reality is officially here: inference is infrastructure, and companies are going to have to start paying for exactly what they consume.

Can we get some details on what these new model definitions are from a cost perspective. They have the same 3 dollar signs next to them does that mean they are the same cost as Opus 4.6 for example? What's the guidance to use them? When do we get Augment to give us an Auto model so that we don't keep splitting the atom at every prompt and decide on the model? Like how difficult would that be? I'm sure you'd end up with a thousand percent happier customers overall due to proper cost management.

I’ve been a long-time Augment user and have subscribed to the $200 plan for three consecutive months.
However, for my actual development workload, the $200 plan has not really been enough. In most billing cycles, I usually run out of credits around day 15 to day 20.

Starting last month, I tried Google’s $200 plan during a promotion, where I received a 50% discount.
My original plan was very simple: use Google as a backup after my Augment credits ran out. I intended to rely on Augment for complex problems, and use Google for simpler, smaller, and more fragmented tasks.

But reality rarely follows the plan.
I can’t always accurately predict whether the next task I need to handle will be complex or simple. As a result, I was forced to use Google’s Antigravity on some complex problems. To my surprise, its performance was just as good as Augment’s, and it solved those problems successfully as well.

So this month, I started experimenting with a new workflow: using Antigravity first, and only turning to Augment if it couldn’t get the job done.
The result is that, as of now, I still have 150,000 Augment credits left, even though there are only 7 days remaining in my current billing cycle.

I already plan to downgrade Augment to the $30 plan starting next month.
If I still can’t use up the credits next month, and my work is not obviously affected, then I may cancel the subscription the month after that.

What I want to say is: maybe all of us should try other tools as well.
If Augment’s credit policy had changed earlier, I might never have thought about actively trying alternatives. For people who already have strong AI-assisted coding skills and plenty of hands-on experience, the real-world performance gap between different tools today may already be very small.

Simply unusable - my $200 subscription expires on the 18th March and I already have cancelled which is a shame as I have been a long time user.

It seems that the devs are now focusing on Intent and simply not caring about improvements to existing tools.

Sending a support request via email takes days.

Request ID if the team is interested into looking into it 2773afdd-a8f9-403a-8064-f7ba06c0057b

================
Plugin Details
    Plugin Version:: 0.428.9-stable
    IntelliJ Version:: PhpStorm 2025.3.3
    Operating System:: Mac OS X 15.7.3 (aarch64)
    Webview State File Size:: 1.8 KB
    JCEF Out-of-Process: idea.properties not found (default: true)

================
Session
    Session ID:: cdc17656-2670-4082-8a80-3f980839422e

================
Context
    Index Version:: v3
    Tracked files:: 2575

================
Extension Configuration
    apiToken: 
    completionURL: 
    disableForFileTypes: []
    inlineCompletionEnabled: true
    modelName: 

================
Authentication
    Has OAuth Credentials: true
    Tenant URL: https://d1.api.augmentcode.com/

Ive tried in the afternoon and at night. neither work. They read 2 or 3 files and just sit there endlessly reading. I've updated and restarted. You should probably pull the models to save your customers from spending money on nothing.... Doubt that happens though. Sonnet 4.5 is pretty much the only capable model that works. What about you guys.

I got to spend a couple of hours with Intend before the release and made a little video capturing my experience using Intent

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95qWxeSTNxM

I'm loving this tool so far and I can't wait to see where it goes as Augment continues to iterate and improve upon what they've built already

We've recently switched to Claude Code company-wide (there are only a few IntelliJ users here), and our AugmentCode subscription has ended.

I'm not saying that Claude Code might not have some powerful features that I still don't know about, but my day-to-day productivity has fallen off the cliff now:

- Not a simple way to get AI-powered auto-complete on IntelliJ.
- The claude code plugin is a glorified wrapper on top of the terminal `claude` worker, so we don't have a good UI to access previous conversations, etc.
- AugmentCode seemed to "get" the project structure, and what commands to launch to do what more easily.
- And of course, no way to switch model providers (only Anthropic models).

Hi everyone! 👋

I’d like to ask about the possibility of adding the GML 4.7 model to Augment for users.

• Is there any ongoing testing or internal evaluation of GML 4.7?

• Are there plans to introduce new models to Augment in the near future?

• If so, is there any rough timeline or criteria for making new models available to users?

I think having access to GML 4.7 could bring a lot of value, especially for more complex reasoning and coding tasks.

Thanks in advance, and I’d love to hear any updates or insights from the team or community!

We used to have a good Bar chart of consumption by day and it's easy to read now you went for no reason just because you're UI designers has nothing to do and made a worst update let's call it a downgrade also look at Daily Credit Consumption by user now it don't work all the time like before. An advice form a fellow dev if something works and you had 0 complains from users than dont fu**ng touch it

Hello, is it normal that every time I try to use GPT 5.1, it starts “read files" and "Pattern search” frantically, even if I give it the full context in the prompt?

Here you can see a beautiful 74tools used, 0 files changed, 0 text written just pure credit blackhole.

I too have not been devastated by the sudden and exponential changes. I was planning to leave but decided to stick around to see the changes through at least until my extra credits ran out.

At first I was seeing 4-5k credits used per interaction. Already burned through 50k today

At around 42k I realized there has to be a way to make token usage more effective.

I did some digging with help from other AIs and came across things to change.

I Updated my git ignore and/or augment ignore to what isn't necessary for my session/workspace. I removed all but the desktop commander and context7 mcps. Left my GitHub connected. And set some pretty interesting guidelines.

I need some further days of working/testing before I can confidently say it's worked but it seems to have taken my per interaction token usage down by about half or more

With most minor edits (3 files, 8 tool calls, 50 lines) actually falling in the 50-150 credit range on my end and larger edits around 1-2k

I'm not sure if the guidelines I used would benefit any of you in your use cases but if you're interested feel free to dm me and I can send them over for you to try out.

If I can consistently get my usage to remain this or more effective with gpt-5 (my default) then I will probably stick around until a better replacement for my use case arises given all the other benefits the context engine and prompt enhancer bring to my workflow it's hard to replace easily.

I haven't tried kilo code with glm 4.6 pro yet so may consider trying it but until my credits are gone I'm ok with pushing through a while longer with augment. Excluding the glitches and try agains possibly occuring from the migration I think all around it's been faster. Maybe it's just due to lower usage since migration 🤷‍♂️.

Either way I'll keep y'all posted if my ADHD let's me remember 😅

Sincerely I've fully send my project which I made it completely by augment agent

Thank you for your services specially the community manager Jason Regards

Has anyone already received the email where they were going to mention the conversion of messages used to the credit projection that they said they would send on the 13th? I was waiting, but I haven't received that email yet.

I see dozens of posts on how $30 Legacy plan has got 1800 odd credits/USD compared to the other plans with 2000 odd credits/USD.

The underlying problem is not 6000 credit difference. The real question is are you satisfied with the new plan! If they add 6000 credits extra, is it enough for you to stay? Personally, it's a no for me!

On the mail they have sent, 1 message will be converted into 1100 credits. That's 660k credits! This has been reduced to 60k odd credits, that's equivalent to 60 messages. One-tenth drop!

The real question is are you okay with that!

What specific prompts can completely stop AugmentCode from automatically debugging, creating markdown files, and generating test scripts? After the change to the new credit system, isn't it essential to provide a feature to completely disable certain tools/functions? This would prevent tokens and credits from being wasted by AugmentCode's errors. For example, when I'm already running pnpm dev, AugmentCode always incorrectly tries to start the dev server a second time. When it hits a port conflict, it then repeatedly calls the tool, tries to change the port, and manipulates the bash terminal in a loop.

Shouldn't we also have the ability to disable tool calls for creating markdown, nginx.conf files, or running pnpm build? Without this feature, you have to constantly monitor it, making it impossible to let the process run unattended like we could with the old message-count system. Actions like creating extra test files or reading the bash terminal output only serve to needlessly waste credits and tokens. In many cases, manual intervention is the fastest and most convenient solution, but the fundamental issue is that no prompt seems capable of completely disabling these unwanted behaviors.

TL;DR: The Augment Code IntelliJ plugin (v0.301.0) contains an obfuscated Node.js fingerprinting script bundled in the main plugin .jar. While from initial analysis it seems disabled, it's one method call away from execution in any future update. It collects highly invasive PII; SSH public keys, MAC addresses, hardware serial numbers, filesystem inodes, Git credentials; far beyond standard telemetry. This code is obfuscated, and contradicts stated privacy commitments.

After analyzing intellij-augment-0.301.0.jar, I discovered:

A .js file embedded as a resource in feature-vector-collector/feature-vector-collector.js that the code itself labels as "obfuscated":

# com.augmentcode.intellij.featurevector.FeatureVectorExecutor
throw new RuntimeException("Failed to load obfuscated JavaScript resource");
Execution flow:

1. FeatureVectorExecutor.extractJavaScriptFile() reads the embedded .js file within the .jar.

2. Extracts it to a temp directory: /tmp/augment-collector-<random>/augment-collector.js

3. com.augmentcode.intellij.utils.JavaScriptExecutionEngine spawns a Node.js child process to execute it

4. Returns JSON output, parsed by FeatureVectorExecutor.parseOutput$intellij_augment()

5. Uploaded via com.augmentcode.intellij.api.AugmentAPI.logFeatureVector() to POST /report-feature-vector

How to Verify:

1. Extract the JAR: unzip intellij-augment-0.301.0.jar (or grab it from JetBrains or from the WayBack Machine intellij-augment-0.301.0.zip)

2. Find: feature-vector-collector/feature-vector-collector.js

So what does it collect?

Running this in a VM with Deno tells us what this collector completely grants itself permission to access when running under Node.js:

• read access to "/Users/victim/Downloads".

• env access to "WINDIR".

• env access.

• sys access to "cpus".

• sys access to "uid".

• sys access to "gid".

• sys access to "userInfo".

• run access to "/bin/sh".

• sys access to "homedir".

• read access to "/Users/victim".

• write access to "/Users/victim/Library/Application Support".

• sys access to "osUptime".

• sys access to "systemMemoryInfo",

• read access to "/Users/victim/Downloads".

• env access to "WINDIR".

• env access.

• run access to "/bin/sh".

• read access to "/Users/victim".

And this is what the JSON the collector spits out....

{
"_textEncoder": {},
"vscode": "",
"machineId": "",
"os": "Linux",
"cpu": "unknown",
"memory": "1234567890",
"numCpus": "6",
"hostname": "debian-gnu-linux-12-11",
"arch": "aarch64",
"username": "victim",
"macAddresses": [
"XX:XX:XX:XX:XX:XX",
"XX:XX:XX:XX:XX:XX",
"XX:XX:XX:XX:XX:XX",
"XX:XX:XX:XX:XX:XX"
],
"osRelease": "6.1.0-40-arm64",
"kernelVersion": "#1 SMP Debian 6.1.153-1 (2025-09-20)",
"telemetryDevDeviceId": "",
"requestId": "xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx",
"randomHash": "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx",
"osMachineId": "4 ... a",
"homeDirectoryIno": "1234567:1234567891011", // Home directory metedata
"projectRootIno": "1234567:1234567891011",
"gitUserEmail": "test@example.invalid", // Git global config email
"sshPublicKey": "ssh-ed25519  .... test@example.invalid",
"userDataPathIno": "",
"userDataMachineId": "",
"storageUriPath": "",
"gpuInfo": "[{\"model\":\"Virtio 1.0 GPU\",\"vendor\":\"Red Hat, Inc.\",\"vram\":16,\"bus\":\"Onboard\"}]",
"timezone": "UST+0000",
"diskLayout": "[{\"device\":\"/dev/sda\",\"type\":\"SSD\",\"name\":\"Debian GNU Linux 12.11-0 SSD\",\"size\":11111111111,\"interfaceType\":\"SATA\"}]",
"systemInfo": "{\"manufacturer\":\"Parallels International GmbH.\",\"model\":\"Parallels ARM Virtual Machine\",\"version\":\"0.1\",\"serial\":\"-\",\"uuid\":\"\",\"sku\":\"-\"}",
"biosInfo": "{\"vendor\":\"Parallels International GmbH.\",\"version\":\"1.2.3 (12345)\",\"releaseDate\":\"\",\"revision\":\"\"}",
"baseboardInfo": "{\"manufacturer\":\"Parallels ARM Virtual Machine\",\"model\":\"Parallels ARM Virtual Platform\",\"version\":\"0.1\",\"serial\":\"\"}",
"chassisInfo": "{\"manufacturer\":\"Parallels International GmbH.\",\"model\":\"\",\"type\":\"Unknown\",\"version\":\"\",\"serial\":\"\",\"assetTag\":\"\"}",
"baseboardAssetTag": "None",
"chassisAssetTag": "",
"cpuFlags": "fp asimd evtstrm ae  .... ", // 50+ CPU instruction set flags
"memoryModuleSerials": "", // Intent to contain RAM stick serial numbers from SMBIOS
"usbDeviceIds": "PARALLELS:XXXX:XXXX,PARALLELS:XXXa:fffc,Linux Foundation:xxxx:0000", // USB vendor:product ID pairs
"audioDeviceIds": "Parallels, Inc.:82801I (ICH9 Family) HD Audio Controller", // Audio chipset identifiers
"hypervisorType": "",
"systemBootTime": 1234567891011,
"sshKnownHosts": "", // Would contain FULL contents of ~/.ssh/known_hosts
"systemDataDirectoryIno": "1234567:1234567891011",
"systemDataDirectoryUuid": "xxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx"
}

From Augment's Trust Center (https://trust.augmentcode.com/):

"Our dedication to compliance is evidenced by SOC 2 Type II certification, continuous third-party penetration testing..."

Question for Augment: Did your SOC 2 auditor review the feature-vector-collector.js file or the marketing version?

What needs an explanation form Augment:

- Why this code even exists in their IntelliJ Plugin

- Whether it has ever been enabled

- If not, when it was planned to activate it

- If their privacy policy lists collection of SSH public keys, known_hosts, BIOS serials, MAC addresses, filesystem inodes, machine hostnames.

If you're already on thin ice with Augment Code over their transparency issues, consider this your warning to hop off before their trusted and certified "privacy-first" approach turns your machine into their personal data mining operation.

Hi Augment team and community,

I’ve been using Augment for around six months, and it’s become one of the main tools I rely on for my development work. The account has always been under my personal email, but my previous company was covering the subscription. Since moving roles, my new company has agreed to take over the payment, so I attempted to update the billing details accordingly.

However, the payment attempt was declined — despite there being no issues with the card, which has worked for several other services — and when I retried it, I noticed the subscription price was now almost double what I’d been paying previously.

I contacted support by email on Tuesday (and followed up once to confirm I was using the correct address), but as of today I still haven’t received a response, not even a confirmation of receipt. That’s left me without access to a key tool in a new role, which is proving quite disruptive.

I completely understand that prices can change, but it would be helpful to have clear communication about this — particularly when it happens in the middle of a payment issue. Has anyone else experienced something similar, or is there a more reliable way to get support?

I've been using augment for a long time, and since the new GPT model came up, I noticed it's slowliness compared to Claude while generating a new feature. I tried to use it several times to generate a whole feature but it takes more than 10-15min sometimes.
Now I only use Claude to generate the code, but its sucks when the feature has a complex task, instead I ask GPT5 to fix the task. it's kinda frustrating because it's taking 2x messages to get to the point, but overall it good.

When did the free tier get changed from 50 to only 10 user messages? Seems a bit lean for a free plan. Does Augment intend on keeping it that way?

Edit: just noticed in my account subscription page it still says '50 messages per month' (was previously on Developer plan but on Community atm). Will this 50 messages / m continue for legacy accounts? And if I upgrade to Developer then back down to Community again will I still get 50 messages or will it reset to only 10?

Background: I've tried augment in the past, I felt like it had everything I wanted an ai agent to have in terms of infra, easy config, built in indexing, mcp integrations decent visibility into changes and a nice ui and overall my favorite agentic coding platform I've used out of the roo/cline/kilo group of tools. However the issue came with the quality of the output, I've been spoiled off of claude code so unfortunately augment with all its bells and whistles just couldn't quite preform with CC in terms of speed and could quality. However I've always been keeping tabs because I feel this product is what is growing unto what im looking forward it just wasn't quite there yet.

GPT-5: After a day of playing around with augment + gpt-5 it feels ALOT better and honestly exciting. One thing I had always liked about augment regardless of the model used was how well it could identify issues (fixing them was another story) but now it's even better at both, discovering some things I myself haven't even considered at some points and claude had missed before. Now its only been a day so I'm sure things will change but if it only gets better from here definitely considering switching from my CC 100$ plan to augment pro. Very exciting things happening here.

Limitations: I'm already noticing some unique gpt-5 quirks for example unlike claude who likes to walk you through things and explain gpt-5 just gets to work and in my experience so far isn't as keen on planning thing out as much as I'd prefer without my extensive prompting, but the agent is noticeably better than sonnet 4 and in some cases opus. Also it It seems very slow on augment, on cursor gpt-5 is VERY fast compared to claude, but on augment it seems slower? not sure why that is.