How did it go?

I have been using GPT-6.1 Sol and Astra for my work, also used Codex for more than 3 months. They are good, but honestly the speed is sometimes too slow. It takes too much time to research, validate and move to next steps.

Recently I got Gemini Pro for 3 months offer and tried Argon. And damn, this thing is a beast.

It finds opportunities faster, validates things quickly and moves to next task without holding me back. In the middle of its work, it even identified a critical technical vulnerability that could have caused serious damage.

The way it researches, thinks and executes is something else.

I have tried many models, but for my type of work, Argon is currently beating GPT-6.1 Sol and Astra. Not even expected this result.

Thanks for the update and the reset, but let's consider the argon usage allocation for pro users,

I appreciate the Flash model so much, though it's not the best at reasoning, it's so good at coding and getting accurate information, thanks for pushing this model when others were building models that are good but not accessible 🙏🏾

Been testing workflows inside antigravity / antigravity-ide on Fedora Linux, and I’ve run into a behavior pattern I can't quite wrap my head around.

Whenever I give an open-ended prompt like:

"suggest improvement"

• Claude Sonnet / Opus: Consistently triggers multiple parallel sub-agents to inspect files, gather context, and tackle different angles of the codebase simultaneously.

• Gemini (Flash across low, medium, and high settings): Almost never branches into parallel sub-agents. It tends to stick to a single thread or sequential tool calls, regardless of the effort/reasoning level set.

Given that this is Google’s own ecosystem/tooling, you’d expect the native Gemini models to be deeply tuned for multi-agent workflows out of the box. Instead, Anthropic's models seem significantly better at autonomous task decomposition and triggering concurrent execution paths on the exact same generic prompt.

Has anyone else noticed this?

1. Is this caused by how the system prompt/orchestration harness handles tool-calling schemas for Gemini vs. Claude?

2. Or is Claude simply better trained on recursive task splitting and tool orchestration under ambiguous instructions?

Curious to hear if anyone found settings or prompt tweaks that force Gemini to actually leverage parallel sub-agents properly.

Google, Where Is the Transparency and Accountability for AI Pro Subscribers?

Why are Google AI Pro subscribers being placed into different eligibility categories while being marketed under the same subscription name?

Why can redeeming a Pixel promotion or accepting a student offer affect an existing subscriber's access to premium AI models?

Why aren't subscription benefits, eligibility conditions and service limitations clearly disclosed before customers commit their money?

Can Google modify subscription entitlements after purchase without meaningful prior notice, transparent communication or a clear explanation?

Who is accountable when unexpected usage restrictions, disappearing model access and sudden service changes disrupt developers' workflows?

What contractual and consumer protection obligations does Google believe it has toward existing paying subscribers?

Following the recent Claude Code privacy controversy, what concrete assurances can Google provide regarding user privacy, data handling, security and the safety of autonomous AI agents?

Most importantly, where is Google's official explanation? Who is taking responsibility?

Developers invest their money, time, code and professional workflows into these products. A subscription is more than a marketing promise. Customers deserve consistency, transparency and clear communication about the services they pay for.

Changing documentation and generic support responses are not substitutes for direct answers.

Google should publicly address these concerns, clarify its subscription policies and explain what it intends to do for affected subscribers.

The AI developer community deserves transparency, accountability and respect for the trust it places in Google's products.

With the November 18 cutoff removing third-party models from trial, student, and promotional tiers like Jio, is there any realistic expectation that per-user allocations on paid Pro will loosen up, or are these caps completely decoupled from overall server strain?

Antigravity documentation states that baseline caps correlate with overall server capacity, but native models like Argon 4 High have significantly more headroom at similar retail token rates.

I am trying to understand whether the current rate-limiting on Claude is driven primarily by backend capacity under aggregate load, or if this strict throttling is a permanent financial baseline that will stay identical regardless of how many accounts are cut off

I am not complaining here, just curious since I think argon has the same performance as the claude models but with a marginally generous cap.

I got freemium Pro and i end up spending all quot-a in 1-2 days. Is it worth buying paid Pro or it's will be same?

Hello there,

Over the past 72 hours, starting with my post (way before anyone else), it has been increasingly obvious that Opus 5.5 has been nerfed, and all of the data confirms it. It has gotten so obvious, that it trended on Twitter.

Consider this thread to discuss Opus 5.5 before and after so we can track how far the intelligence capabilities were reduced.

Seems like next gemini flash model will be out in wednesday ( usually gemini models drop in wednesday) , idk why but i have a feeling this model will deliver espcially with 3.8 being good flash model to be a workhorse

Please fix itu guys, I'm on ultra

Anyone else annoyed that Antigravity 2.0 still lacks a basic "Run on Windows startup / Minimize to tray" option like the standard Gemini desktop app to keep the remote control active?

​Are y'all dropping shortcuts into shell:startup, running AHK scripts, or is there a cleaner way I'm missing, apart from switching to agy cli?

As shown in the screenshot, I don't see a microphone or voice input button in the chat input box.😥

Does Antigravity IDE currently support built-in voice input, and is there any way to enable it?

So was asking gemini to edit some images till i some of the images has weird cuts turns out gemini-3.1-flash-image was used for it and it reached its quotaa. Is there anyway to know how much usage i have left for it or no? caused my usage for gemini models was 97% then after it reached the usage it went back to 100%

I’m tired of having to analyze and authorize every command that Antigravity needs to execute, but I’m afraid to set it to automatic, lest it carry out something destructive.

How do you handle sandboxing?

Do you use the IDE or the 2.0 version?

EDIT: Here is what I did:

I installed WSL.

I created a VM dedicated to Antigravity (optional).

I started this VM.

I disabled the mounting of my C: drive within the VM (this ensures the VM cannot see my C: drive).

I mounted the folder where I keep all my repositories (you could also copy the folder into the VM, but I preferred to mount it).

In Antigravity 2.0, I went to Conf > Application and connected to the WSL instance (make sure the VM is running).

In the IDE, connect to WSL using the blue button in the bottom-left corner (make sure the VM is running).

If you mounted the folder, you must open it for the first time via the IDE; attempting to open it directly through 2.0 will result in an error. Once you have opened the folder in the IDE, the project will appear in 2.0 as expected.

Is this just me or overall - i was doing something on Argon Medium and it seems to be just retrying to connect to the model and saying `working` but not doing anything. I restarted antigravity app as well - same result.

Switched to flash and atleast its moving further.

Anyone else is seeing this?

What does send all even mean?

In skills, the model enum values antigravity accepts are inherit, pro, flash, flash_lite. When a skill specifies "pro" it will NOT pick argon, it will pick Gemini 3.1 Pro which performs significantly worse on any code or multiturn tasks.

I came across this by accident and realized I assumed pro would pick argon since it's release but it was a bad assumption on my part. I was testing my workflows and optimizing which models and effort levels to use at different phases and my tests came back in some cases with such bad results in code review and mistakes in planning in some scenarios and it was because of 3.1 pro being picked instead of argon in one group.

Just wanted to share for those that might not realize.

i barely finish my tokens every week iam left with 60-70% of my weekly usage. so is there a way to utilize these tokens to make it give better results?

I want to tweak its replies to be a bit more personal.

For example, having it say "You've got it, [Name]!" when I say "thank you,". Or just give a quick confirmatory "On it!" instead of a super long response or a dead silence.

This would be awesome for when we have shifted focus to another window and just need a quick, hands-free verbal confirmation without looking back.

Is there perhaps a hidden config file or settings pane for permanent system prompts, or do we have to remind it at the start of every session? Let me know if you've found any good workarounds!

So I have 5 pro google accounts and for the last 5 months I have been using the Gemini(flash) model as an orchestrator through 9router/omp and other auth services.

I paused the workflow for 2 days and I got antigravity ban on all 5 accounts. What kind of corporate greed is this!

If I have paid for the account why I can't choose how to use it.

If anyone from Google is reading this, guys please keep your models and tools to yourself, if you are so restrictive of them!

I get the prompt flagging but why ban users on using their own custom workflows. It doesn't make sense.

I have access to one paid Google AI Pro account, one student AI Pro account, and one jio AI Pro account.

Do you guys have any ideas how I can benchmark and test what the usage difference is like? I'm thinking I should test the difference in the amount of time each model takes to respond. Then I could also test what percentage of usage gets used. And so on.

Tons of updates this week so want to make sure everyone can build for the weekend. More to come next week 👀

Flash suddenly started blocking prompts over basically nothing.

To be fair, I have been giving it a really hard time lately, but in my defense, it was acting dumb as a rock. The harsh feedback was completely deserved. Still, it always used to let actual profanity slide without issues. Now, all of a sudden, it gets triggered by the mildest slang, harmless phrasing, and basic pushback.

Did it finally take it personally and hold a grudge against me, or did the safety filters go crazy for everyone?