HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
Tura-AI
tura
Rust2026–2026
Tura-AI / tura

tura

Build agent that uses 80% less token and delivers better results.

3Distinct people
9Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
665GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Build agent that uses 80% less token and delivers better results.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by day9 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2026-07-15 15:10:14 UTC to 2026-08-11 20:39:32 UTC.

0122026-07-15 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-16 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 1 submissions, 1 commentsJul 152026-07-16 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-17 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-17 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-18 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 1 submissions, 1 comments2026-07-18 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-19 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-19 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-20 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-20 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-21 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-21 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-22 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-22 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-23 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-23 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-24 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-24 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-25 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-25 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-26 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-26 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-27 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-27 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-28 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-28 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-29 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsJul 282026-07-29 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-30 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-30 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-31 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-31 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-02 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-02 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-03 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-03 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-04 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-04 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-05 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-05 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-06 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-06 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-07 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-07 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-08 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-08 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-09 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-09 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-10 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-10 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-11 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-11 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-12 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 commentsAug 11

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Jul 152026-07-15 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-16 00:00:00 UTC211
Jul 162026-07-16 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-17 00:00:00 UTC110
Jul 172026-07-17 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-18 00:00:00 UTC211
Jul 182026-07-18 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-19 00:00:00 UTC110
Jul 192026-07-19 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-20 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 202026-07-20 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-21 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 212026-07-21 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-22 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 222026-07-22 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-23 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 232026-07-23 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-24 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 242026-07-24 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-25 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 252026-07-25 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-26 00:00:00 UTC110
Jul 262026-07-26 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-27 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 272026-07-27 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-28 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 282026-07-28 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-29 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 292026-07-29 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-30 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 302026-07-30 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-31 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 312026-07-31 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 12026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-02 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 22026-08-02 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-03 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 32026-08-03 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-04 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 42026-08-04 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-05 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 52026-08-05 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-06 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 62026-08-06 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-07 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 72026-08-07 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-08 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 82026-08-08 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-09 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 92026-08-09 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-10 00:00:00 UTC110
Aug 102026-08-10 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-11 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 112026-08-11 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-12 00:00:00 UTC110

What Hacker News says

9 sources
yohji1984·Jul 25, 2026Submission

Why My Open-Source Project Hasn't Done Better

Since the beginning of 2026, many projects such as RTK, Caveman, and Ponytail have claimed that they can reduce token usage by 80–90%. Some of them gained tens of thousands of GitHub stars in a very short time. My previous startup was building an e-commerce chatbot. In fact, the product was almost identical to the Universal Commerce Protocol (UCP). After UCP was released, I decided not to continue pursuing that direction. Earlier this year, I started turning the architecture we had built for e-commerce chatbot agents into an SDK. Put simply, its core idea is to use state machines and deterministic execution sequences to reduce the number of round trips to LLM providers by around 80% for the same task, thereby significantly reducing token consumption. Here is the problem: I understand very clearly why tools such as RTK are ineffective in g
Read the rest
enuinely long-running tasks. I published a report on July 18, and JetBrains published a report on July 20 that reached essentially the same conclusion: token-saving plugins such as RTK and Caveman have little to no effect on real-world, long-running tasks. - JetBrains: https://blog.jetbrains.com/ai/2026/07/rtk-claude-code-token-savings/ - My report: https://turaai.net/blog#token-saving-plugins-are-mostly-stupid-idea I also know how to achieve a real reduction of more than 80% in token consumption during long-running tasks. However, I have encountered significant difficulties promoting my open-source project. I would summarize the main problems as follows. 1. Most coding-agent users do not care what actually drives token consumption There is a huge gap in understanding among coding-agent users, regardless of whether they have formal software-engineering training or are self-taught "vibe coders." A long article that systematically explains the process and challenges people's existing assumptions has very little chance of spreading in forums already flooded with AI-written posts and vibe-coded plugins claiming to reduce token usage by 95%. Simple ideas are easier to spread. People are not purely rational; they tend to believe the things they can understand most easily. That is also why pseudoscientific content built on incorrect causal explanations often attracts far more attention on social media than channels that carefully explain the underlying mathematics. 2. The author's arrogance This is really a combination of two problems. From the perspective of someone who believes strongly in scientific testing methods, evaluations, and benchmarks, software-engineering claims without an eval or benchmark can feel meaningless. But perhaps my own arrogance and my contempt for, or even jealousy of, tools such as RTK has made me less willing to promote my work in ways that would actually be more effective. If you have read this far, I would genuinely appreciate your advice: how can I promote my project more effectively while continuing to respect the rigor of evaluations and benchmarks? I know that building a coding agent with Codex or Claude is relatively easy. But I also believe that there will always be people who understand the value of benchmarks and evaluation harnesses. The project was released on July 16 and currently has a little over 400 GitHub stars. For now, it is still a relatively unknown project: https://github.com/Tura-AI/tura
4 points · Open discussion
yohji1984·Jul 18, 2026Submission

Claude Code team should try macro so users can complete 3x as many tasks

So the idea is really simple. If CC need to change a file and run some test, CC needs to: # Turn 1 — apply patch (change package file) # Turn 2 — apply patch (fix the bug) # Turn 3 — apply patch (edit the testing script) # Turn 4 — build # Turn 5 — run tests and lint # Turn 6 — *and if is playwright CC needs another round to read media The concept is that we can use macro command to put the entire process into a RAG in one single turn. For example like this: step1: inspect env step2: apply patch (change package file) step2: apply patch (fix the bug) step2: apply patch (edit the testing script) step3: build step4: run tests and lint step5: read medias I could not test this implementation due to Antropic terms of use. But I tested on other coding agent and providers this can reduce llm turns around by 40% - 80%, and saving nearly same amoun
Read the rest
t of tokens. (I need to use ** to hide the provider's name in order to avoid the post being deleated by the bot). Here is the implementation and testing benchmark can be found in the md. I tested with DeepSWE and entire repo rewrite cases: https://github.com/Tura-AI/tura
1 points · Open discussion
yohji1984·Jul 17, 2026Submission

Is GPT-5.6 Sol Max Worth It?

I ran some test with gpt- 5.6 sol in max reasoning on both codex cli and my own agent harness: https://github.com/Tura-AI/tura I tested only 1 task and the toekn efficency difference is not as great as in high mode: Tura used up to 83.1% fewer turns on the rewrite benchmark and improved the harness results by 7 percent point. In ultra the dirrence is around 50% and incressed harness result only by one. Full report: https://turaai.net/blog#is-gpt-5-6-sol-max-worth-it However in the bug fixing tasks based on the pulbished report from DeepSWE and others, the performance incress is less impressive compare with the incess in costs. here is the summarry: Use Max for building new project, and high for debuging or add defined feature.
2 points · Open discussion
yohji1984·Jul 16, 2026Submission

Why people chasing after useless token saving plugins and ignoring real solution

I wrote a blog yesterday on how useless RTK and Ponytail are on real coding tasks. And published my agent harness long-horizon task benchmarks on 80% real token saving. I just want to know why people just ignore the fact those pulgins are useless and don't care about the real savings? full reports are on my repo: https://github.com/Tura-AI/tura Arm n Harness score Total tokens Modeled cost Rounds Duration No plugin 2 78.85% 6.660M $5.281946 62.5 895s Ponytail 2 80.77% -7.56% -8.87% -9.60% +13.51% RTK 2 76.92% +13.20% +7.18% +44.00% +40.69% Configuration Passes Pass rate Observed tokens Rounds Estimated cost Tura Balanced High 48/60 80.0% 229,695,477 2,017 $221.138 Tura Direct High 39/60 65.0% 75,108,167 969 $99.620 Codex CLI Medium 38/60 63
Read the rest
.3% 333,538,349 3,140 $257.173 Codex CLI High 36/60 60.0% 455,742,296 6,074 $327.483
2 points · Open discussion
Hi HN, I've been working on an agentic runtime framework. The earlier benchmark eval is promising. But I can see the limits of the test design and the fragility of the runtime itself. I would like to ask for your reviews of the framework and the eval process itself. https://github.com/Tura-AI/tura https://turaai.net/docs#benchmark-current-test-set-record Tura-AI/tura https://turaai.net/blog#why-i-am-building-tura
In Agent runtime reduces LLM turns by 80% with a higher success rate in DeepSWE

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.