Pick models by testing them on the real job

A developer compared several models on a UAV software project and found that detailed plans still didn’t stop weaker ones from making serious mistakes.

Done with Claude· Advanced· Oct 2026

What they did
The developer was working on software for UAV CAD, CFD, and DFM optimization. They prepared thorough requirement, design, and implementation documents, then ran smaller models and the strongest open-weight options through those materials to see how they handled the task. Based on the comparison, they chose Opus to shape and check the design, and Flash 3.8 to generate and build the code.
How it went
The open-weight models still introduced many bugs and major blunders, even with the written plans in place. Opus and Gemini 3.8, and now Argon, handled the work much better. The developer’s takeaway was that compact models can still be workable for simpler applications.
Tips
Don’t assume a detailed spec will prevent a model from failing on a niche engineering problem. Try the model on your own hardest examples before you commit to a lower-cost stack.

Try it yourself with Claude

I’m making a [kind of engineering tool] for [domain]. Start by outlining a brief product plan and a technical approach, then stop and ask for my approval before writing code. After I approve, build it in [folder/repo] with tests and a README explaining how to run it. When you finish, inspect your own work for mistakes and clearly mark anything that is still uncertain, approximate, or not fully checked. Do not take any irreversible step, such as sending, deleting, submitting, or paying, without asking me first.

Fill in the [brackets]. Agents can make mistakes, so review anything before it is sent, paid or deleted.

Get 3 agent uses like this every morning

With the day's top AI news. Free, and one click to unsubscribe.