Hero image for "Trying Claude Code on the web": Translucent browser window floating in cosmic digital space, streams of code and light flowing through
2 min read

Trying Claude Code on the web

First impressions of the Claude Code web research preview and how it compares to working with AI in a local editor.

Trying Claude Code on the web

Anthropic released a research preview of Claude Code that runs in the browser. I had been using AI coding tools in my editor for a while, so I wanted to see how a web-based approach would feel.

The difference from editor integrations

The main thing that sets this apart from something like Copilot is that it works at the project level rather than the file level. It reads your directory structure, understands how files relate to each other, and can make changes across multiple files in one go.

With Copilot I was always working within a single file, accepting or rejecting line-by-line suggestions. Claude Code operates more like a colleague who has access to your whole repo. You describe what you want, and it figures out which files to touch.

What worked

I pointed it at this blog and asked it to make some changes. It picked up on the Nuxt Content structure, the frontmatter format, and the component patterns without me having to explain any of it. That part was genuinely useful.

The web interface also means there is nothing to install. You connect your repo and start working. For quick tasks on a different machine, that is convenient.

What did not

The context window has limits. On larger codebases, it can lose track of things or miss files that are relevant. You also have to be specific about what you want. Vague instructions lead to vague results, which is true for any AI tool but feels more noticeable when it has access to your entire project.

Also, I let it write this blog post as an experiment, and the original version was full of generic AI praise. The irony of using an AI tool to write about an AI tool is that it tends to be overly positive about itself. I had to come back and rewrite it later.

Where it fits

For me, Claude Code on the web works best for quick, scoped tasks: fixing a bug, adding a small feature, or exploring an unfamiliar codebase. For longer development sessions I still prefer working locally with the CLI, where I have more control over the workflow.

It is a different kind of tool than autocomplete. Whether that is better depends on what you are doing.