Add GLM-5.3 coding plan review article (zh+en) - #91
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 94eba90719
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| - **Pro**: ~400 prompts per 5-hour window — tight for heavy agent use | ||
| - **Max**: ~1,600 prompts per 5-hour window — unlikely to trigger | ||
|
|
||
| For developers using agent tools like Claude Code or Codex, a single task can involve dozens of tool calls (read file, write file, execute command), each counting as a prompt. So: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do not count every agent tool invocation as a full plan prompt. The existing quota definition in src/content/compare-en/minimax-coding-plan-vs-glm-coding-plan.md:49-54 states that one Zhipu prompt represents roughly 15–20 model calls, with an additional model multiplier. Treating each read, write, or command as one prompt substantially overstates how quickly users exhaust the quota and undermines the subsequent tier recommendations; the mirrored Chinese paragraph has the same error.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
|
|
||
| At the time of publication, the site's `data/apis/zhipu-coding-plan.yaml` still reflects GLM-5.1 / v2. Model version and pricing changes for GLM-5.3 will be synced via a separate data PR, with `content:check` and build re-verified at that time. | ||
|
|
||
| > Further reading: Check out our [Zhipu GLM vs Volcengine Ark Coding Plan comparison](/en/compare/minimax-coding-plan-vs-glm-coding-plan) and [AI Coding Cost Comparison 2026](/en/compare/ai-coding-cost-comparison-2026). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The link is labeled as a Zhipu-versus-Volcengine comparison, but its target is the existing MiniMax-versus-Zhipu article, so readers are sent to a different comparison than promised. Either rename the link to MiniMax vs Zhipu or provide the intended Volcengine route; the Chinese mirror contains the same mismatch.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Summary
GLM-5.3 review article (topic A) by @editor (author), bilingual (zh/en). Draft for QA verification; no merge/deploy by the author.
Items
New guide:
src/content/guides/glm-5.3-coding-plan-review.md+src/content/guides-en/glm-5.3-coding-plan-review.mdarticle_type: review,pillar: plans,content_status: keep,locale_strategy: mirroredBranch based on latest main (includes Add DeepSeek Harness intro article: plugin-based agent framework (zh+en) #90 DeepSeek Harness) — no extra merge needed
Related (separate PR)
data/apis/zhipu-coding-plan.yamlrefresh (GLM-5.3) ships as an independent Draft PR (per plan: data PR merges first, then this article)Verified (by @dev)
npm ci,npm run build(313 pages, +2),check:seo— passcontent:check --strict: 0 ERROR / 0 WARNnpm audit: 0 vulnerabilitiesHandoff