There are three Claudes: one you think with, one you delegate to, and one you build with. In this session you take one real task and run it through all three, testing a couple of models along the way, so you learn the differences by feeling them instead of reading a chart. Go at your own speed. Nobody is waiting on you.
Three sections that build on each other: think with it (Claude Chat), then delegate to it (Claude Cowork), then build with it (Claude Code). It's the same skill each time, pointed at more reach.
What ties it together: in the first lesson you pick one real task, and you carry that same task through all three Claudes. By the end you'll have done it three ways and you'll know, for your own work, which Claude and which model to reach for.
Bring a task you already have, or pick one from the menu in lesson one. Both work.
The Claude you already have open. You ask, it answers, you're driving the whole time. This is where everyone starts, and where most of the money-saving habits live. Pick your one task here.
People say "Claude" like it's one thing. It's really three, and they differ by how much you hand off:
The best way to feel the difference is to do the very same task in all three and notice what changes. So before anything else, pick that task. Choose something real and low-stakes with a few steps in it, not a one-line question.
Start where you already are. Open Claude Chat on your laptop or phone and do your task. You ask, it answers, you steer. Nothing new yet, and that's fine.
Here's the part most people never touch: inside any Claude, you pick a model. Heavier means smarter, but also slower and pricier. Most work does not need the heavy one.
Most wasted back-and-forth starts the same way: a lazy first ask, then eight rounds of "no, more like this." Claude isn't a mind reader yet. A clear first message does in one pass what ten vague ones do slowly.
Think about ordering a taco. "Make me a taco" leaves Claude guessing what kind. "Three flour tacos with carne asada, onions, cilantro, and salsa verde, all on one plate" gets you the thing you actually wanted. Same idea with any task.
Fill it in for your own task and send it. Notice how much closer the first answer lands when you say those four things up front.
Claude has no memory between messages, just the chat in front of it. So every time you hit send, it re-reads the whole conversation to reply. It's like skimming the entire group chat before every single text. The longer the chat, the more it re-reads, and the more it costs. Long chats also get worse, not better, as the thread fills with old tangents.
"Start a new chat" sounds like losing everything you built up. You don't. You carry the important bits over. Three ways, easiest first:
The context note from the last lesson works, but a note buried in one chat gets lost. The upgrade is to keep your standing context in real files you own, in one place, so any Claude can read it. Write it once, reuse it forever.
A context file is just a plain document about you and your work: who you are, what you're working on, how you like things written, and the projects and people that come up over and over. It's the same idea as a Project's memory, except it lives in files you keep, not locked inside one chat.
obsidian.md and create a vault, or just make one folder somewhere easy to find. Either way, you now have a place your context lives.about-me file. A few short sections: who I am, what I'm working on right now, how I like things written, and the people or projects that come up a lot. Keep it plain and real.project-name, with what it is, what's decided, what's still open, and the details Claude keeps needing.Same coworker, more reach. In Chat you drive every step. In Cowork you hand off the whole task and step back while it does the clicking. Do the Chat section first, and bring the same task with you.
In Chat, you were doing the task together, one message at a time. Cowork is where you delegate the whole thing. You describe what you want and what "done" looks like, and it goes off and works through the steps, clicking through your apps and files for you while you watch.
Take the exact same task from lesson one and hand it over as a job, not a step-by-step. This is where the clear-prompt habit from Chat 3 pays off, because now you're briefing a coworker who's going to run with it.
You've now done the same task two ways. This little bit of noticing is where the whole session earns its keep. Open a note and actually write down what was different, while it's fresh.
If you want, run one piece on a different model here too, and see whether it changes how well the hand-off goes. You're building a real feel for what fits what.
The same task, pointed at the most capable Claude. Where Cowork does the task, Code builds a thing that runs and keeps running. This is the section that opens the most doors. Do the first two first.
The third Claude writes and fixes actual software. You don't write the code and you don't need to read it. You describe what you want, Claude Code builds it, you look at the result and say what to change. The rhythm is the same one you've used all along: describe, look, adjust.
So take your task one step further and ask Code to turn it into something that runs:
You've run one real task through all three Claudes and tried a few models along the way. That gives you something no slide can: a felt sense of which one fits your work, and when. Write it down while it's fresh, in your own words.
Don't aim for a perfect chart. Aim for the notes you'd give a friend who does what you do: for my work, reach for Chat when ___, Cowork when ___, Code when ___, and start at Sonnet unless ___.
Then pin it somewhere you'll see it. That cheat sheet is now your standing context, and it's the kind of thing worth dropping into a Project so every future chat already knows how you like to work.