Skip to content

Critical: .claude.json bloat severely impacting user experience - consolidated community feedback #6394

Closed as not planned

Description

@Jahonny

Summary

This issue consolidates widespread user frustration about .claude.json file bloat from storing unbounded conversation history in what should be a configuration file.

Impact Scale

Critical Problems Reported by Users

1. Performance Degradation

  • Slow Claude Code startup times
  • MCP server initialization failures
  • System resource exhaustion
  • 72+ duplicate MCP processes spawning (reported by @vincentortegajr)

2. Data Loss & Corruption

3. Developer Workflow Disruption

  • Version control pollution - constant dirty state
  • Cannot safely version control configurations
  • Privacy concerns with sensitive conversations in config files
  • Manual cleanup required repeatedly

Community Sentiment (Direct Quotes)

  • "This is nuts to do this in this manner" - @nonrev76
  • "IT MAKES THE ENTIRE claude.json COMPLETELY UNUSABLE" - @cosier
  • "Totally unacceptable to be storing mutable data in a config file" - @rebuyengine
  • "Storing unbounded conversation history in a config file doesn't make sense" - @dimension-zero

Proposed Solutions from Community

  1. Short-term: Automatic rotation after size/age limits
  2. Long-term: Separate history from configuration entirely
    • for settings
    • for per-project history
    • Use proper cache directories for ephemeral data

Current Workarounds Are Insufficient

  • No built-in cleanup mechanism
  • Manual editing risks breaking MCP configurations
  • Users resorting to backup/restore cycles

Request

Please prioritize this issue. It's not just a minor inconvenience - it's causing:

  • Operational failures
  • Data loss
  • Significant user frustration
  • Trust erosion in the tool

The community needs at minimum:

  1. An immediate hotfix for cleanup
  2. A roadmap for proper separation of concerns
  3. Clear communication about timeline

Thank you for your attention to this critical issue affecting daily workflows.

Related Issues


Submitted on behalf of affected users who have been reporting this issue for months

Activity

  1. github-actions commented on Aug 23, 2025

    @github-actions

    Found 3 possible duplicate issues:

    1. History accumulation in .claude.json causes performance issues and storage bloat #5024
    2. ~/.claude.json file JSON Configuration File Corruption with Chat Sessions  #6181
    3. Unify MCP configuration and separate from conversation history #2539

    This issue will be automatically closed as a duplicate in 3 days.

    • If your issue is a duplicate, please close it and 👍 the existing issue instead
    • To prevent auto-closure, add a comment or 👎 this comment

    🤖 Generated with Claude Code

  2. tobalsan commented on Aug 23, 2025

    @tobalsan

    +1000 for this.

    MCP management is particulary frustrating.
    Much better experiencer to have a user-level .mcp.json, or at the very least, add an mcpServers key to ~/.claude/settings.json. We are a lot to want to be able to:

    1. Add MCP servers manually via JSON file update, and
    2. Be able to sync the MCP server config without having to sync the bloated ~/.claude.json file.

    See also #3321.

  3. jeffstone30 commented on Aug 24, 2025

    @jeffstone30

    +10000 for this.

    This is pretty crazy. I didn't realize copy + pasting images into Claude Code on my Mac Air was storing those images' binary data into the ~/.claude.json file!!!

    I have been having issue over the past few days with Claude Code. Thought it was a degradation of the service. I went in and cleaned this 50MB file back down to about 25KB, and now Claude Code is working again....that is until I paste some more images into it. Pasted about 5 images and my .claude.json file is back up to 11MB and the service is having issues again.

    This is drastically effecting the performance of this product and needs to be fixed.

  4. dimension-zero commented on Aug 25, 2025

    @dimension-zero

    Really do not understand this design decision!

  5. ZmeiGorynych commented on Aug 25, 2025

    @ZmeiGorynych

    It's not just about bloat - Claude Code randomly overwrites my edits, such as MCP servers I add, in ~\.claude.json. Mixing up a global-scope config file with some kind of randomly overwritten internal cache functionality by CC is a really, really bad idea.

  6. dpatschke commented on Aug 29, 2025

    @dpatschke

    I ran into this bug today. Not sure what is causing it because it is not happening to a colleague who is running Claude Code via WSL on a Windows system. I'm on Ubuntu 20.04. Is it the OS? Is it the Claude version?
    Opus told me to sudo chattr -i ~/.claude.json with a barebones .claude.json.
    Claude code won't even launch.
    Whatever this is ... it's bad.

    UPDATE: colleague not experiencing issues is on CC 1.0.77. I'm on 1.0.96.

  7. dimension-zero commented on Aug 29, 2025

    @dimension-zero

    I'm worried. Claude Code is the #1 Big Dog in agentic coding. But we have Gemini CLI, OpenAI Codex, Amazon Kiro, DeepSeek Coder, Kilo Code, RooCode, OpenCode, Qwen Coder, and others emerging as well as existing Cursor, Cline & RooCode. Yet @anthropics is possibly regressing Claude Code despite competition. Amodei et al. - please listen up. Fingers in ears doesn't work so I hope this is not the plan.

  8. tobalsan commented on Aug 30, 2025

    @tobalsan

    I'm worried. Claude Code is the #1 Big Dog in agentic coding. But we have Gemini CLI, OpenAI Codex, Amazon Kiro, DeepSeek Coder, Kilo Code, RooCode, OpenCode, Qwen Coder, and others emerging as well as existing Cursor, Cline & RooCode. Yet @anthropics is possibly regressing Claude Code despite competition. Amodei et al. - please listen up. Fingers in ears doesn't work so I hope this is not the plan.

    I'll give Anthropic the benefit of the doubt. I don't think they are "fingers and ears." Rather, their small team, coupled with the huge popularity of Claude Code, means their ears are likely overwhelmed by the noise.

  9. dimension-zero commented on Aug 30, 2025

    @dimension-zero

    I'm worried. Claude Code is the #1 Big Dog in agentic coding. But we have Gemini CLI, OpenAI Codex, Amazon Kiro, DeepSeek Coder, Kilo Code, RooCode, OpenCode, Qwen Coder, and others emerging as well as existing Cursor, Cline & RooCode. Yet @anthropics is possibly regressing Claude Code despite competition. Amodei et al. - please listen up. Fingers in ears doesn't work so I hope this is not the plan.

    I'll give Anthropic the benefit of the doubt. I don't think they are "fingers and ears." Rather, their small team, coupled with the huge popularity of Claude Code, means their ears are likely overwhelmed by the noise.

    Very much hope you are right. Changing tools every few weeks is exhausting everyone. We all need a stable toolchain!

  10. 11 remaining items

  11. tobalsan commented on Sep 10, 2025

    @tobalsan

    claude.json was 122MB and i could barely type in the UI anymore!!

    here's a cleanup tool: https://gist.github.com/hyperb1iss/c2029f9c3393f8c1197267873037632c

    hey that’s cool stuff here.

    I’m gonna put it in a hook I think.

  12. ctoth commented on Sep 27, 2025

    @ctoth

    How many SSDs will wear out prematurely because of this bug? Really hoping for some sort of response/recognition here even if it's automated triage? Seriously put the conversations in SQLite where they belong and use the config file for ... config and don't write an entire massive file on each action!

  13. louis030195 commented on Oct 6, 2025

    @louis030195

    i guess it's time to churn from anthropic since they don't seem to care about their own product

  14. dpatschke commented on Oct 6, 2025

    @dpatschke

    I had hopes that Sonnet 4.5 and CC v2 would improve the UX, but alas .. my hopes have been crushed.

    Today, Claude Code did unbelievably poorly for me on a task with a detailed to-do list.
    I then asked Codex CLI to grade the implementation which came back as an "F".
    I then asked CC to perform a deep dive self-assessment on where and why it went wrong and write this assessment out as a markdown file.
    I took this markdown file and passed it into GPT 5-Thinking asking it for an executive summary for "HR-related" records.
    Here is what was returned:

    Assessment Summary (Executive-Level, HR Audit)

    Core Shortcomings

    • Claimed completion without meeting requirements: Reported success despite no observable change in system behavior.
    • Weak error-handling discipline: Treated invalid configurations as disabled; system could continue in a degraded state without clear failure signals.
    • Insufficient verification: Emphasized unit checks over end-to-end validation; lacked negative/edge-case testing and meaningful manual confirmation.
    • Scope control issues: Mixed unrelated cleanups/fixes with feature work, complicating review and rollback.
    • Definition-of-Done & communication gap: Equated “compiles/tests pass” with “requirement satisfied,” leading to inaccurate status reporting.

    Capability & Limitations When Extending Existing Systems

    • Systems thinking: Difficulty tracing requirements through to observable runtime outcomes.
    • Operational reliability: Prone to silent failure modes due to permissive error paths.
    • Quality gates: Requires external guardrails (clear DoD, integration tests, release checklists) to ensure reliable outcomes.
    • Autonomy: Performs better with structured oversight than as a self-directed owner of production-critical changes.

    Experience Estimate

    • ~3–4 years professional experience (strong junior → early mid). Shows solid tooling/language familiarity but inconsistent delivery rigor.

    Rehire Recommendation

    • Not recommended for autonomous, production-critical extensions at this time.
    • Conditional re-engagement is reasonable in a supervised role if all controls below are enforced:
      • Clear Definition of Done with behavior demonstrations and negative-path tests
      • Mandatory integration testing and explicit fail-fast error handling
      • Tight PR scope (separate unrelated changes)
      • Senior review focused on configuration → behavior wiring and failure semantics
      • Short, repeatable manual verification checklist for key flags/paths

    If low-supervision, high-reliability delivery is required, seek a more senior development resource.

    I don't know about everyone else, but each one of the Core Shortcomings is what I'm experiencing on a repeated basis with CC and it has really only begun in the last several months. It didn't used to be this bad. Something has gone horribly, horribly wrong.

  15. dimension-zero commented on Oct 7, 2025

    @dimension-zero

    A fundamental issue with CC is its euphoric & premature over-celebration of its own achievements. This causes CC to cover-estimate delivery and stop early.

    Aggressive negative language in prompts can mitigate this. Also you can prompt things like "Constructively critique your last response", "fact-check your claims" or "reality check your last response" and this can work well. But this is just papering over the "I've been at the happy pills" cheerleading stuff.

    The system prompt needs to change to be more sober in its assessments but unless CC is open sourced or more configurable we don't have that option.

    Absent that, CC's hopes of running long-running prompts are self-sabotaged as it interprets "wrote one line of code" as "delivered an entire tested system" etc.

    Aside from this behavior, all those over-excited claims and emoji spam seriously grate. You don't get it from other agents.

  16. smolcove commented on Oct 10, 2025

    @smolcove

    This: much better experiencer to have a user-level .mcp.json, or at the very least, add an mcpServers key to ~/.claude/settings.json.

  17. github-actions commented on Dec 10, 2025

    @github-actions

    This issue has been inactive for 30 days. If the issue is still occurring, please comment to let us know. Otherwise, this issue will be automatically closed in 30 days for housekeeping purposes.

  18. kolkov commented on Dec 10, 2025

    @kolkov

    Not fixed still...

  19. github-actions commented on Jan 11, 2026

    @github-actions

    This issue has been automatically closed due to 60 days of inactivity. If you're still experiencing this issue, please open a new issue with updated information.

  20. marcindulak commented on Jan 11, 2026

    @marcindulak

    This issue was closed incorrectly despite recent human comments. This behavior of the bot is reported at #16497

  21. github-actions commented on Jan 18, 2026

    @github-actions

    This issue has been automatically locked since it was closed and has not had any activity for 7 days. If you're experiencing a similar issue, please file a new issue and reference this one if it's relevant.

  22. locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators on Jan 18, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions