u/DaikonCharacter6259

Hey everyone, I’m a TikTok creator too, and I kept running into the same problem: I’d spend hours editing a video, think it was ready, upload it, and then boom! Barely any views at all.

So I started building a tool to help me out with it.

It’s a pre-upload video review tool that looks for things like:

• First 3s Hooks (Visual, sound and the catchy text).
• Weak opening.
• Slow setup.
• Late payoffs.
• Open loops.

The goal isn’t to predict views or promise virality. I just want to help creators catch obvious edit problems before publishing.

I’m still building it and would really appreciate honest feedback. What features would you actually want in a tool like this?

Would you care about transcript feedback, thumbnail/title suggestions, pacing graphs, retention predictions, A/B hook comparisons, or something completely different?

What would make you use it regularly, and what would make you ignore it?

PS: I'm not here to promote my tool, I just want honest, brutal feedback to improve my tool. If you're really interested, it's in a early access waitlist. DM me if you want it.

Hey everyone, I’m a YouTuber too, and I kept running into the same problem: I’d spend hours editing a video, think it was ready, upload it, and then boom! Barely any views at all.

So I started building a tool to help me out with it.

It’s a pre-upload video review tool that looks for things like:

• First 3s Hooks (Visual, sound and the catchy text).
• Weak opening.
• Slow setup.
• Late payoffs.
• Open loops.

The goal isn’t to predict views or promise virality. I just want to help creators catch obvious edit problems before publishing.

I’m still building it and would really appreciate honest feedback. What features would you actually want in a tool like this?

Would you care about transcript feedback, thumbnail/title suggestions, pacing graphs, retention predictions, A/B hook comparisons, or something completely different?

What would make you use it regularly, and what would make you ignore it?

PS: I'm not here to promote my tool, I just want honest, brutal feedback to improve my tool. If you're really interested, it's in a early access waitlist. DM me if you want it.

Hey everyone, I’m a YouTuber too, and I kept running into the same problem: I’d spend hours editing a video, think it was ready, upload it, and then boom! Barely any views at all.

So I started building a tool to help me out with it.

It’s a pre-upload video review tool that looks for things like:

• First 3s Hooks (Visual, sound and the catchy text).
• Weak opening.
• Slow setup.
• Late payoffs.
• Open loops.

The goal isn’t to predict views or promise virality. I just want to help creators catch obvious edit problems before publishing.

I’m still building it and would really appreciate honest feedback. What features would you actually want in a tool like this?

Would you care about transcript feedback, thumbnail/title suggestions, pacing graphs, retention predictions, A/B hook comparisons, or something completely different?

What would make you use it regularly, and what would make you ignore it?

Hey everyone, I’m a YouTuber too, and I kept running into the same problem: I’d spend hours editing a video, think it was ready, upload it, and then boom! Barely any views at all.

So I started building a tool to help me out with it.

It’s a pre-upload video review tool that looks for things like:

• First 3s Hooks (Visual, sound and the catchy text).
• Weak opening.
• Slow setup.
• Late payoffs.
• Open loops.

The goal isn’t to predict views or promise virality. I just want to help creators catch obvious edit problems before publishing.

I’m still building it and would really appreciate honest feedback. What features would you actually want in a tool like this?

Would you care about transcript feedback, thumbnail/title suggestions, pacing graphs, retention predictions, A/B hook comparisons, or something completely different?

What would make you use it regularly, and what would make you ignore it?

PS: I'm not here to promote my tool, I just want honest, brutal feedback to improve my tool. If you're really interested, it's in a early access waitlist. DM me if you want it.

If GPT-5.6 Sol is burning through your Codex usage too quickly, reduce unnecessary context and subagent overhead with these changes.

1. Lower the context window and compact earlier

Add this to your Codex config.toml:

model_context_window = 272000
model_auto_compact_token_limit = 233000

This prevents Codex from carrying an unnecessarily large active context for too long.

2. Restrict unnecessary subagent usage

Add this to your AGENTS.md:

Use subagents only when they are likely to save tokens or improve the result.

For simple tasks, use non-forked subagents with a lower reasoning level where appropriate.

3. Enable the newer multi-agent configuration

Add this to config.toml:

[features.multi_agent_v2]
hide_spawn_agent_metadata = false
tool_namespace = "agents"

4. Prevent subagents from inheriting the full conversation

Add this to your AGENTS.md:

When spawning subagents, use fork_turns="none" unless the parent conversation context is genuinely required.

Forked subagents can inherit a large amount of existing context, increasing token usage before they even begin the assigned task.

Combined Codex prompt

Update my Codex configuration to reduce unnecessary GPT-5.6 Sol usage.

Make these changes:

1. Set:
   model_context_window = 272000
   model_auto_compact_token_limit = 233000

2. Add:

   [features.multi_agent_v2]
   hide_spawn_agent_metadata = false
   tool_namespace = "agents"

3. Update AGENTS.md so that:
   - subagents are used only when they save tokens or improve the result;
   - simple tasks use non-forked, lower-reasoning subagents where appropriate;
   - subagents use fork_turns="none" unless inheriting the parent context is necessary.

Preserve all unrelated settings and validate the final TOML syntax.

These changes reduce:

• oversized active context;
• delayed compaction;
• unnecessary subagent spawning;
• duplicated context across agents.

Lmk if these work.

PS: Used AI to structure and rewrite the body of the post.

https://preview.redd.it/79gwpptqrlch1.png?width=927&format=png&auto=webp&s=bd0ac926e7e2ac4125740c605bf2340bb038f343

As you can see in the image, I asked a simple task on how to install remotion onto Antigravity for MCP access, but then it answered for something that happened over 10 message back, is this a new bug?

PS: This on web chat.

As the title, anyone has an idea of the rough time 5.6 would come out? Like 12:00am PT or later?

I think I’m affected by the GPT-5.5/Codex 516 reasoning_output_tokens issue from this thread

https://www.reddit.com/r/codex/comments/1unetk4/are_you_on_the_pro_plan_do_you_use_highxhigh_a/

The fix that worked for me is related to this “do thought experiments” prompt idea

https://www.reddit.com/r/codex/comments/1umk63l/100_success_when_debugging/

The problem

With the normal candy-puzzle eval, GPT-5.5 Codex gave mixed results. Some runs used thousands of reasoning tokens and got the right answer, but some fell into the exact 516 cluster and gave wrong/unclear answers.

Question:

Do not use external tools.
A black bag contains candies with counts:
round apple 7, round peach 9, round watermelon 8;
star apple 7, star peach 6, star watermelon 4.
Shape is distinguishable by touch before drawing; flavor is not.
What is the minimum number of candies to draw to guarantee having apple and peach candies of different shapes, i.e. round apple + star peach or round peach + star apple?
Give reasoning and final number.

Example mixed result:

Run  Answer        ReasoningOutputTokens  Cluster
1    contains_29   516                    BAD_CLUSTER_516
2    contains_21   8286                   not_clustered
3    manual_check  516                    BAD_CLUSTER_516
4    contains_21   13466                  not_clustered
5    manual_check  516                    BAD_CLUSTER_516

So it wasn’t “always dumb.” It looked like Codex sometimes entered a shallow direct-answer path at exactly 516, and other times entered a proper long-reasoning path.

First thing to try

Put this at the top of your Codex prompt:

Before solving or editing, emit one short commentary update stating the exact reasoning/root-cause check you are doing.

Do thought experiments before making changes.
Use them to test competing explanations, edge cases, failure modes, and whether the apparent fix would actually solve the root cause.
Do not stop at the first plausible explanation.

Do not stop after a superficial answer. Validate the result with evidence, edge cases, and tests before finalizing.

For me, this forced Codex into the proper reasoning path.

After using that prompt, I ran a 10-shot test and got:

Run  Answer  Correct  ReasoningOutputTokens  Cluster
1    21      True     6214                   not_clustered
2    21      True     7768                   not_clustered
3    21      True     5696                   not_clustered
4    21      True     7768                   not_clustered
5    21      True     8804                   not_clustered
6    21      True     7768                   not_clustered
7    21      True     8271                   not_clustered
8    21      True     6732                   not_clustered
9    21      True     7768                   not_clustered
10   21      True     9840                   not_clustered

Summary:

Total runs: 10
Correct runs: 10
Bad cluster runs: 0
Wrong + bad cluster runs: 0
Verdict: PASSED forced-good-path 10-run test

If that still does not work

The first thing I tried was removing the ## Intermediary updates section from the copied model instructions. By itself, that did not fully fix it for me. I still got mixed responses.

But if the prompt header above does not work for you, then try both together:

1. Remove the ## Intermediary updates section from your copied model instructions.
2. Keep using the forced commentary + thought-experiments prompt header.
3. Use xhigh.
4. Reject/rerun hard-task outputs that land on 516, 1034, or 1552 reasoning tokens.

My current workaround:

Use xhigh.
Force one upfront commentary/root-cause checkpoint.
Add “do thought experiments before changes.”
Reject/rerun outputs with reasoning_output_tokens = 516 / 1034 / 1552 on hard tasks.

I’m not claiming this proves the root cause, but the difference was very clear for me:

Before: mixed/wrong answers, repeated 516 clusters
After: 10/10 correct, 0 bad clusters, thousands of reasoning tokens

Can others test this? Especially people using GPT-5.5 Codex with high/xhigh.

PS: I used AI to rewrite the body and structure.

https://preview.redd.it/mylccakpud8h1.png?width=458&format=png&auto=webp&s=b6a6a1b15a384384cf3ede68cc4e1d6b153809a5

I'm from India and I'm trying to upgrade my plus plan to the Pro 5x plan, but I'm getting this issue non stop, I've tried different payment options, different cards, all of them go to payment gateway, I enter the OTP and it's done. But in the end this pops up. What do I do now? Get Pro on a different account? Cancel the plus? Please help me out!

PS: International transactions were on at the time of payment.

A lot of Shorts stuck at 200 views seem to have the same issue

People get stuck at 200, 500, or 1,000 views.

It's not always the video that's the problem.
It's not always the idea that's bad.
It's not always the editing that's poor.
But often, the start is unclear.

The viewer needs to understand quickly: what is this video about, why should I care, and what's the payoff?

If that's not clear, people will swipe away. Then the platform has no reason to keep pushing the video.
A video can look clean and well-produced, but still lose people due to one small weak moment, such as a slow first frame, too much setup, text appearing late, no movement at the start, or the best part coming after 5-7 seconds, with an intro before the value is delivered.

When a video gets stuck at a low view count, I don’t think the answer is always “bad video” or “bad algorithm.”
Sometimes it's just one weak second near the start that's causing the issue.

If anyone wants, drop your Short below and I’ll try to point out where I think viewers might be leaving and what I’d change in the edit to improve it.

One thing I keep noticing with TikToks stuck at 200–500 views:

The video is not always bad.
Sometimes the first few seconds just do not give people a reason to stay.

Common weak points:

• slow first frame
• too much setup
• payoff comes too late
• text appears late
• no movement early
• hook explains instead of showing

I’ve been studying this problem and I’m building a small tool around it, but I don’t want this post to be an ad.

If anyone wants, drop your TikTok below and I’ll give you exact details where I think viewers might be leaving, plus what I’d change before reposting.

One thing I keep noticing with TikToks stuck at 200–500 views:

The video is not always bad.
Sometimes the first few seconds just do not give people a reason to stay.

Common weak points:

• slow first frame
• too much setup
• payoff comes too late
• text appears late
• no movement early
• hook explains instead of showing

I’m building ViralJury around this problem.

Right now it is waitlist-only, but if you join now, you’ll be among the first creators to get access when early testing opens.

It is not a “go viral guaranteed” tool. It is a pre-upload check to help find the weak second before posting.

Join here:
https://viraljury.net/

Also, drop your TikTok below if you want. I’ll try to point out where viewers might be leaving.

A lot of TikToks do not get stuck because the whole video is bad.

Sometimes the idea is good, the edit is clean, but the first few seconds are unclear. If people swipe early, TikTok has no reason to keep pushing it.

Common issues:

• slow first frame
• too much setup
• payoff comes too late
• text appears late
• no movement at the start
• hook explains instead of showing

I’m building ViralJury around this problem.

Right now it is waitlist-only, but if you join now, you’ll be among the first creators to get access when early testing opens.

No “go viral guaranteed” nonsense. Just a pre-upload check.

Join here:
https://viraljury.net/

Drop your TikTok below too. I’ll try to point out where viewers might be leaving.

People get stuck at 200, 500, or 1,000 views.

It's not always the video that's the problem.
It's not always the idea that's bad.
It's not always the editing that's poor.
But often, the start is unclear.

The viewer needs to understand quickly: what is this video about, why should I care, and what's the payoff?

If that's not clear, people will swipe away.
Then the platform has no reason to keep pushing the video.
A video can look clean and well-produced, but still lose people due to one small weak moment, such as a slow first frame, too much setup, text appearing late, no movement at the start, or the best part coming after 5-7 seconds, with an intro before the value is delivered.

When a video gets stuck at a low view count, I don’t think the answer is always “bad video” or “bad algorithm.”
Sometimes it's just one weak second near the start that's causing the issue.

If anyone wants, drop your Short below and I’ll try to point out where I think viewers might be leaving and what I’d change in the edit to improve it.

Past 2 weeks were great with codex limits, it was generous for a plus plan. But the past 2-3 days limits have gotten so much worse. I gave codex 5.5 high a single prompt to do and entire 5h got reduced FROM 100% to 0%

I was planning to buy 100$ plan, now I wonder if anyone on the 100$ plan face these issues, much help required

https://preview.redd.it/fq53njm27y7h1.png?width=783&format=png&auto=webp&s=f1e6c078ac8fdc59467ef0f455b5845b341112f6

https://preview.redd.it/78qhh1v27y7h1.png?width=266&format=png&auto=webp&s=0c75107a23b0d5e24dd44a507509c76a30b5cc39