Claude: show weekly usage breakdown by product

[floriankilian]

The usage settings page on claude.ai shows how this week's usage splits across products (Claude Code / Chats / Cowork / Other). In my case Cowork is 92 %. CodexBar only shows the weekly total, so I can't see which product is using up the limit.

The data is already in the web usage response CodexBar fetches (/api/organizations/{orgId}/usage), in the seven_day_breakdown field, which is currently ignored:

"seven_day_breakdown": {
  "as_of": "2026-09-29T17:18:59Z",
  "window_started_at": "2026-09-23T05:00:00Z",
  "rows": [
    { "key": "claude_code", "display_name": "Claude Code", "percent": 0 },
    { "key": "chat", "display_name": "Chats", "percent": 8 },
    { "key": "cowork", "display_name": "Cowork", "percent": 92 },
    { "key": "other", "display_name": "Other", "percent": 0 }
  ]
}

It would be great to show this split under the Claude weekly bar, similar to the Grok product breakdown (#3900).

Not the same as #2378, which is about Cowork usage not counting toward spend.

[clawsweeper]

Codex review: this still needs some work. Reviewed September 29, 2026, 1:27 PM ET / 17:27 UTC.

Summary
Current main still drops Claude’s weekly product breakdown. The request is distinct from the Cowork spend report, and the Grok example does not implement Claude’s data path. It merits a product presentation decision before implementation.

Reproducibility: not applicable. as a bug reproduction: this requests a new display capability. The supplied response sample, screenshot, and current parser show the requested data and its present omission.

Maintainer decision needed

Question	Recommendation
Should Claude web usage show the reported product shares as detail rows beneath the weekly quota bar?	Show composition rows: Use the existing detail-section UI and label the values as shares of weekly usage, without implying separate product quotas.

Why: This adds a new user-facing interpretation of Claude’s web response; VISION.md asks for sign-off on new features.

Next step
The request is bounded, but the product-share presentation needs the sign-off required for new features.

Review details

Best possible solution:

Carry valid, same-response product shares through the Claude web snapshot into existing provider detail rows, preserving one weekly quota bar and leaving other Claude sources unchanged when they lack the breakdown.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Not applicable as a bug reproduction: this requests a new display capability. The supplied response sample, screenshot, and current parser show the requested data and its present omission.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes, subject to product sign-off: existing provider detail rows are a narrow fit for composition percentages, provided they are not presented as independent quota limits.

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning medium; reviewed against 25bba9b7fd9c.

Label changes

Label changes:

• add P2: The missing breakdown limits insight into a weekly allowance but does not block usage monitoring.
• add impact:ux-friction: Users must consult Claude’s settings page to learn which product consumed their weekly usage.
• add issue-rating: 🌊 off-meta tidepool: Current issue advisory state selects this label.
• add clawsweeper:no-new-fix-pr: Current issue advisory state selects this label.
• add clawsweeper:needs-maintainer-review: Current issue advisory state selects this label.
• add clawsweeper:needs-product-decision: Current issue advisory state selects this label.

Label justifications:

• P2: The missing breakdown limits insight into a weekly allowance but does not block usage monitoring.
• impact:ux-friction: Users must consult Claude’s settings page to learn which product consumed their weekly usage.

Evidence reviewed

What I checked:

• Current parser: The parser reads seven_day utilization and reset time, then proceeds to other fields without reading seven_day_breakdown. (Sources/CodexBarCore/Providers/Claude/ClaudeWeb/ClaudeWebAPIFetcher.swift:713, 25bba9b7fd9c)
• Snapshot boundary: The web conversion carries the weekly percentage into a rate window but has no product breakdown field to carry onward. (Sources/CodexBarCore/Providers/Claude/ClaudeUsageFetcher.swift:1246, 25bba9b7fd9c)
• Display path: Claude provider details currently contain reset-credit sections; the menu card already renders provider detail sections. (Sources/CodexBarCore/Providers/Claude/ClaudeProviderDescriptor.swift:761, 25bba9b7fd9c)
• Existing presentation pattern: Grok’s documented product breakdown uses text rows beneath one weekly bar, which supplies a relevant presentation pattern but does not cover Claude’s response. (docs/grok.md:243, 25bba9b7fd9c)
• Reporter evidence: The issue supplies a seven_day_breakdown sample and an attached Claude settings screenshot showing Chats at 8% and Cowork at 92%. The locally prepared screenshot was inspected.
• Repository direction: VISION.md supports provider limit information and shared provider-driven UI, while asking for sign-off on new features. (VISION.md:3, 25bba9b7fd9c)

Likely related people:

• Peter Steinberger: Suggested for follow-up; no historical authorship or introduction is verified. (role: unverified routing candidate; confidence: low)
• enieuwy: Suggested for follow-up; no historical authorship or introduction is verified. (role: unverified routing candidate; confidence: low)

How this review workflow works

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.