Anthropic · Claude Fable 5 · June 2026

Claude Fable 5 — built for ultra-long, complex autonomous work

  • Million-token context
  • Extra-long single replies
  • Longest autonomous-run posture
  • Safety-classifier fallback
Claude Fable 5

What is Claude Fable 5?

Claude Fable 5 is Anthropic’s Mythos-class public release from June 2026. It’s built for hours-long—or longer—autonomous knowledge work and coding: Anthropic says capability exceeds any previously public Claude. Some requests related to cybersecurity, biochemistry, or distillation may be handed to Claude Opus 4.8 by a safety classifier, with the user informed; most sessions still run fully on Fable 5. Everyday engineering primary more often stays on Claude Opus 5. On iMini Agent, pick Claude Fable 5 to use it.

Vendor
Anthropic
Released
June 2026
Context
1M tokens
Max output
128K tokens
Deep thinking
Deeper on hard jobs
Best as
Ultra-long, ultra-hard autonomous work

What’s new versus Claude Opus 4.8

Autonomy length, cross-domain ceiling, and long-context focus—what to check before stepping up to Fable.

Longer autonomous runs

Anthropic emphasizes the longest autonomous-work posture among Claude releases so far; the more complex and longer the chain, the clearer the advantage over Opus 4.8 usually becomes.

Cross-domain ceiling capability

Official benchmarks lift across software engineering, knowledge work, vision, and research—suited to high single-shot investment and async wait times.

More focused under long context

Million-token materials and long threads hold goals more easily; persistent file-memory style capabilities help long jobs.

Fewer steps at matched quality

Customer feedback and coding evals show reaching similar quality often needs fewer turns and steps—suited to heavy async workloads.

Official evaluations and safety audits

Results Anthropic published in the Claude Fable 5 / Mythos 5 launch materials. Most benchmark gaps between the two models are within 1–3 points; tables take the higher score. Starred cybersecurity and biology benches are safety-intercepted, so Fable 5 tracks closer to Claude Opus 4.8 there.

Claude Fable 5 / Mythos 5 vs Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, and Gemini 3.1 Pro evaluation table
Multi-task overview. SWE-Bench Pro 80.3%, Terminal-Bench 2.1 88.0%, GDPval-AA 1932, OSWorld-Verified 85.0%—all above Claude Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, and Gemini 3.1 Pro. Note the method note: Fable 5 and Mythos 5 usually differ by 1–3 points; this table takes the higher score.
Agent coding evals: SWE-Bench Pro and FrontierCode comparison
Two agent-coding measures: SWE-Bench Pro 80.3%, about 11 points above Claude Opus 4.8 (69.2%); FrontierCode 29.3%, more than double Opus 4.8 (13.4%). FrontierCode is built from real frontier engineering tasks—stronger evidence for long-horizon coding and tool collaboration.
Viral capsid experimental-property prediction: unsupervised AAV packaging classification
Viral capsid experimental-property prediction (unsupervised AAV packaging classification, reasoning only). Claude Mythos 5 median ~0.85, clearly above a protein-language-model baseline of 0.70 and Claude Opus 4.8—showing stable reasoning on scientific tasks without labeled templates.
Cyber adversarial robustness: offensive-task completion under red-team attack
Cyber adversarial robustness: under automated red-teaming, lower success at completing offensive cyber tasks is better. Claude Fable 5 is 5.4%, far below Claude Opus 4.8 at 56.6%—key safety evidence for Fable 5’s deployable posture.
Offensive cyber evals: Firefox, OSS-Fuzz, CyberGym, CyScenarioBench
Four offensive cyber benches. Claude Fable scores 0.0% on Firefox, OSS-Fuzz, CyberGym, and CyScenarioBench; on-screen Claude Mythos 5 is clearly higher. Anthropic uses the contrast to show Fable 5 keeps high capability while pressing offensive cyber capability near zero.
Behavioral alignment audit: Claude Mythos 5 misalignment score
Behavioral alignment audit—lower is better. Claude Mythos 5 scores 2.06, near Claude Opus 4.8 at 2.05 and clearly below Claude Sonnet 4.6 at 2.81; read with capability scores when judging production primary fit.

Three common workflows

Claude Fable 5 fits high failure cost, async wait, and very long chains.

Ultra-long coding & repo-scale changes

For migrations, refactors, and multi-day fixes across many files. Write success criteria clearly and accept longer runtimes.

Deep knowledge work & research synthesis

For long-material reasoning, chart reading, and multi-source conclusions. Focus on checkable evidence and deliverable conclusions.

Vision-driven rebuilds & analysis

For understanding UIs from screenshots, rebuilding page structure, or reading scientific figures. Keep images and long instructions in one thread.

How to choose vs Claude Opus 5 and Claude Sonnet 5

All three are current Claude models. The differences are ceiling capability, everyday primary cost, and safety-fallback experience.

DimensionClaude Fable 5Claude Opus 5Claude Sonnet 5
Context1M tokens1M tokens1M tokens
ReasoningDeeper on hard jobs, ceiling postureDeep thinking built in, tunableTunable depth tiers
Coding / agentsUltra-long, ultra-hard autonomous codingEveryday flagship primary for long-horizon codingScaled agents & everyday coding
Long tool runsLongest autonomous-run postureStronger goal holding and completionBetter as a high-frequency primary
Speed postureCeiling completion quality firstQuality and stability in balanceThroughput first
Prefer whenSingle ultra-long, ultra-hard, async jobsNew long-horizon coding and knowledge workNew high-frequency agent primary

Using Claude Fable 5 on iMini

Free quota, safety fallback, key specs, and how it differs from Opus and Sonnet.

Use Claude Fable 5 free on iMini Agent

Million-token context for ultra-long autonomous coding and knowledge work.

Open Claude Fable 5

No Anthropic API key required.