[FEATURE] Make VS Code plugin respect thinking verb overrides in settings.json

Resolved 💬 2 comments Opened May 6, 2026 by Haighstrom Closed May 6, 2026

Preflight Checklist

  • [x] I have searched existing requests and this feature hasn't been requested yet
  • [x] This is a single feature request (not multiple features)

Problem Statement

The thinkingVerbs configuration in ~/.claude/settings.json is silently ignored by the VS Code extension. The setting is documented and works correctly in the Claude Code CLI, but has no effect when using the VS Code plugin.

Current behaviour

When the following is present in ~/.claude/settings.json:

"thinkingVerbs": {
"format": "{}… ",
"verbs": ["Working"]
}
The CLI correctly substitutes these verbs into its thinking indicator. The VS Code extension ignores the configuration entirely and displays its own hardcoded thinking indicator, with no way to customise it.

Why this matters

The settings.json file is the established, cross-client configuration mechanism for Claude Code. Users who work across both the CLI and the VS Code extension reasonably expect settings defined there to have consistent effect in both clients. The current behaviour creates a silent inconsistency: the setting appears to apply (no error, no warning) but has no effect, which makes it hard to diagnose.

Environment

Client: VS Code extension
Platform: Windows 11
settings.json location: ~/.claude/settings.json

Proposed Solution

Expected behaviour

The VS Code extension reads thinkingVerbs from settings.json (at both user and project level, following the same precedence rules as other settings) and uses the configured verbs and format string when displaying its thinking indicator.

Alternative Solutions

Probably this should be part of a wider effort to ensure the VS Code extension uses the settings.json file in general.

Priority

Low - Nice to have

Feature Category

CLI commands and flags

Use Case Example

_No response_

Additional Context

_No response_

View original on GitHub ↗

This issue has 2 comments on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗