[The latest in 2026]How to Bypass Antigravity Rate Limits: Why Gemini 3 Pro Is the Best Alternative to Opus for Vibe Coding

What You Will Learn

• The Bottom Line: Using Claude Opus 4.5 on Antigravity is currently risky due to "Weekly Limits" and a suspected, unpublished "Monthly Limit." If you prioritize cost, the solution is Gemini 3 Pro (High). If you prioritize quality and stability, migrating to Claude Code is the answer.
• Target Audience: Google AI Pro Plan subscribers, Vibe Coding practitioners, and engineers concerned with the Return on Investment (ROI) of their development environment.
• Current Status: As of January 28, 2026, users are experiencing automatic reset date extensions under the vague definition of "generous limits."
• The Future: The time has come to decide: take Google's "overwhelming affordability" or Anthropic's "expensive stability."

Entering 2026, an AI-native development environment has become a necessity—something we take for granted. However, for the past few days, a single, despair-inducing screen display has turned the mood into something resembling a funeral.

"Rate limit exceeded. Resets in 112 hours."

If you are currently opening Google Antigravity, trying to write code with your beloved Claude Opus 4.5, and facing this screen, this article is for you. The optimistic "just wait a bit and it will fix itself" articles from a month or two ago are no longer relevant.

This is a breakdown of the "Antigravity Pro Plan Rate Limit Crisis" happening right now, on January 28, 2026. I am writing this with anger, but also with a "sharp hypothesis" about the reality of the situation and the practical measures we must take.

The Honeymoon Phase: Google Antigravity and "Vibe Coding"

Before we dive into the main issue, let's share the context. Why were we so enthusiastic about Antigravity? Antigravity is Google's next-generation Integrated Development Environment (IDE), a tool for cloud-based pair programming with AI. Compared to competitors like "Cursor" or "Claude Code," the user experience is on par, but the Google AI Pro Plan (Annual Half-Price Sale) offered insanely high cost-performance that was simply too attractive to ignore.

We established a method called "Vibe Coding"—creating prototypes at lightning speed by conveying "vibes" and general intent to the AI rather than detailed specifications. At the core of this was the third-party model available within Antigravity: Claude Opus 4.5. Its reasoning capabilities and code generation accuracy were overwhelming—truly "magic."

But one day, the magic suddenly broke.

The Nightmare Begins: Sudden Weekly Limits

The anomaly started a few days ago. I asked Claude Opus 4.5 to add features to an iOS app as usual, and I was limited in less than an hour. "Well, I'll just take a break for a few hours," I thought. But what I was presented with was a hopeless wait time of over 100 hours.

The Algorithm Changed

Upon investigation, the official Antigravity X account had made a quiet but cruel announcement.

Google Antigravity (2026-01-9): As we balance giving the best possible quotas and maintaining fairness between users, especially under incredible demand, we will be establishing generous weekly limits for all models. This will only affect a minority of Google AI Pro users. These limits do not apply to Google AI Ultra, which continues to be the best plan for power developers!https://x.com/antigravity/status/2009519871332372651?s=46

Since then, the behavior has effectively changed to:

1. Short-term Limit: Intensive use for about 50 minutes (continuous Vibe Coding prompts).
2. Mid-term Lock: A lock of about 5 hours.
3. Weekly Limit: After repeating the above 2-3 times, you hit the "Weekly Limit" and get locked out for 100-150 hours.

They claim this affects "only a minority," but if you continue a rally for app debugging, anyone can easily reach this line.

[Insight] Not a Bug? Suspected "Monthly Hard Limit" Silent Implementation

Here is the most baffling fact I experienced, and the most important truth I want to convey in this article.

On my Antigravity display, the limit reset countdown was supposed to hit zero on January 25, 2026. I counted down the days and pushed back my iOS app development schedule to wait for it.

However, on the night of January 25th, I still couldn't use Opus 4.5. Even worse, the expected reset date had automatically changed to "February 1st."

I doubted my eyes for a moment. "It didn't recover? The limit extended even though I haven't touched it?" On SNS, voices crying "It's a bug" or "Display error" are scattered about. However, analyzing the situation calmly, one hypothesis emerges.

Is this not a bug, but a "Monthly Hard Limit" that was silently implemented?

In other words, independent of the Weekly Limits, there may be a cap like "Total Token Allowance per Month," and because I used up my January quota, I was forcibly locked until the next month (February 1st). Frighteningly, the official documentation makes absolutely no mention of such a monthly limit. If this is a specification, our development is being halted by "hidden parameters" not shown in the UI. "Do not trust the reset time displayed by Antigravity."This is the current conclusion.

Why Has It Become So Strict?

The cause is obvious. It sold too well.

1. Side Effects of the Half-Price Annual Sale

The "Annual Contract Half-Price Campaign" for the Google AI Pro Plan, which ran from the end of last year until mid-January, was too attractive. This likely caused a massive influx of users, pushing the infrastructure costs—especially for using external APIs like Anthropic's models—far beyond Google's projections.

2. Server Resource Depletion

The impact is also visible in Gemini Advanced. Especially when trying to use the "Deep Research" feature, the following error occurs frequently during prime time (7 PM to 2 AM):

System Error: The server has reached its processing capacity limit. Please try again later.

This is evidence that Google's entire AI infrastructure is screaming.

Measures I Tried and Their Results

To escape this limit hell, I tried every possible "struggle."

△ Deleting Conversations (Reducing Context)

Hypothesis: "If I delete past conversation history, input tokens will decrease, and I won't hit the limit as easily." Conclusion: "Consumption per turn decreases, but it's not a fundamental solution." Deleting history does reduce the context sent in the next request. However, even if you diligently delete history, if you run heavy inferences with Opus 4.5 a few times, you get locked out immediately. It's a drop in the bucket.

× Saving with Fast Mode (Sonnet 4.5 / Gemini Flash)

I tried using lightweight models instead of Opus. This was the biggest trap. When throwing complex iOS SwiftUI code at them, lightweight models generate code with subtle bugs or use outdated APIs. I had to go back and forth many times to fix them, resulting in wasting more tokens than using Opus once, and hitting the limit immediately.

× Full Migration to Local LLM

This seemed ideal. "If there are limits, why not run it on my own Mac mini?" But reality wasn't so sweet. Compared to cloud LLMs, the balance of cost and effort is too poor for the following reasons:

• The Performance & Cost Wall: To run a model with reasoning capabilities comparable to Claude Opus 4.5 locally, you need a workstation with memory costing millions of yen. On a personal Mac mini M4, you can only run small, quantized models, which cannot be a partner for complex app development.
• Mismatch of Purpose: Companies introduce Local LLMs mainly for "Compliance" (preventing data leakage), not cost reduction. They use them for financial/medical data or confidential projects where sending code to an external API is a risk. For an individual developer to introduce it just because "Antigravity's limits are annoying," the ROI (Return on Investment) is terrible.

△ Implementing Automated Tests

The method of having AI write strict test code before writing the actual code. This was surprisingly fun. Development proceeded like solving a puzzle, and rework decreased. However, it couldn't be used in every situation, and it didn't result in a significant reduction of tokens.

Realistic Solution 1: The Answer Was Right Under Our Noses. "Gemini 3 Pro"

In the despair of not being able to use Opus 4.5, I reluctantly changed the Antigravity standard model setting to "Gemini 3 Pro (High)" and switched the mode to "Planning."

Honestly, I didn't expect much. "Google's model will surely be inferior to Opus," I thought. But using it, I realized a "high level of practicality" that was completely different from my initial impression.

Planning Mode is Excellent

The current Gemini 3 Pro "Planning Mode" doesn't answer immediately when you throw a prompt. Instead, it enters a "Thinking..." status and spends seconds to tens of seconds on the reasoning process (Chain of Thought). This pause has dramatically reduced the "jumping to conclusions" and "hallucinations" that were once Gemini's weaknesses.

• Logical Construction: It outputs logical code that comes close to Opus 4.5 in complex SwiftUI View hierarchies and data flow design.
• Context Understanding: Even with long chat histories, thanks to Planning Mode, it answers without losing sight of the context.

Cost is the Ultimate Feature

And the biggest benefit is the "Overwhelming Cost Performance."

• Claude Opus 4.5: Hits limits immediately.
• Gemini 3 Pro: Zero additional cost. Almost no limits (unless doing parallel development).

We have already paid for the Google AI Pro Plan. Within that plan, we can use a model of this performance without limits. No extra charges. No matter how much you use, no additional bill comes.

Disadvantage: Inferiority Complex to Opus

While logical construction has improved significantly with Planning Mode, Opus still wins when generating difficult code for critical moments. You need to compromise, accepting that "it's not the highest grade, but it's delicious enough."

Realistic Solution 2: If Quality is Priority, Move to "Claude Code"

If you feel "I cannot compromise on my tools" or "Opus 4.5 quality is essential," you should consider leaving the Google ecosystem and migrating to Anthropic's native "Claude Code." You could migrate to the Google AI Ultra plan to relax limits, but at ¥36,400 ($249.99)/month, it is cheaper to contract directly with the source.

Pro: Official Stability

Claude Code is Anthropic's native tool, allowing you to fully utilize Opus 4.5's performance. The risk of being swayed by opaque limit changes like Antigravity's is reduced.

Con: Sky-High Costs

The problem is the price.

• Claude Code Pro Plan: $20/month (approx. ¥3,000)
• Claude Code Max 5x Plan: $100/month (approx. ¥15,000)
• Claude Code Max 20x Plan: $200/month (approx. ¥30,000)
  • Source: Pricing | Claude Code: https://www.anthropic.com/pricing

Claude Code has limits as well. For serious development, the $20 Pro Plan is too strict, and to use it comfortably, you must be prepared to spend on the Max 5x ($100/mo) or Max 20x ($200/mo) tiers. Compared to Google's "all-in-one for ~$20 (or less with the sale)," the cost jumps 5 to 10 times.

Conclusion: Weighing Risk vs. Cost

As of January 28, 2026, relying on Claude Opus 4.5 as a Google AI Pro Plan user in Antigravity poses a serious risk to your development schedule. The sudden Weekly Limits and the likely intended "Monthly Limit" are out of our control.

However, there is no need to stop development. We have two choices.

1. Fight with Gemini 3 Pro (High) + Planning Mode: Use "loose limits" and "low cost" as weapons, covering the slight performance gap with ingenuity. This is the optimal solution for personal development and prototyping.
2. Pay for Claude Code: Acknowledge that Google's "cheapness" comes with the risk of "limits," and solve it with money. This is the choice for client work with deadlines or high-difficulty development.

I have chosen the path of mastering Gemini 3 Pro for now. At first, you might feel something is missing. But the psychological safety of "no extra costs" and "no fear of limits" is an essential element for writing good code.

So, stop waiting for the limit to lift, and switch your editor settings to "Gemini." The unfinished code is waiting for you.