Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

cost-aware-llm-pipeline

Design an LLM API workflow that controls spending through task-based model selection, budget tracking, selective retries, and caching repeated prompts. Use the examples to route simpler tasks to cheaper models and track cumulative costs.

OriginalShow the original description

Cost optimization patterns for LLM API usage — model routing by task complexity, budget tracking, retry logic, and prompt caching. Use when LLM spend needs to come down, or when routing tasks across model tiers and budgets.

See how to install

Good for

  • Reviewing costs in an LLM API application
  • Choosing models by batch task complexity
  • Tracking cumulative spending against a budget
  • Revisiting retries and repeated prompt handling

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md5.9 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Cost-Aware LLM Pipeline

Patterns for controlling LLM API costs while maintaining quality. Combines model routing, budget tracking, retry logic, and prompt caching into a composable pipeline.

When to Activate

  • Building applications that call LLM APIs (Claude, GPT, etc.)
  • Processing batches of items with varying complexity
  • Need to stay within a budget for API spend
  • Optimizing cost without sacrificing quality on complex tasks

Core Concepts

1. Model Routing by Task Complexity

Automatically select cheaper models for simple tasks, reserving expensive models for complex ones.

MODEL_SONNET = "claude-sonnet-5"
MODEL_HAIKU = "claude-haiku-4-5-20251001"

_SONNET_TEXT_THRESHOLD = 10_000  # chars
_SONNET_ITEM_THRESHOLD = 30     # items

def select_model(
    text_length: int,
    item_count: int,
    force_model: str | None = None,
) -> str:
    """Select model based on task complexity."""
    if force_model is not None:
        return force_model
    if text_length >= _SONNET_TEXT_THRESHOLD or item_count >= _SONNET_ITEM_THRESHOLD:
        return MODEL_SONNET  # Complex task
    return MODEL_HAIKU  # Simple task (3-4x cheaper)

2. Immutable Cost Tracking

Track cumulative spend with frozen dataclasses. Each API call returns a new tracker — never mutates state.

from dataclasses import dataclass

@dataclass(frozen=True, slots=True)
class CostRecord:
    model: str
    input_tokens: int
    output_tokens: int
    cost_usd: float

@dataclass(frozen=True, slots=True)
class CostTracker:
    budget_limit: float = 1.00
    records: tuple[CostRecord, ...] = ()

    def add(self, record: CostRecord) -> "CostTracker":
        """Return new tracker with added record (never mutates self)."""
        return CostTracker(
            budget_limit=self.budget_limit,
            records=(*self.records, record),
        )

    @property
    def total_cost(self) -> float:
        return sum(r.cost_usd for r in self.records)

    @property
    def over_budget(self) -> bool:
        return self.total_cost > self.budget_limit

3. Narrow Retry Logic

Retry only on transient errors. Fail fast on authentication or bad request errors.

from anthropic import (
    APIConnectionError,
    InternalServerError,
    RateLimitError,
)

_RETRYABLE_ERRORS = (APIConnectionError, RateLimitError, InternalServerError)
_MAX_RETRIES = 3

def call_with_retry(func, *, max_retries: int = _MAX_RETRIES):
    """Retry only on transient errors, fail fast on others."""
    for attempt in range(max_retries):
        try:
            return func()
        except _RETRYABLE_ERRORS:
            if attempt == max_retries - 1:
                raise
            time.sleep(2 ** attempt)  # Exponential backoff
    # AuthenticationError, BadRequestError etc. → raise immediately

4. Prompt Caching

Cache long system prompts to avoid resending them on every request.

messages = [
    {
        "role": "user",
        "content": [
            {
                "type": "text",
                "text": system_prompt,
                "cache_control": {"type": "ephemeral"},  # Cache this
            },
            {
                "type": "text",
                "text": user_input,  # Variable part
            },
        ],
    }
]

Composition

Combine all four techniques in a single pipeline function:

def process(text: str, config: Config, tracker: CostTracker) -> tuple[Result, CostTracker]:
    # 1. Route model
    model = select_model(len(text), estimated_items, config.force_model)

    # 2. Check budget
    if tracker.over_budget:
        raise BudgetExceededError(tracker.total_cost, tracker.budget_limit)

    # 3. Call with retry + caching
    response = call_with_retry(lambda: client.messages.create(
        model=model,
        messages=build_cached_messages(system_prompt, text),
    ))

    # 4. Track cost (immutable)
    record = CostRecord(model=model, input_tokens=..., output_tokens=..., cost_usd=...)
    tracker = tracker.add(record)

    return parse_result(response), tracker

Pricing Reference (2026)

ModelInput ($/1M tokens)Output ($/1M tokens)Relative Cost
Haiku 3.5 (legacy)$0.80$4.000.8x
Haiku 4.5$1.00$5.001x
Sonnet 5$2.00$10.002x
Sonnet 4.6$3.00$15.003x
Opus 4.8$5.00$25.005x
Fable 5 / Mythos 5$10.00$50.0010x
Opus 4.0 / 4.1 (legacy)$15.00$75.0015x

Best Practices

  • Start with the cheapest model and only route to expensive models when complexity thresholds are met
  • Set explicit budget limits before processing batches — fail early rather than overspend
  • Log model selection decisions so you can tune thresholds based on real data
  • Use prompt caching for system prompts over 1024 tokens — saves both cost and latency
  • Never retry on authentication or validation errors — only transient failures (network, rate limit, server error)

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

  • Using the most expensive model for all requests regardless of complexity
  • Retrying on all errors (wastes budget on permanent failures)
  • Mutating cost tracking state (makes debugging and auditing difficult)
  • Hardcoding model names throughout the codebase (use constants or config)
  • Ignoring prompt caching for repetitive system prompts

When to Use

  • Any application calling Claude, OpenAI, or similar LLM APIs
  • Batch processing pipelines where cost adds up quickly
  • Multi-model architectures that need intelligent routing
  • Production systems that need budget guardrails

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

accessibility

FreeSummary

Design and audit interfaces for Web, iOS, and Android using WCAG 2.2 accessibility guidance. Check screen-reader labels, keyboard navigation, contrast, and control sizes to identify barriers and guide implementation for people using assistive technology.

  • Adding descriptive labels to icon-only buttons
  • Reviewing keyboard navigation and modal focus
  • Checking contrast and control sizes
affaan-m/ECC283.4KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Investigate unreliable AI agents across 12 layers, including instructions, memory, tool execution, and display. Use code and logs to trace failures, rank findings by severity, and produce an ordered repair plan that prioritizes code changes.

  • Investigating failures that appear only inside an agent application
  • Tracing old conversation content leaking into new sessions
  • Checking skipped or falsely claimed tool execution
affaan-m/ECC283.4KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

agent-eval

FreeSummary

Compare coding agents on tasks from your own codebase. Define success checks, run agents in separate Git working directories, and report pass rates, available API costs, completion time, and consistency across repeated trials.

  • Comparing coding agents on real development tasks
  • Evaluating a new tool or model before adoption
  • Checking performance after agent updates
affaan-m/ECC283.4KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Design and refine an AI agent’s available actions, tool inputs, and result formats. Define recovery steps for errors, manage the information kept in context, and evaluate changes through completion rates, retries, and cost per successful task.

  • Define an AI agent’s tool set and input formats
  • Make tool results and next steps easier to interpret
  • Specify safe retries and stopping conditions
affaan-m/ECC283.4KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Diagnose failed AI agent runs by capturing errors, checking likely causes, and choosing small, reversible recovery actions. The workflow produces a structured report of the failure, recovery steps, and evidence, helping explain repeated retries or stalled progress.

  • Diagnosing repeated tool calls with no progress
  • Investigating quality loss as context grows
  • Checking file paths and environment mismatches
affaan-m/ECC283.4KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Diagnose AI agent runs that fail repeatedly, loop through tools, or lose track of the task. Capture errors and environment details, test a focused recovery action, and produce a report explaining the evidence and outcome.

  • Diagnosing repeated failures in an agent run
  • Investigating loops through the same tool calls
  • Reviewing output degradation as context grows
affaan-m/ECC283.4KUpdated Oct 5, 2026

See all skills by affaan-m

Report a problem with this skill