Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

cost-booster-edit

Apply simple code changes across files without calling an LLM, using agent-booster's local transformation engine. The skill checks a confidence score before saving results and records outcomes for cost tracking and future routing decisions.

OriginalShow the original description

Apply a simple code transform via agent-booster's WASM engine — sub-millisecond, deterministic, $0 (no LLM call). Companion to cost-booster-route.

Works withGemini
See how to install

Good for

  • Apply repetitive code changes across many files
  • Remove console statements
  • Run repeatable code transformations in CI
  • Record transformation confidence and execution time

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md5.7 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Cost Booster Edit

Direct wrapper around agent-booster.apply() (npm agent-booster v0.2.x, exposed via agentic-flow/agent-booster). Use when a transform is already classified as Tier 1 eligible — cost-booster-route recommends whether; this skill executes.

When to use

  • Bulk transforms across many files (var → const, add-types, remove-console, add-error-handling, async-await, add-logging).
  • Any simple, structural edit where an LLM would otherwise be called and billed.
  • Inside CI pipelines where determinism + zero-cost matter more than naturalness.

Do NOT use when the transform requires reasoning about intent, naming, or cross-file context — those are Tier 2/3 jobs.

Steps

  1. Take inputs — intent (one of the 6 booster intents) and file path.

  2. Read the source to a variable, derive the intended edit text from the intent (caller supplies).

  3. Invoke — run from anywhere under v3/ so agent-booster resolves:

    node --input-type=module -e '
      import("agent-booster")
        .then(async ({ AgentBooster }) => {
          const booster = new AgentBooster();
          const r = await booster.apply({
            code: process.argv[1],
            edit: process.argv[2],
            language: process.argv[3] || "javascript",
          });
          console.log(JSON.stringify({
            success: r.success, output: r.output, latency: r.latency,
            confidence: r.confidence, strategy: r.strategy,
            tokens: r.tokens,
          }));
        })
        .catch(e => console.log(JSON.stringify({ success: false, error: String(e.message) })));
    ' -- "$CODE" "$EDIT" "$LANG"
    
  4. Check confidence — default threshold is 0.5. Below that, fail closed: do NOT write the file; report and escalate to Tier 2/3.

  5. Write back the output field if success && confidence >= 0.5.

  6. Persist outcome — memory_store --namespace cost-tracking --key "booster-edit-..." --value '{"intent":..., "latency":..., "confidence":..., "strategy":..., "applied":true}'. Feed the routing learner via hooks_model-outcome (use the cost-optimize skill's step 8).

Measured benchmark (2026-05-04, this checkout)

5 representative intents run through AgentBooster.apply():

intentlatency (ms)wall (ms)confidencestrategysuccess
var-to-const550.65fuzzy_replacetrue
add-types110.64fuzzy_replacetrue
remove-console000.70fuzzy_replacetrue
add-error-handling000.85exact_replacetrue
async-await000.85exact_replacetrue

Avg measured latency ≈ 1.2 ms. All 5 above the default 0.5 confidence threshold. See docs/benchmarks/0002-baseline.md for the LLM-baseline comparison.

What's verified locally

ClaimStatus here
100% win rateVerified — 12/12 on bench/booster-corpus.json (see runs/latest.json). Booster AND Gemini 2.0 Flash both score 12/12 — this is a structural-correctness corpus, not a hard adversarial one.
Sub-millisecond latencyVerified — avg 0.67 ms, p50 0 ms, p99 6 ms, max 6 ms.
$0 per editVerified structurally — no API call, no token billing.
Deterministic AST-based mergeVerified — same inputs reproduce the same output and strategy.
Confidence ≥ 0.5 ⇒ correctVerified on this corpus — 12/12 above 0.5 (min 0.551), all correct.
350× speedup vs. LLMVerified — exceeded against every tier: 1000.9× vs Gemini 2.0 Flash, 1838.7× vs Claude Sonnet 4.6, 2634.1× vs Claude Opus 4.7. Run BENCH_LLM_BASELINE=1 BENCH_ANTHROPIC=1 node scripts/bench.mjs to refresh.
Cost saved per editMeasured: $0.000020 vs Gemini, $0.000722 vs Sonnet 4.6, $0.004720 vs Opus 4.7 (the booster side is $0 in all cases).
Win parity with frontier LLMsVerified — Booster, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Sonnet 4.6, Opus 4.7 all scored 12/12 on this corpus. Booster matches LLM accuracy structurally for deterministic transforms.

To extend: add cases to bench/booster-corpus.json, run ( cd v3 && node ../plugins/ruflo-cost-tracker/scripts/bench.mjs ) (or with BENCH_LLM_BASELINE=1), commit runs/latest.json. Smoke step 23 fails the build if win rate drops below 0.80.

Override the LLM model: BENCH_LLM_MODEL='claude-sonnet-4' (when wired against api.anthropic.com) or BENCH_LLM_MODEL='models/gemini-2.5-flash' for a reasoning-model comparison. Pricing flags: BENCH_LLM_PRICE_IN, BENCH_LLM_PRICE_OUT.

fuzzy_replace is best-effort; for production transforms prefer cases that route to exact_replace (≥0.85 confidence in our sample).

Cross-references

ADR-0002 §"Decision 1" (route classifier) and §"Riskiest assumption" (Bash-shelled invocation) · cost-booster-route (classifier-side companion) · agent-booster npm README (3-mode install, MCP / npm / HTTP).

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

Compare models available through the HuggingFace router with chat-ui configuration, research missing models, and write short English descriptions of their architecture and capabilities. Add entries to both production and development configuration files and commit the changes.

  • Adding newly available router models to chat-ui
  • Writing concise descriptions of model capabilities
  • Updating production and development model entries together
ruvnet/ruflo77.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

adr-create

FreeSummary

Create an Architecture Decision Record, a document for recording important design choices, with the next sequential number. It generates a Markdown template, registers the record in AgentDB, and links related decisions found through search.

  • Record the reasoning behind adopting a technology
  • Start an ADR for an API or data model change
  • Document an infrastructure decision
ruvnet/ruflo77.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

adr-index

FreeSummary

Build a searchable index and relationship graph from ADRs, records of architectural decisions. Import two supported document formats, refresh existing metadata without duplicate relationships, and review summaries of statuses, missing references, and inconsistencies.

  • Index ADRs imported from another project
  • Refresh a graph that differs from files on disk
  • Set up ADR tracking in an existing codebase
ruvnet/ruflo77.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

adr-reindex

FreeSummary

Rebuild the index of ADRs, records of architectural decisions, after files or relationship lines are deleted. It clears stored records and relationships, indexes the files still present, and checks that the final record count matches.

  • Rebuild the index after deleting an ADR file
  • Remove stale relationships after editing an ADR
  • Reconcile the ADR index on a schedule
ruvnet/ruflo77.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

adr-review

FreeSummary

Review code changes against accepted Architecture Decision Records, documents that capture agreed design choices. Report violations, outdated references, compliant changes, and areas without ADR coverage, then suggest code fixes or a new decision record where appropriate.

  • Check a pull request before merging
  • Review major code changes against agreed design decisions
  • Find references to superseded ADRs
ruvnet/ruflo77.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

adr-verify

FreeSummary

Check saved architecture decision records (ADRs) for broken references, circular replacement relationships, and inconsistent statuses. Use the results to verify imported records or stop a CI check when selected integrity rules fail.

  • Checking ADR integrity after import
  • Blocking CI when ADR issues are found
  • Reviewing ADR data before a release
ruvnet/ruflo77.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

See all skills by ruvnet

Report a problem with this skill