본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

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.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

원문원문 설명 보기

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

연동 도구Gemini
설치 방법 보기

이럴 때 유용합니다

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

포함된 파일(1)

  • SKILL.md5.7 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

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).

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

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.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Adding newly available router models to chat-ui
  • Writing concise descriptions of model capabilities
  • Updating production and development model entries together
ruvnet/ruflo7.7만2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

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.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Record the reasoning behind adopting a technology
  • Start an ADR for an API or data model change
  • Document an infrastructure decision
ruvnet/ruflo7.7만2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

adr-index

무료

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.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Index ADRs imported from another project
  • Refresh a graph that differs from files on disk
  • Set up ADR tracking in an existing codebase
ruvnet/ruflo7.7만2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

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.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Rebuild the index after deleting an ADR file
  • Remove stale relationships after editing an ADR
  • Reconcile the ADR index on a schedule
ruvnet/ruflo7.7만2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

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.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Check a pull request before merging
  • Review major code changes against agreed design decisions
  • Find references to superseded ADRs
ruvnet/ruflo7.7만2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

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.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Checking ADR integrity after import
  • Blocking CI when ADR issues are found
  • Reviewing ADR data before a release
ruvnet/ruflo7.7만2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

ruvnet의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고