本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

cost-aware-llm-pipeline

Cost optimization patterns for LLM API usage — model routing by task complexity, budget tracking, retry logic, and prompt caching.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md5.6 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

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-4-6"
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 (2025-2026)

ModelInput ($/1M tokens)Output ($/1M tokens)Relative Cost
Haiku 4.5$0.80$4.001x
Sonnet 4.6$3.00$15.00~4x
Opus 4.5$15.00$75.00~19x

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

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Design, implement, and audit inclusive digital products using WCAG 2.2 Level AA standards. Use this skill to generate semantic ARIA for Web and accessibility traits for Web and Native platforms (iOS/Android).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

Whole site or product — a full web accessibility (a11y) audit against WCAG 2.2, following the WCAG-EM methodology. Defines scope, samples representative pages and flows, runs the automated tier (`accessibility-scan`) and the hands-on manual tier (`accessibility-inspect`), and produces one conformance report. Grades each finding by severity and evidence basis, and states per-criterion conformance as pass, fail, or undetermined (needs a human). Use it for 'audit my site for accessibility', 'is this product accessible', 'a11y audit', 'WCAG or Section 508 conformance report', or any multi-page assessment. Assesses; does not fix (use `accessibility-fix`) or diff (use `accessibility-diff`). For a single page use `accessibility-scan`; for hands-on keyboard and screen-reader checks use `accessibility-inspect`.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

Regression check — diff a live page's web accessibility (a11y) violations against a baseline. By default it compares your uncommitted changes (stash-based); pass `--branch [<name>]` to compare against a branch. Reports the new WCAG violations introduced, the ones fixed, and the count of pre-existing ones. Use it for 'did my change break accessibility', 'what a11y issues did this PR add', or as a CI gate. For a full scan of one page use `accessibility-scan`; for a whole site use `accessibility-audit`.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

Remediation only — repair web accessibility (a11y) violations against WCAG 2.2 with a baseline, edit, and verify loop. Takes a target (URL, files, directory) or a findings worklist from `accessibility-scan`/`accessibility-inspect`/`accessibility-audit`, applies mechanical fixes as given, leaves TODOs for visual or contextual judgment, and verifies by re-running the baseline check. It only fixes. To find issues use `accessibility-scan` (one page, automated), `accessibility-inspect` (one page, manual), or `accessibility-audit` (whole site, WCAG-EM); to check for regressions use `accessibility-diff`. Use it for 'fix the a11y issues in X', 'make this accessible', 'add missing alt text and labels', 'apply these accessibility fixes', 'remediate these violations'.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

One page, hands-on manual tier — drive a live page through the web accessibility (a11y) checks a rule engine can't decide: keyboard operation and focus order, screen-reader names, roles and states from the accessibility tree, reflow and zoom, reduced motion, form errors, and target size. Grades each finding by evidence basis (verified / confirm-with-a-human / human-required) and severity, and closes every criterion in a ledger: verified, flagged, not exercised, or N/A. Locates and assesses; does not fix (use `accessibility-fix`). Use it for keyboard testing, focus-order checks, screen-reader or a11y-tree review, reflow and zoom at 200%, or 'is this operable, not just lint-clean'. The automated tier is `accessibility-scan`; `accessibility-audit` runs both across a sampled site.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

One page, automated tier — run the web accessibility (a11y) rule engine against a live page and locate every violation it can detect mechanically. Pass a URL, a config target name (e.g. `accesslint:accessibility-scan dev`), or nothing to use the default target from `accesslint.config.json`. Ensures a debuggable Chrome, runs the @accesslint/core engine over CDP, and returns a worklist of live-DOM WCAG 2.2 violations, each grounded to its DOM selector and source `file:line`. Locates; doesn't edit. Use it for 'is this page accessible', 'check a11y on this URL', 'find contrast and alt-text issues', or to verify a UI change. For hands-on keyboard and screen-reader checks use `accessibility-inspect`; for a whole site or product use `accessibility-audit`; to diff against uncommitted changes or a branch use `accessibility-diff`.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

tensology のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する