跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

anth-cost-tuning

Analyze Claude API spending and test cost controls through model selection, caching repeated input, batch processing, and output limits. Track budgets and compare cost, quality, and response time before expanding a proposed change.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

原文查看原文说明

Optimize Anthropic Claude API costs with model routing, prompt caching, batching, and spend monitoring. Use when analyzing Claude API billing, reducing costs, or implementing cost controls and budget alerts. Trigger with phrases like "anthropic cost", "claude billing", "reduce claude spend", "anthropic budget", "claude pricing optimize".

实测评分 未实测

查看安装方法

适用场景

  • Estimate Claude API spending by feature
  • Compare models while checking output quality
  • Evaluate caching and batches for repeated workloads
  • Implement budget alerts and spending limits

包含的文件(1)

  • SKILL.md8.1 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Anthropic Cost Tuning

Overview

Optimize Claude API spend through model routing, prompt caching, the Message Batches API, and real-time cost tracking. The four biggest levers: model selection (4-19x), prompt caching (10x input), batches (2x), and max_tokens discipline.

Pricing Reference (per million tokens)

ModelInputOutputCache ReadCache Write
Claude Haiku$0.80$4.00$0.08$1.00
Claude Sonnet$3.00$15.00$0.30$3.75
Claude Opus$15.00$75.00$1.50$18.75

Message Batches: 50% off all model pricing for async processing.

Cost Calculator

def estimate_cost(
    input_tokens: int,
    output_tokens: int,
    model: str = "claude-sonnet-4-20250514",
    cached_input: int = 0,
    use_batch: bool = False
) -> float:
    pricing = {
        "claude-haiku-4-20250514": {"input": 0.80, "output": 4.00, "cache_read": 0.08},
        "claude-sonnet-4-20250514": {"input": 3.00, "output": 15.00, "cache_read": 0.30},
        "claude-opus-4-20250514": {"input": 15.00, "output": 75.00, "cache_read": 1.50},
    }
    rates = pricing[model]
    uncached_input = input_tokens - cached_input

    cost = (
        uncached_input * rates["input"] +
        cached_input * rates["cache_read"] +
        output_tokens * rates["output"]
    ) / 1_000_000

    if use_batch:
        cost *= 0.5

    return cost

# Example: 10K requests/day, 500 input + 200 output tokens each
daily = estimate_cost(500, 200, "claude-sonnet-4-20250514") * 10_000
print(f"Daily: ${daily:.2f}")      # ~$0.045 * 10K = $450/day
print(f"Monthly: ${daily * 30:.2f}")  # ~$13,500/month

# Same with Haiku + batching
daily_optimized = estimate_cost(500, 200, "claude-haiku-4-20250514", use_batch=True) * 10_000
print(f"Optimized: ${daily_optimized:.2f}/day")  # ~$22/day (20x cheaper)

Strategy 1: Model Routing

def route_to_model(task: str, complexity: str) -> str:
    """Route tasks to cheapest adequate model."""
    # Haiku: classification, extraction, yes/no, routing ($0.80/$4)
    if task in ("classify", "extract", "route", "validate"):
        return "claude-haiku-4-20250514"

    # Sonnet: general tasks, code, tool use ($3/$15)
    if complexity in ("low", "medium"):
        return "claude-sonnet-4-20250514"

    # Opus: only for complex reasoning, research ($15/$75)
    return "claude-opus-4-20250514"

Strategy 2: Prompt Caching

# Cache system prompts and reference documents (90% input savings)
# Break-even: 2 requests with same cached content
message = client.messages.create(
    model="claude-sonnet-4-20250514",
    max_tokens=256,
    system=[{
        "type": "text",
        "text": large_reference_document,  # 10K+ tokens
        "cache_control": {"type": "ephemeral"}
    }],
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": user_question}]
)

Strategy 3: Batches for Non-Real-Time

# 50% cost reduction for anything that doesn't need immediate response
# Ideal for: summarization pipelines, data extraction, content generation
batch = client.messages.batches.create(requests=[...])  # Up to 100K requests

Strategy 4: Spend Tracking

import anthropic
from dataclasses import dataclass, field

@dataclass
class SpendTracker:
    budget_usd: float = 100.0
    spent_usd: float = 0.0
    requests: int = 0

    def track(self, response):
        cost = estimate_cost(
            response.usage.input_tokens,
            response.usage.output_tokens,
            response.model,
            getattr(response.usage, "cache_read_input_tokens", 0)
        )
        self.spent_usd += cost
        self.requests += 1

        if self.spent_usd > self.budget_usd * 0.8:
            print(f"WARNING: 80% budget used (${self.spent_usd:.2f}/${self.budget_usd})")
        if self.spent_usd > self.budget_usd:
            raise RuntimeError(f"Budget exceeded: ${self.spent_usd:.2f}")

tracker = SpendTracker(budget_usd=50.0)

Cost Reduction Checklist

  • Use Haiku for classification/extraction/routing tasks
  • Enable prompt caching for repeated system prompts
  • Use Message Batches for non-real-time processing
  • Set max_tokens to realistic values (not maximum)
  • Use prefill to reduce output preamble tokens
  • Implement spend tracking and budget alerts
  • Monitor via Usage API

Prerequisites

  • Establish an approved budget, billing owner, cost allocation dimensions, and alert thresholds before changing model routing or batch behavior.
  • Use a sandbox workspace, synthetic prompts, pinned model IDs, and a versioned pricing snapshot; confirm current rates in the official pricing documentation before making a forecast.
  • Configure least-privileged credentials and ensure logs/metrics contain token counts and aggregate cost only, never prompt or response content.

Instructions

  1. Baseline request volume, input/output/cache tokens, latency, quality, and spend by feature using a redacted measurement window. Do not make routing changes from a single outlier.
  2. Define a quality floor and route only eligible workloads to the least expensive model that meets it. Use prompt caching only for approved non-sensitive content and batches only where asynchronous completion is acceptable.
  3. Cap max_tokens, concurrency, retries, and batch size. Enforce per-feature and per-workspace budgets before requests are sent; fail closed when a budget or scope check cannot be evaluated.
  4. Test the proposed policy on synthetic fixtures in a sandbox, then canary it with aggregate cost, quality, latency, error, and rate-limit monitoring. Require owner approval before broader rollout.
  5. If quality, spend, or policy thresholds regress, disable the new route/cache/batch policy, restore the prior configuration, and retain a redacted comparison receipt.

Output

Produce a cost-control receipt containing the pricing snapshot date, policy version, model/batch/cache decisions, token aggregates, projected and observed spend, quality and latency results, budget outcome, canary scope, approval, and rollback reference. Exclude prompt/response text, customer identifiers, API keys, and raw billing exports.

Error Handling

FailureResponse
Unknown model price or usage fieldStop forecasting, refresh the official pricing/usage source, and mark the estimate provisional.
Budget or quota exceededReject or queue new work, alert the owner, and do not bypass the guard with another key or workspace.
Quality regression after cheaper routingRestore the prior route, quarantine affected output, and rerun the quality fixture before another canary.
Cache or batch unsuitable for data/latency policyDisable that optimization and use the approved synchronous, non-cached path.

Examples

Evaluate 1,000 synthetic classification prompts in a sandbox with a fixed budget, compare pinned Sonnet against Haiku plus an approved batch policy, assert customer_content_logged=0, and emit budget=within_limit; quality=pass; canary=internal; rollback=route-v1. Do not use live customer prompts to tune pricing.

Resources

Next Steps

For architecture patterns, see anth-reference-architecture.

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

Add a synthetic-data CI gate for customer-owned Abridge integration code. Test consent handling, note-review handoffs, redaction, and rollback behavior with mocked vendor boundaries, without connecting CI to a live Abridge or EHR tenant.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Adding regression checks to an Abridge integration repository
  • Testing consent and note-release handling
  • Checking logs for sensitive data exposure
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace28692026年10月25日 更新

Triage Abridge recording, note review, Epic handoff, and access problems using observed symptoms and approved guidance. Identify the affected workflow stage, organize a minimal timeline, and prepare a redacted escalation record for the responsible team.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Separate recording problems from upload failures
  • Investigate note creation delays and editor issues
  • Identify the responsible team for Epic handoff failures
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace28692026年10月25日 更新

Map and review an Abridge clinical documentation workflow from consent and recording through draft review, evidence checks, edits, and final disposition. Keep clinician approval explicit, identify failure exits, and separate verified facts from tenant-specific details and pending approvals.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Map a clinical note workflow for a care setting
  • Check where consent and patient identity are verified
  • Review draft notes against linked evidence before sign-off
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace28692026年10月25日 更新

Audit how clinician-reviewed Abridge note sections map into Epic templates and downstream workflows. Use approved test records to document destinations, exceptions, evidence, rollback steps, and a go or no-go decision for a specific environment.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Checking Abridge note section mappings to Epic templates
  • Auditing a department’s approved documentation handoff
  • Preparing test evidence and a go or no-go decision
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace28692026年10月25日 更新

Review Abridge adoption and workflow value using local usage records, clinician feedback, and verified contract costs. Build an evidence based decision table covering adoption, quality, support burden, and options to expand, hold, or improve the rollout.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Reviewing adoption after an Abridge rollout
  • Preparing evidence for a renewal decision
  • Comparing workflow outcomes across care settings
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace28692026年10月25日 更新

Prepare a bounded support bundle for an Abridge issue using allowlisted operational details such as versions, coarse timestamps, and correlation references. Exclude recordings, transcripts, patient identifiers, credentials, and unrestricted logs, then document redactions and review details.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Preparing reviewed evidence for an Abridge support case
  • Documenting redactions and excluded data
  • Collecting approved operational details for an incident
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace28692026年10月25日 更新

查看 jeremylongshore 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题