跳到主内容
智客 ZICQ

技能库 智客分类:Agent 工作流 ecc-tools-cost-audit

Ecc 工具成本审计

证据-第一次ECC 工具燃烧和计费审计工作流程。 用于调查失控的PR创建,配额绕行,溢价模型渗出,重复工作,或GitHub App在ECC Tools repo中的成本飙升.

7244 安装量

官方网址:skills.sh

技能介绍

先看中文介绍;官方 description 原文单独保留,不改写 SKILL.md。

做什么

证据-第一次ECC 工具燃烧和计费审计工作流程

何时用

- 用户说ECC 工具燃烧率、公关重现率、超常公关、使用限制绕道或溢价模型泄漏

代理如何加载

按 Agent Skills 渐进披露:启动时只加载 name 与 description(约 100 token);任务匹配后才读入整份 SKILL.md 正文;scripts/、references/、assets/ 仅在需要时再读。 本文件正文结构:ECC Tools Cost Audit、Skill Stack、When To Use、Scope Guardrails、Workflow、1. Freeze repo scope。 其中含规范建议的小节:分步指令。

文件分析

文件分析:这是一份仅含 SKILL.md 的指令型技能,代理激活后整份正文进入上下文。

官方 description(原文)

Evidence-first ECC Tools burn and billing audit workflow. Use when investigating runaway PR creation, quota bypass, premium-model leakage, duplicate jobs, or GitHub App cost spikes in the ECC Tools repo.

ECC Tools Cost AuditSkill StackWhen To UseScope GuardrailsWorkflow1. Freeze repo scope2. Trace ingress before theorizing3. Trace the worker and side effects4. Audit the high-signal burn paths5. Fix in burn order6. Verify with the smallest proving stepsHigh-Signal Failure Patterns

来源分类:skills.sh agent-skill

SKILL.md 与 Agent 调用

官方规范 ↗
name
ecc-tools-cost-audit
description
Evidence-first ECC Tools burn and billing audit workflow. Use when investigating runaway PR creation, quota bypass, premium-model leakage, duplicate jobs, or GitHub App cost spikes in the ECC Tools repo.
  1. 发现技能客户端向 Agent 提供名称与描述目录。
  2. 匹配与调用用户指定或任务匹配后,载入 SKILL.md 指令。
  3. 按需加载按步骤读取参考文档、使用脚本与素材。

具体调用语法与可用工具以目标 Agent 客户端为准。 查看调用机制说明 ↗

安装这个技能

Skills CLI ↗

先选择目标 Agent 和安装范围,保留技能包的附属文件,安装后检查客户端能否发现该技能。

交给 Agent 安装

复制安装指令给支持 Agent Skills 的代理,确认其中的目标目录与客户端匹配。

把 Agent Skill「ecc-tools-cost-audit」安装到我的项目:SKILL.md 原文与官方 description 见 https://zicq.com/zh/skills/skl-d1911efe09859474-Ecc-%E5%B7%A5%E5%85%B7%E6%88%90%E6%9C%AC%E5%AE%A1%E8%AE%A1.html
请存为 .cursor/skills/ecc-tools-cost-audit/SKILL.md 或 .claude/skills/ecc-tools-cost-audit/SKILL.md,frontmatter 的 name 与 description 保持原样,不要改写。

GitHub 完整包 ↗

终端安装 · Skills CLI

需要 Node.js 与 npx。先查看仓库技能列表,确认实际名称。

npx skills add 'https://github.com/affaan-m/ecc' --list

npx skills add 'https://github.com/affaan-m/ecc' --skill 'ecc-tools-cost-audit'

CLI 会交互选择目标 Agent,默认安装到项目;用户级安装使用 -g。先通过查看命令核对仓库内容,再用 npx skills list 检查已安装技能。

阅读排版

name: ecc-tools-cost-audit description: Evidence-first ECC Tools burn and billing audit workflow. Use when investigating runaway PR creation, quota bypass, premium-model leakage, duplicate jobs, or GitHub App cost spikes in the ECC Tools repo. metadata: origin: ECC

ECC Tools Cost Audit

Use this skill when the user suspects the ECC Tools GitHub App is burning cost, over-creating PRs, bypassing usage limits, or routing free users into premium analysis paths.

This is a focused operator workflow for the sibling ECC-Tools repo. It is not a generic billing skill and it is not a repo-wide code review pass.

Skill Stack

Pull these ECC-native skills into the workflow when relevant:

  • autonomous-loops for bounded multi-step audits that cross webhooks, queues, billing, and retries
  • agentic-engineering for tracing the request path into discrete, provable units
  • customer-billing-ops when repo behavior and customer-impact math must be separated cleanly
  • search-first before inventing helpers or re-implementing repo-local utilities
  • security-review when auth, usage gates, entitlements, or secrets are touched
  • verification-loop for proving rerun safety and exact post-fix state
  • tdd-workflow when the fix needs regression coverage in the worker, router, or billing paths

When To Use

  • user says ECC Tools burn rate, PR recursion, over-created PRs, usage-limit bypass, or premium-model leakage
  • the task is in the sibling ECC-Tools repo and depends on webhook handlers, queue workers, usage reservation, PR creation logic, or paid-gate enforcement
  • a customer report says the app created too many PRs, billed incorrectly, or analyzed code without producing a usable result

Scope Guardrails

  • work in the sibling ECC-Tools repo, not in everything-claude-code
  • start read-only unless the user clearly asked for a fix
  • do not mutate unrelated billing, checkout, or UI flows while tracing analysis burn
  • treat app-generated branches and app-generated PRs as red-flag recursion paths until proved otherwise
  • separate three things explicitly:
    • repo-side burn root cause
    • customer-facing billing impact
    • product or entitlement gaps that need backlog follow-up

Workflow

1. Freeze repo scope

  • switch into the sibling ECC-Tools repo
  • check branch and local diff first
  • identify the exact surface under audit:
    • webhook router
    • queue producer
    • queue consumer
    • PR creation path
    • usage reservation / billing path
    • model routing path

2. Trace ingress before theorizing

  • inspect src/index.* or the main entrypoint first
  • map every enqueue path before suggesting a fix
  • confirm which GitHub events share a queue type
  • confirm whether push, pull_request, synchronize, comment, or manual re-run events can converge on the same expensive path

3. Trace the worker and side effects

  • inspect the queue consumer or scheduled worker that handles analysis
  • confirm whether a queued analysis always ends in:
    • PR creation
    • branch creation
    • file updates
    • premium model calls
    • usage increments
  • if analysis can spend tokens and then fail before output is persisted, classify it as burn-with-broken-output

4. Audit the high-signal burn paths

PR multiplication

  • inspect PR helpers and branch naming
  • check dedupe, synchronize-event handling, and existing-PR reuse
  • if app-generated branches can re-enter analysis, treat that as a priority-0 recursion risk

Quota bypass

  • inspect where quota is checked versus where usage is reserved or incremented
  • if quota is checked before enqueue but usage is charged only inside the worker, treat concurrent front-door passes as a real race

Premium-model leakage

  • inspect model selection, tier branching, and provider routing
  • verify whether free or capped users can still hit premium analyzers when premium keys are present

Retry burn

  • inspect retry loops, duplicate queue jobs, and deterministic failure reruns
  • if the same non-transient error can spend analysis repeatedly, fix that before quality improvements

5. Fix in burn order

If the user asked for code changes, prioritize fixes in this order:

  1. stop automatic PR multiplication
  2. stop quota bypass
  3. stop premium leakage
  4. stop duplicate-job fanout and pointless retries
  5. close rerun/update safety gaps

Keep the pass bounded to one to three direct fixes unless the same root cause clearly spans multiple files.

6. Verify with the smallest proving steps

  • rerun only the targeted tests or integration slices that cover the changed path
  • verify whether the burn path is now:
    • blocked
    • deduped
    • downgraded to cheaper analysis
    • or rejected early
  • state the final status exactly:
    • changed locally
    • verified locally
    • pushed
    • deployed
    • still blocked

High-Signal Failure Patterns

1. One queue type for all triggers

If pushes, PR syncs, and manual audits all enqueue the same job and the worker always creates a PR, analysis equals PR spam.

2. Post-enqueue usage reservation

If usage is checked at the front door but only incremented in the worker, concurrent requests can all pass the gate and exceed quota.

3. Free tier on premium path

If free queued jobs can still route into Anthropic or another premium provider when keys exist, that is real spend leakage even if the user never sees the premium result.

4. App-generated branches re-enter the webhook

If pull_request.synchronize, branch pushes, or comment-triggered runs fire on app-owned branches, the app can recursively analyze its own output.

5. Expensive work before persistence safety

If the system can spend tokens and then fail on PR creation, file update, or branch collision, it is burning cost without shipping value.

Pitfalls

  • do not begin with broad repo wandering; settle webhook -> queue -> worker first
  • do not mix customer billing inference with code-backed product truth
  • do not fix lower-value quality issues before the highest-burn path is contained
  • do not claim burn is fixed until the narrow proving step was rerun
  • do not push or deploy unless the user asked
  • do not touch unrelated repo-local changes if they are already in progress

Verification

  • root causes cite exact file paths and code areas
  • fixes are ordered by burn impact, not code neatness
  • proving commands are named
  • final status distinguishes local change, verification, push, and deployment

相关技能

Agent 工作流

技能创建者Skill Creator

创造有效技能指南。 当用户想创造出新的技能(或更新现有的技能),以专业知识,工作流程,或工具集成来扩展克洛德的能力时,应该使用这种技能.

Agent 工作流

克劳德胡布Clawdhub

使用ClawdHub CLI搜索,安装,更新并发布从taladhub.com的代理技能. 需要获取苍蝇上的新技能时使用,将安装的技能同步到最新版本或特定版本,或者发布 npm-instainddhub CLI 的新/更新的技能文件夹.

Agent 工作流

团队指挥Agent Team Orchestration

管弦乐团多代理团队,任务设定周期,交接协议,审查工作流程. 使用时间: (1)建立2+特派员队伍,具有不同专业,(2)确定任务路线和生命周期(收录框_ spec_建设_审查_完成),(3)在特派员之间制定交接协议,(4)建立审查和质量关口,(5)管理特派员之间的交流和文物共享.

Agent 工作流

超级力量Superpowers

Spec-first,TDD,子代理驱动的软件开发工作流程. 当:(1)构建任何新功能或应用——触发脑暴_计划_子代理执行回路,(2)调试出一个bug或测试失败——触发系统性的根起过程,(3)用户说"让我们构建","帮助我计划","我想添加X",或"这个被打破",(4)完成一个功…