agentleFS
YoungmaidainonYoungmaidainon/Agent-Level-Up/caveman-evidence-review/SKILL.md

caveman-evidence-review

Skill3 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Review Caveman Cloud evidence read-only: costs, Cave Score, Cave Plan, workflows, traces, latency, errors, compression, routing, and verified savings. Use when the user asks what Caveman found, where LLM spend goes, why cost or quality changed, which workflows need attention, or asks for a trace or analytics review. Prefer Caveman MCP tools; fall back to CLI JSON.

10 other projects use a version of this, 5 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use ponytail and grilling.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • GoogleSkill

    ponytail

    Forces the laziest solution that actually works, simplest, shortest, most minimal. Channels a senior dev who has seen everything: question whether the task needs to exist at all (YAGNI), reach for the standard library before custom code, native platform features before dependencies, one line before fifty. Supports intensity levels: lite, full (default), ultra. Use on ANY coding task: writing, adding, refactoring, fixing, reviewing, or designing code, and choosing libraries or dependencies. Also use whenever the user says "ponytail", "be lazy", "lazy mode", "simplest solution", "minimal solution", "yagni", "do less", or "shortest path", or complains about over-engineering, bloat, boilerplate, or unnecessary dependencies. Do NOT use for non-coding requests (general knowledge, prose, translation, summaries, recipes).

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • GoogleSkill

    grilling

    Grill the user relentlessly about a plan, decision, or idea. Use when the user wants to stress-test their thinking, or uses any 'grill' trigger phrases.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. 5 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • 5

    Common

    Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Common:

    Keep these buckets separate:

    line 19
  2. Common:

    Never add or relabel them.

    line 24
  3. Common:

    Do not fetch prompt, completion, tool, or artifact payloads unless the user explicitly asks for payload review.

    line 25
  4. Very specific:

    Stop if login or project selection is missing.

    line 49
  5. Very specific:

    Use caveman_trace_search. Choose a bounded window and closed filters: workflow, agent, model, provider, error code, runtime mode, cache …

    line 77
  6. Common:

    Do not infer causality from one expensive trace.

    line 90
  7. Very specific:

    Call caveman_trace_get for a small number of high-signal trace ids.

    line 106
  8. Common:

    If data is missing, name missing signal and stop at strongest supported statement.

    line 142

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Review Caveman evidence

Act as a read-only operator. Build conclusions from current Caveman data, not from repository guesses. Never start, approve, cancel, or roll back an experiment from this skill.

Hard rules

  1. Keep these buckets separate:
    • measured provider-complete list-price cost;
    • inferred daily headroom;
    • verified ledger savings;
    • evidence cost. Never add or relabel them.
  2. Do not fetch prompt, completion, tool, or artifact payloads unless the user explicitly asks for payload review. Metadata, spans, timing, models, token counts, status, and optimizer attribution are enough for the default review.
  3. Scope every read to the project selected by Caveman context. Never supply an organization id.
  4. Empty results are evidence of no current signal, not zero cost or zero risk.
  5. Cite trace ids and exact time windows used. Do not claim a cause from an aggregate alone.

Step 1 — Load context

Prefer MCP:

caveman_context {}

CLI fallback:

caveman cloud whoami
caveman cloud projects list

Stop if login or project selection is missing. Ask the user to run caveman login or select a project; never guess.

Step 2 — Establish baseline

Use caveman_report for:

  • overview
  • costs
  • score
  • workflows
  • verified_savings

Then use caveman_plan for ranked daily headroom. If question is narrow, skip unrelated reports. Read shortest set that can answer it.

CLI fallback:

caveman cloud costs
caveman cloud score
caveman cloud plan --json

State report window and basis before interpreting direction.

Step 3 — Test the leading explanation with traces

Use caveman_trace_search. Choose a bounded window and closed filters: workflow, agent, model, provider, error code, runtime mode, cache status, optimization id, status class, token/cost/latency bounds, compression, or monitor verdict.

Useful groupings:

  • workflow — find jobs driving cost or failures;
  • model — compare model mix;
  • session — isolate retry or loop behavior;
  • ungrouped — identify exact traces.

Compare a suspect cohort with a control cohort or earlier bounded window. Do not infer causality from one expensive trace.

CLI fallback:

caveman cloud traces search \
  --workflow <slug> \
  --from <RFC3339> \
  --to <RFC3339> \
  --sort total_cost_usd \
  --dir desc \
  --limit 25

Step 4 — Inspect representative traces

Call caveman_trace_get for a small number of high-signal trace ids. Inspect request and span metadata, latency, status, token counts, cache state, applied optimizers, and model route. Keep payload retrieval off.

CLI fallback:

caveman cloud traces show <trace-id> --spans

Step 5 — Report

Use this shape:

## Caveman evidence review

Scope: <project> · <from> to <to>
Measured cost: <value and basis>
Verified savings: <ledger value, kept separate>
Inferred headroom: <per-day band, kept separate>

Findings:
1. <finding> — <aggregate evidence> — traces <ids>
2. <finding> — <aggregate evidence> — traces <ids>

Unproven:
- <plausible explanation lacking a control, trace, or eval>

Next read-only check:
- <one bounded query>

Possible action:
- <proposal only; use caveman-manage for read-only lifecycle review and safety gate>

If data is missing, name missing signal and stop at strongest supported statement. Never turn a catalog subtotal into an invoice or an experiment result into verified savings.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.