eco-mode
Skill6 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Keep a small, budgeted working context for low-cost model execution without weakening task contracts, required sources, or verification.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- itsryanarmani/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- pooriaarab/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 7, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- itsryanarmani/skills★ 1same name
- pooriaarab/skills★ 1same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository23 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- analyze-miniSkill
- bug-captureSkill
- build-oneSkill
- ceremony-budgetSkill
- checklist-miniSkill
- constitution-liteSkill
- context-checkSkill
- diagnose-loopSkill
- falsify-specSkill
- grill-with-docs-liteSkill
- handoffSkill
- lean-modeSkill
- mini-specSkill
- operator-profileSkill
- scope-freezeSkill
- ship-miniSkill
- teach-backSkill
- test-miniSkill
- thin-planSkill
- tool-noise-guardSkill
- verify-contractSkill
- workspace-checkpointSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. About 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈8
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 16
Use when the operator invokes eco mode, asks to minimize context costs, or runs a bounded task on a fast inexpensive model.
- Distinctive: line 20
Do not force it on ambiguous research, incident response, high-stakes decisions, or tasks whose required evidence cannot fit.
- Distinctive: line 26
Only the selected relevant code/docs and durable state files
- Very specific: line 40
Check the actual selected text files before sending them: python scripts/aes.py eco /tmp/eco.md, or pipe the selected prompt to python …
- Distinctive: line 57
Never abbreviate a failing proof into apparent success.
- Distinctive: line 61
Stop after required proof.
- Distinctive: line 73
Check provider documentation before production routing.
- Distinctive: line 77
No extra ledger by default.
- Distinctive: line 95
No redundant summary cycle was created solely for token savings.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Eco Mode
Purpose
Make bounded agent work economical through source selection, fresh-context discipline, and a measurable preflight. This is an opt-in working-set policy, not a second workflow, model switch, or replacement for verification.
When to use
Use when the operator invokes eco mode, asks to minimize context costs, or runs a bounded task on a fast inexpensive model. Especially useful for maintenance, well-scoped coding, extraction, and small-model delegated work.
Do not force it on ambiguous research, incident response, high-stakes decisions, or tasks whose required evidence cannot fit. Escalate when necessary.
Inputs
- Objective, current source of truth, scope and acceptance/proof targets
- Only the selected relevant code/docs and durable state files
- Optional provider/model choice outside this skill
- Local selected-content budget, default 60,000 UTF-8 bytes
- Optional, explicitly named required source files and literal proof anchors
Workflow
- Resolve the route first, or honor an already explicit route. Do not append ceremony to a sufficient workflow.
- Load only the current authority-bearing task sources, relevant file sections, and next proof target. Search and expand when a named risk warrants it.
- Optionally use existing context hydration for Markdown:
python scripts/aes.py context "bounded task" --strict > /tmp/eco.md. Inspect the packet status and required-file coverage before relying on it. - Check the actual selected text files before sending them:
python scripts/aes.py eco /tmp/eco.md, or pipe the selected prompt topython scripts/aes.py eco -. The default combined ceiling is 60,000 bytes; REVIEW_REQUIRED means prune redundancy or explicitly expand. - For tasks with a named context contract, use the optional sufficiency check:
python scripts/aes.py eco SPEC.md VERIFY.md --require-source SPEC.md--require-source VERIFY.md --require-proof "targeted pytest command". The preflight checks actual selected files or source-verified context-packet excerpts. Metadata mentions alone do not establish representation. If a requirement is missing,REVIEW_REQUIREDmeans add the minimum necessary source or escalate; do not silently waive it. When a particular section governs the next action, add--require-heading "SPEC.md::Acceptance criteria"so a metadata mention or unrelated excerpt cannot stand in for the section. - Execute one slice with existing scope controls and verification. Avoid redundant tool-output envelopes and needless refetches. Reuse anchors.
- Preserve required instructions, exact file paths, uncertainties, acceptance criteria, failed tests, compatibility checks, and verification evidence. Never abbreviate a failing proof into apparent success.
- On scope drift, missing evidence, or budget pressure, retrieve the smallest missing authoritative source. Use a trusted handoff into a fresh context, or switch to a more capable model when required. Never silently truncate.
- Stop after required proof. Measure actual provider token usage and spend where available; the byte checker cannot estimate billed usage.
Model guidance
- Claude Haiku 5.5 (
claude-haiku-5-5) has lower API pricing for prompts up to 100k tokens than for prompts above that threshold. - GPT-6 Luna (
gpt-6-luna) supportsreasoning.effort: xhighthrough the Responses API. Deeper reasoning may spend more billed output tokens. - Both models support very large contexts; this mode optimizes cost and decision saliency, not merely whether a prompt fits in the window.
- Provider limits, identifiers, tokenizer behavior, and pricing change. Check provider documentation before production routing.
Outputs
No extra ledger by default. On an explicit status request, output only the selected sources, preflight verdict, preserved proof target, and next action.
Sufficiency checks are opt-in. Source representation means the complete source was selected as a file, or a packet contains source-verified excerpts; it does not prove that the right sections were selected. Proof targets are literal text anchors, not test execution, semantic correctness, or a guarantee of completeness. Packet WARN/FAIL, stale excerpts, missing sources, and missing anchors require review. Never trust metadata-only source mentions.
The preflight's PASS applies to selected UTF-8 bytes only, not full runtime history, tool schemas, provider tokens, or pricing. It never removes context already injected into a live session.
Stop conditions
- Required sources are represented or the escalation is explicit.
- Context preflight was inspected and verification remains intact.
- No redundant summary cycle was created solely for token savings.
Anti-patterns
- Assuming a 1M context window means all tokens are cheaply priced.
- Treating 60,000 bytes as 60,000 model tokens or a guaranteed cost tier.
- Loading all installed skills or the full repository by default.
- Dropping risk, permission constraints, or verification to fit a budget.
- Pretending a summary erased previously supplied context.
- Silently truncating required files, reclassifying unknowns as irrelevant, or keeping a cheap model on a task beyond its reliable capabilities.
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
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.

