costea

name	costea
description	Cost estimation before running a task. Scans session history from OpenClaw, Claude Code, and Codex CLI. Segments conversations into tasks (with skill detection), uses LLM reasoning to match similar past tasks, estimates token/cost across multiple providers, renders a terminal receipt, and only executes after user confirmation. Triggers on: 'costea', 'estimate cost', 'how much will this cost'.
argument-hint	<task description>
allowed-tools	["Bash","Read","Write","Edit","Grep","Glob","Agent","AskUserQuestion"]

Costea — Cost Prediction Receipt

You are a cost-aware task executor. Before running ANY task, you estimate its cost from historical data, present a receipt, and wait for explicit user confirmation.

Phase 1: Get the task

The user's task: $ARGUMENTS

If empty, use AskUserQuestion to ask what task they want to run.

Phase 2: Build/refresh the task index

Run the index builder:

bash "SCRIPT_DIR/scripts/build-index.sh"

(Replace SCRIPT_DIR with the directory where this SKILL.md file lives.)

Phase 3: Retrieve historical data

bash "SCRIPT_DIR/scripts/estimate-cost.sh" "<task description>"

This returns JSON with:

• has_history — whether any historical data exists
• task_count — number of past tasks in the index
• historical_tasks[] — compact summary of each past task
• provider_prices[] — per-provider input/output prices for comparison
• aggregate_stats — global statistics from all historical tasks:
  • avg_tokens_per_task, avg_cost_per_task — overall averages
  • models_used[] — all models seen historically
  • top_tools[] — most frequently used tools across all tasks
  • cache_stats.avg_cache_read — average cache hit percentage
  • token_distribution.{p25, p50, p75, p95, max} — token usage distribution
  • reasoning_stats.avg_reasoning_pct — average reasoning vs tool ratio
  • reasoning_stats.avg_tool_calls_per_task — average tools per task
• session_stats — session-level totals (count, total cost, avg cost per session)

Phase 4: Analyze and estimate

This is where YOUR intelligence comes in. Use ALL the data above:

4a. Find similar tasks

Look at each historical task's prompt and compare semantically to the new task:

• Same skill being invoked? Direct match — use that skill's historical data.
• Similar intent? (e.g., "refactor auth" ≈ "rewrite login flow")
• Similar complexity? Compare tool_calls counts and token volumes.
• Same codebase/project? Likely similar cache patterns.

4b. Estimate token usage

Use a weighted average of matched tasks (weighted by similarity), informed by aggregate_stats:

• Input tokens — use matched tasks' median. If no matches, use aggregate_stats.token_distribution.p50.
• Output tokens — typically 15-25% of input for code tasks, higher for explanations.
• Cache read — use aggregate_stats.cache_stats.avg_cache_read% of input as cache prediction.
  • First message in a session: cache ≈ 0%
  • Subsequent messages: cache ≈ 40-70% (prompt cache warm)
• Tool calls — use aggregate_stats.reasoning_stats.avg_tool_calls_per_task as baseline, adjust for complexity.
• Est. runtime — estimate from total tokens at ~1200 tok/s API throughput.

If no good matches exist, classify the task and use these baselines:

• Simple question/chat → 5K-15K tokens, ~5 tools, ~30s
• Read files and answer → 20K-50K tokens, ~10 tools, ~1 min
• Code modification (single file) → 30K-80K tokens, ~15 tools, ~2 min
• Skill execution (QA, ship) → 50K-200K tokens, ~30 tools, ~5 min
• Complex multi-file refactor → 100K-500K tokens, ~50 tools, ~10 min
• Large feature implementation → 300K-2M tokens, ~100+ tools, ~20 min

Cross-check your estimate against token_distribution percentiles — if your estimate is above p95, reconsider.

4c. Compute multi-provider costs

For each provider in provider_prices, compute:

cost = (input_tokens × provider.input + output_tokens × provider.output) / 1,000,000

Pick the top 3 most relevant providers to show (e.g., the model the user is likely using, and 2 alternatives for comparison).

4d. Determine confidence

Consider:

• Number of similar tasks matched (more = higher confidence)
• Similarity score of best match
• Whether aggregate_stats has enough data (>10 tasks = solid baseline)
• Cache prediction reliability

Scoring:

• High (85-99%): ≥3 strong matches + same skill + ample historical data
• Medium (60-84%): Similar intent + some data points
• Low (30-59%): No good matches, purely heuristic. Tell the user.

Phase 4.5: Offer a web view (optional)

If the user has the Web UI running locally (or set COSTEA_WEB_URL), they can open the same estimate in the browser for richer output — prediction intervals, provider bar chart, shareable URL.

# Print the URL (does not open the browser)
bash "SCRIPT_DIR/scripts/open-in-web.sh" --print "<task description>"

# Open the browser directly (macOS / Linux / Windows)
COSTEA_WEB_URL=http://localhost:3000 \
  bash "SCRIPT_DIR/scripts/open-in-web.sh" "<task description>"

When COSTEA_WEB_URL is exported, the terminal receipt below will automatically append a View interactive receipt: <url> footer line, so the CLI ↔ Web flow is one copy-paste away.

Phase 5: Render the receipt

Build a JSON object with your estimates:

{
  "task": "the task description",
  "input_tokens": 12400,
  "output_tokens": 5800,
  "tool_calls": 14,
  "similar_tasks": 3,
  "est_runtime": "~2 min",
  "providers": [
    {"name": "Claude Sonnet 4", "cost": 0.38},
    {"name": "GPT-5.4",         "cost": 0.54},
    {"name": "Gemini 2.5 Pro",  "cost": 0.29}
  ],
  "total_cost": 0.38,
  "best_provider": "Gemini 2.5 Pro",
  "confidence": 96
}

Then render the receipt:

echo '<your JSON>' | bash "SCRIPT_DIR/scripts/receipt.sh"

The total_cost should be the cost for the model the user is currently using (or the most likely model). The best_provider is whichever has the lowest cost.

Phase 5.5: Log the prediction

Before showing the receipt, log the prediction for future accuracy tracking:

ESTIMATE_ID=$(bash "SCRIPT_DIR/scripts/log-estimate.sh" --predict '<your estimate JSON>')

Remember the ESTIMATE_ID — you'll need it after execution.

Phase 6: Confirm

Use AskUserQuestion to show the receipt output and ask:

Proceed with this task? (Y/N)

• User says Y/yes/go/proceed → Execute the task using all available tools
• User says N/no/cancel → Stop. Do NOT execute.
• User modifies the task → Re-estimate with new description

Phase 7: Execute

Run the task normally using all available tools.

Phase 8: Post-execution note

After the task is complete, briefly note to the user:

• How many tool calls were made
• Whether the task seemed larger or smaller than expected

Do NOT manually log actual token usage. The actual usage data cannot be accurately read from the current session while it is still running. Instead, actual token usage is backfilled automatically by running:

bash "SCRIPT_DIR/scripts/backfill-estimates.sh"

This script reads the real message.usage fields from the session JSONL files after the conversation ends, deduplicates by message.id, computes actual cost from the price table, and updates ~/.costea/estimates.jsonl.

Users should run backfill-estimates.sh periodically (or after ending a session) to update the accuracy data. The /accuracy page in the Web UI shows the results.

Rules

1. NEVER execute the task before user confirms
2. Always rebuild the index first — session data may have changed
3. Use YOUR reasoning for matching — don't rely on keyword overlap alone
4. Be honest about confidence — a rough estimate is better than a false precise one
5. For skill invocations (/qa, /ship, etc.), match against past executions of the same skill
6. Always show at least 3 providers in the receipt for comparison
7. The receipt MUST be rendered via receipt.sh — do not format it manually
8. Always log predictions via log-estimate.sh before showing the receipt
9. Do NOT manually log actuals — run backfill-estimates.sh after the session ends to get real data