caveman-evidence-review

作者: juliusbrussee

檢視 Caveman Cloud 唯讀證據:成本、Cave Score、Cave Plan、工作流程、追蹤、延遲、錯誤、壓縮、路由及已驗證的節省。當使用者詢問 Caveman 發現了什麼、LLM 花費流向何處、成本或品質為何改變、哪些工作流程需要注意,或要求追蹤或分析檢視時使用。優先使用 Caveman MCP 工具;若無法使用則退回 CLI JSON。

npx skills add https://github.com/juliusbrussee/caveman --skill caveman-evidence-review

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.

來自 juliusbrussee 的更多技能

caveman
juliusbrussee
超壓縮溝通模式。透過穴居人式簡潔表達,減少約75%的token使用量,同時維持完整技術準確性。支援強度等級:lite、full(預設)、ultra、wenyan-lite、wenyan-full、wenyan-ultra。當使用者說「caveman mode」、「talk like caveman」、「use caveman」、「less tokens」、「be brief」或呼叫/caveman時啟用。亦會在要求token效率時自動觸發。
communicationproductivity
caveman-commit
juliusbrussee
超壓縮提交訊息生成器。去除提交訊息中的雜訊,同時保留意圖與理由。採用 Conventional Commits 格式。主旨不超過50字元,僅在「原因」不明顯時加入內文。當使用者說「寫提交」、「提交訊息」、「生成提交」、「/commit」或呼叫 /caveman-commit 時使用。暫存變更時自動觸發。
developmentcode-review
caveman-compress
juliusbrussee
將自然語言記憶檔案(CLAUDE.md、待辦事項、偏好設定)壓縮成穴居人格式以節省輸入令牌。保留所有技術內容、程式碼、網址與結構。壓縮版本會覆蓋原始檔案。人類可讀的備份會另存為FILE.original.md。觸發指令:/caveman-compress FILEPATH 或「壓縮記憶檔案」
developmentdocument
caveman-help
juliusbrussee
所有穴居人模式、技能與指令的快速參考卡。一次性顯示,非持續模式。觸發方式:/caveman-help、「caveman help」、「what caveman commands」、「how do I use caveman」。
developmentdocumentproductivity
caveman-review
juliusbrussee
超壓縮程式碼審查評論。減少PR回饋中的雜訊,同時保留可執行的關鍵資訊。每條評論僅一行:位置、問題、修正。當使用者說「審查此PR」、「程式碼審查」、「審查差異」、「/review」或呼叫/caveman-review時使用。審查拉取請求時自動觸發。
developmentcode-review
caveman-stats
juliusbrussee
顯示當前會話的實際Token使用量與預估節省金額。直接從Claude Code會話日誌讀取,無需AI估算。透過/caveman-stats觸發。輸出由mode-tracker鉤子注入,模型本身不計算數值。
developmentdata-analysis
cavecrew
juliusbrussee
We need to translate the given text from English to Traditional Chinese. The text describes a decision guide for delegating to caveman-style subagents. It mentions specific names: cavecrew-investigator, cavecrew-builder, cavecrew-reviewer, and cavecrew. These names should be preserved as is. Also, technical terms like "Explore", "diff review", "tool-result", "main context" should be preserved or appropriately translated. The instruction says to preserve product names, protocol names, URLs, numbers, and technical terms. So we keep "cavecrew-investigator", "cavecrew-builder", "cavecrew-reviewer", "cavecrew", "Explore", "diff review", "tool-result", "main context". Also "~60%" should be preserved. The text inside <text> is the entire paragraph. We need to output only the translation, no extra commentary. Let's translate carefully: "Decision guide for delegating to caveman-style subagents." -> "委派給原始人風格子代理的決策指南。" "T
developmentcode-reviewapi
caveman-explore
juliusbrussee
唯讀儲存庫瀏覽器。請主動用於冷啟動探索、廣泛的跨檔案定位,或當直接搜尋失敗而需要找出某個東西所在位置時。當問題已指明確切檔案或符號,或先前回合已回傳可用的 file:line 證據時,請略過。僅回傳精簡的 path:line 引用;其讀取與 grep 操作不會進入主要對話。