cache-efficiency
Analyze prompt-cache effectiveness for Claude Code usage from the Agent Monitor dashboard — cache hit rate (total_cache_read / (total_cache_read + total_input)), cache_write vs cache_read reuse, cache-read vs cache-write spend, and the sessions with the poorest reuse. Pulls token
Install
npx skills add https://github.com/hoangsonww/Claude-Code-Agent-Monitor/tree/master/plugins/ccam-analytics/skills/cache-efficiency
claude plugin marketplace add https://llmmart.ai/marketplace.json && claude plugin install hoangsonww-claude-code-agent-monitor@llmmart
git clone https://github.com/hoangsonww/Claude-Code-Agent-Monitor.git
The skills CLI installs just this skill, for any of its supported agents. Claude Code installs the whole hoangsonww/claude-code-agent-monitor collection as a plugin from our marketplace. Git is the plain clone.
Skill manifest
Cache Efficiency
Diagnose whether prompt caching is actually saving money, and where it is not.
Input
The user provides: $ARGUMENTS
This may be: empty (analyze the whole fleet), "today" / "this week" / a date range, a session ID to scope the analysis, or a target like "hit rate > 80%". When empty, analyze all data from /api/analytics.
Data Sources
| Endpoint | Returns |
|---|---|
GET /api/analytics |
tokens.total_input, tokens.total_output, tokens.total_cache_read, tokens.total_cache_write (baselines pre-summed), plus daily_sessions |
GET /api/sessions?limit=200 |
Session list — each has model, cwd, started_at, ended_at, inline cost, metadata (JSON: usage_extras with cache token detail) |
GET /api/sessions/{id} |
Full session detail with nested agents and events, for drill-down on a flagged session |
GET /api/pricing/cost |
{ total_cost, breakdown: [{ model, input_tokens, output_tokens, cache_read_tokens, cache_write_tokens, cost, matched_rule }] } — used to price cache read vs write spend |
How cache economics work
cache_hit_rate = total_cache_read / (total_cache_read + total_input)
cache_reuse = total_cache_read / total_cache_write
cache_read_cost = (cache_read_tokens / 1M) × cache_read_per_mtok
cache_write_cost = (cache_write_tokens / 1M) × cache_write_per_mtok
Cache writes cost more per token than cache reads (e.g. Sonnet $3.75 write vs $0.30 read per Mtok), and writes are billed even if the cached block is never reused. The payoff only arrives on subsequent reads — so a healthy fleet shows cache_read_tokens far exceeding cache_write_tokens. When cache_reuse < 1, you are paying to cache context you barely re-read.
Token counts are effective totals = current + baseline (baselines preserve pre-compaction tokens).
Report Sections
1. Fleet Cache Hit Rate
From /api/analytics: compute cache_hit_rate × 100. State raw total_cache_read and total_input. Benchmark: >70% strong, 40–70% moderate, <40% weak prompt-cache utilization.
2. Write vs Read Reuse
Compute cache_reuse = total_cache_read / total_cache_write. Show both token counts. Flag if reuse < 1 (writing more cache than is ever read back).
3. Cache Spend Split
From /api/pricing/cost breakdown, sum cache_read_cost and cache_write_cost across all models. Show the dollar split and what fraction of total cost is cache-write overhead vs cache-read savings.
4. Sessions With Poor Reuse
From /api/sessions?limit=200, parse metadata.usage_extras for per-session cache read/write where available; rank sessions by lowest read/write reuse (and by cache_write-heavy cost). List the worst 10 with model, cost, and reuse ratio. Use /api/sessions/{id} to drill into any single flagged session.
5. Recommendations
- Sessions where
cache_write >> cache_read: short or one-shot sessions rarely recoup cache writes — note them. - Stable, repeated context (system prompts, large files) should be cached once and reused; high churn defeats caching.
- Estimate the dollar impact of raising the hit rate to the next benchmark tier.
Output
Structured Markdown with tables. Currency as USD to 4 decimal places; rates as $/Mtok; percentages with ▲/▼ for any trend. Token counts with thousands separators.
Files (claude-code-agent-monitor)
-
agents
-
openai.yaml 269 B
interface: display_name: "Cache Efficiency" short_description: "Analyze prompt-cache effectiveness for Claude Code usage..." default_prompt: "Use $cache-efficiency to inspect CCAM data and complete this workflow safely." policy: allow_implicit_invocation: true
-
-
SKILL.md 3.8 KB
--- name: cache-efficiency description: > Analyze prompt-cache effectiveness for Claude Code usage from the Agent Monitor dashboard — cache hit rate (total_cache_read / (total_cache_read + total_input)), cache_write vs cache_read reuse, cache-read vs cache-write spend, and the sessions with the poorest reuse. Pulls token totals from /api/analytics, per-session detail from /api/sessions, and dollar splits from /api/pricing/cost. Use when diagnosing cache spend or deciding whether prompt caching is paying off. --- # Cache Efficiency Diagnose whether prompt caching is actually saving money, and where it is not. ## Input The user provides: **$ARGUMENTS** This may be: empty (analyze the whole fleet), "today" / "this week" / a date range, a session ID to scope the analysis, or a target like "hit rate > 80%". When empty, analyze all data from `/api/analytics`. ## Data Sources | Endpoint | Returns | |----------|---------| | `GET /api/analytics` | `tokens.total_input`, `tokens.total_output`, `tokens.total_cache_read`, `tokens.total_cache_write` (baselines pre-summed), plus `daily_sessions` | | `GET /api/sessions?limit=200` | Session list — each has model, cwd, started_at, ended_at, inline `cost`, metadata (JSON: usage_extras with cache token detail) | | `GET /api/sessions/{id}` | Full session detail with nested agents and events, for drill-down on a flagged session | | `GET /api/pricing/cost` | `{ total_cost, breakdown: [{ model, input_tokens, output_tokens, cache_read_tokens, cache_write_tokens, cost, matched_rule }] }` — used to price cache read vs write spend | ### How cache economics work ``` cache_hit_rate = total_cache_read / (total_cache_read + total_input) cache_reuse = total_cache_read / total_cache_write cache_read_cost = (cache_read_tokens / 1M) × cache_read_per_mtok cache_write_cost = (cache_write_tokens / 1M) × cache_write_per_mtok ``` Cache writes cost more per token than cache reads (e.g. Sonnet $3.75 write vs $0.30 read per Mtok), and writes are billed even if the cached block is never reused. The payoff only arrives on subsequent reads — so a healthy fleet shows **cache_read_tokens far exceeding cache_write_tokens**. When `cache_reuse < 1`, you are paying to cache context you barely re-read. Token counts are **effective totals** = `current + baseline` (baselines preserve pre-compaction tokens). ## Report Sections ### 1. Fleet Cache Hit Rate From `/api/analytics`: compute `cache_hit_rate × 100`. State raw `total_cache_read` and `total_input`. Benchmark: >70% strong, 40–70% moderate, <40% weak prompt-cache utilization. ### 2. Write vs Read Reuse Compute `cache_reuse = total_cache_read / total_cache_write`. Show both token counts. Flag if reuse < 1 (writing more cache than is ever read back). ### 3. Cache Spend Split From `/api/pricing/cost` breakdown, sum `cache_read_cost` and `cache_write_cost` across all models. Show the dollar split and what fraction of total cost is cache-write overhead vs cache-read savings. ### 4. Sessions With Poor Reuse From `/api/sessions?limit=200`, parse `metadata.usage_extras` for per-session cache read/write where available; rank sessions by lowest read/write reuse (and by cache_write-heavy cost). List the worst 10 with model, cost, and reuse ratio. Use `/api/sessions/{id}` to drill into any single flagged session. ### 5. Recommendations - Sessions where `cache_write >> cache_read`: short or one-shot sessions rarely recoup cache writes — note them. - Stable, repeated context (system prompts, large files) should be cached once and reused; high churn defeats caching. - Estimate the dollar impact of raising the hit rate to the next benchmark tier. ## Output Structured Markdown with tables. Currency as USD to 4 decimal places; rates as $/Mtok; percentages with ▲/▼ for any trend. Token counts with thousands separators.
Comments (0)
Sign in to join the conversation.
Reviews (0)
No reviews yet.
No comments yet.