productivity-score
Calculate a productivity score using actual Agent Monitor metrics — session completion rates, cache efficiency (cache_read vs input), compaction pressure (baseline tokens), turn velocity (turn_count / total_turn_duration_ms), tool success ratio (PreToolUse vs PostToolUse), and th
Install
npx skills add https://github.com/hoangsonww/Claude-Code-Agent-Monitor/tree/master/plugins/ccam-analytics/skills/productivity-score
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
Productivity Score
Calculate a productivity scorecard from the Agent Monitor's real data.
Input
The user provides: $ARGUMENTS
Options: "today", "this week", "last 30 days", a session ID, or "compare" for period comparison.
Data Sources
| Endpoint | Returns |
|---|---|
GET /api/analytics |
Token totals (total_input, total_output, total_cache_read, total_cache_write — baselines pre-summed), tool_usage top 20, daily_events/sessions, event_types, sessions_by_status, agents_by_status, avg_events_per_session, total_subagents |
GET /api/sessions?limit=100 |
Sessions with metadata JSON: thinking_blocks, turn_count, total_turn_duration_ms, usage_extras (service_tier, speed, inference_geo) |
GET /api/pricing/cost |
Total cost with per-model breakdown |
GET /api/workflows/{sessionId} |
11 workflow datasets: stats, orchestration, toolFlow, effectiveness, patterns, modelDelegation, errorPropagation, concurrency, complexity, compaction, cooccurrence |
Score Components (each 0–100)
1. Completion Rate (20% weight)
From sessions_by_status:
completed / (completed + error + abandoned) × 100- Bonus for high completed-to-active ratio
- Penalty for abandoned sessions (wasted work)
2. Token Efficiency (20% weight)
From analytics tokens (baselines are pre-summed into totals):
- Cache hit rate:
total_cache_read / (total_cache_read + total_input) × 100- Above 60% = excellent, below 30% = poor
- Output concentration:
total_output / total_input— 0.3–0.8 is balanced
3. Tool Effectiveness (20% weight)
From event_types:
- Success ratio: Count
PostToolUse/ CountPreToolUse— should be ~1.0; gap = tool failures - API error rate: Count
APIError/ total events — should be near 0 - From workflow
effectivenessdata: subagent completion rates, task success per type
4. Velocity (20% weight)
From session metadata:
- Turns per session: average
turn_countacross sessions - Turn speed: average
total_turn_duration_ms / turn_count— lower = faster - Events per session: from
avg_events_per_sessionin analytics overview - Thinking depth: average
thinking_blocks— more thinking = more thorough (neutral metric)
5. Cost Efficiency (20% weight)
From pricing:
- Cost per completed session:
total_cost / completed_sessions - Cost trend: comparing current period to previous (decreasing = improving)
- Model optimization: sessions using expensive models (Opus) for tasks subagents handle with Haiku/Sonnet
Overall Score
Weighted sum → letter grade:
- A+ (95-100), A (90-94), B+ (85-89), B (80-84), C+ (75-79), C (70-74), D (60-69), F (<60)
Output Format
═══════════════════════════════════════
PRODUCTIVITY SCORE: 87/100 (B+)
═══════════════════════════════════════
Completion Rate ████████░░ 80/100
Token Efficiency █████████░ 92/100
Tool Effectiveness████████░░ 85/100
Velocity █████████░ 88/100
Cost Efficiency █████████░ 90/100
═══════════════════════════════════════
Then: top 3 strengths, top 3 improvement areas with actionable steps, and period comparison if available.
Files (claude-code-agent-monitor)
-
agents
-
openai.yaml 274 B
interface: display_name: "Productivity Score" short_description: "Calculate a productivity score using actual Agent Monitor..." default_prompt: "Use $productivity-score to inspect CCAM data and complete this workflow safely." policy: allow_implicit_invocation: true
-
-
SKILL.md 3.9 KB
--- name: productivity-score description: > Calculate a productivity score using actual Agent Monitor metrics — session completion rates, cache efficiency (cache_read vs input), compaction pressure (baseline tokens), turn velocity (turn_count / total_turn_duration_ms), tool success ratio (PreToolUse vs PostToolUse), and the workflow intelligence API's complexity and effectiveness scores. --- # Productivity Score Calculate a productivity scorecard from the Agent Monitor's real data. ## Input The user provides: **$ARGUMENTS** Options: "today", "this week", "last 30 days", a session ID, or "compare" for period comparison. ## Data Sources | Endpoint | Returns | |----------|---------| | `GET /api/analytics` | Token totals (`total_input`, `total_output`, `total_cache_read`, `total_cache_write` — baselines pre-summed), tool_usage top 20, daily_events/sessions, event_types, sessions_by_status, agents_by_status, avg_events_per_session, total_subagents | | `GET /api/sessions?limit=100` | Sessions with metadata JSON: `thinking_blocks`, `turn_count`, `total_turn_duration_ms`, `usage_extras` (service_tier, speed, inference_geo) | | `GET /api/pricing/cost` | Total cost with per-model breakdown | | `GET /api/workflows/{sessionId}` | 11 workflow datasets: stats, orchestration, toolFlow, effectiveness, patterns, modelDelegation, errorPropagation, concurrency, complexity, compaction, cooccurrence | ## Score Components (each 0–100) ### 1. Completion Rate (20% weight) From `sessions_by_status`: - `completed / (completed + error + abandoned) × 100` - Bonus for high completed-to-active ratio - Penalty for abandoned sessions (wasted work) ### 2. Token Efficiency (20% weight) From analytics `tokens` (baselines are pre-summed into totals): - **Cache hit rate**: `total_cache_read / (total_cache_read + total_input) × 100` - Above 60% = excellent, below 30% = poor - **Output concentration**: `total_output / total_input` — 0.3–0.8 is balanced ### 3. Tool Effectiveness (20% weight) From `event_types`: - **Success ratio**: Count `PostToolUse` / Count `PreToolUse` — should be ~1.0; gap = tool failures - **API error rate**: Count `APIError` / total events — should be near 0 - From workflow `effectiveness` data: subagent completion rates, task success per type ### 4. Velocity (20% weight) From session metadata: - **Turns per session**: average `turn_count` across sessions - **Turn speed**: average `total_turn_duration_ms / turn_count` — lower = faster - **Events per session**: from `avg_events_per_session` in analytics overview - **Thinking depth**: average `thinking_blocks` — more thinking = more thorough (neutral metric) ### 5. Cost Efficiency (20% weight) From pricing: - **Cost per completed session**: `total_cost / completed_sessions` - **Cost trend**: comparing current period to previous (decreasing = improving) - **Model optimization**: sessions using expensive models (Opus) for tasks subagents handle with Haiku/Sonnet ## Overall Score Weighted sum → letter grade: - **A+** (95-100), **A** (90-94), **B+** (85-89), **B** (80-84), **C+** (75-79), **C** (70-74), **D** (60-69), **F** (<60) ## Output Format ``` ═══════════════════════════════════════ PRODUCTIVITY SCORE: 87/100 (B+) ═══════════════════════════════════════ Completion Rate ████████░░ 80/100 Token Efficiency █████████░ 92/100 Tool Effectiveness████████░░ 85/100 Velocity █████████░ 88/100 Cost Efficiency █████████░ 90/100 ═══════════════════════════════════════ ``` Then: top 3 strengths, top 3 improvement areas with actionable steps, and period comparison if available.
Comments (0)
Sign in to join the conversation.
Reviews (0)
No reviews yet.
No comments yet.