clay-cost-tuning
Optimize Clay credit spending with provider key management, waterfall tuning, and budget controls. Use when analyzing Clay costs, reducing credit consumption, or implementing spending alerts and caps. Trigger with phrases like "clay cost", "clay billing", "reduce clay costs", "clay pricing", "clay expensive", "clay budget", "clay credits".
89
88%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong skill description that clearly communicates specific capabilities (provider key management, waterfall tuning, budget controls), provides explicit 'Use when' guidance with concrete scenarios, and includes a comprehensive list of natural trigger phrases. It uses proper third-person voice and is concise without being vague. The description is well-structured and would allow Claude to confidently select this skill when users discuss Clay platform cost optimization.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'provider key management', 'waterfall tuning', 'budget controls', 'spending alerts and caps'. These are concrete, actionable capabilities rather than vague language. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (optimize credit spending with provider key management, waterfall tuning, budget controls) and 'when' (analyzing Clay costs, reducing credit consumption, implementing spending alerts) with explicit trigger phrases. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'clay cost', 'clay billing', 'reduce clay costs', 'clay pricing', 'clay expensive', 'clay budget', 'clay credits'. These are highly natural phrases a user would type when seeking cost optimization help. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with a clear niche around Clay platform cost optimization. The specific domain (Clay credits, waterfall tuning, provider keys) and explicit trigger terms make it very unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a strong, actionable skill with concrete savings numbers, executable code, and a well-sequenced workflow from highest to lowest impact optimizations. The main weakness is that the extensive inline TypeScript code blocks make the file longer than ideal—some could be extracted to referenced files. The error handling table and March 2026 pricing callout add practical value.
Suggestions
Consider moving the longer TypeScript implementations (BudgetMonitor class, cost-filter, sampler) to a referenced file like `clay-cost-utils.ts` and keeping only brief usage examples inline to improve conciseness.
Add a brief summary table at the top showing expected savings per technique (e.g., 'Own keys: 70-80%, Waterfall tuning: ~67%, Pre-filtering: 20-40%') for quick scanning before the detailed steps.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is mostly efficient with useful tables and code, but some code blocks are longer than necessary (e.g., the BudgetMonitor class and sampler could be more concise). The overview is tight, but the TypeScript examples include boilerplate that could be trimmed while preserving clarity. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable TypeScript code, specific credit cost tables with concrete numbers, exact UI navigation paths (Settings > Connections), and clear decision thresholds (hit rate > 60% proceed, < 40% clean data). Every step has copy-paste ready guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Six clearly sequenced steps ordered by impact (biggest savings first), with explicit validation checkpoints in Step 4 (sample before full run with go/no-go thresholds), budget alerts in Step 5, and a clear error handling table. The sampling workflow includes a feedback loop for data quality. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-structured with clear sections, but it's quite long (~150+ lines of code) and could benefit from splitting detailed code implementations into separate files. The reference to 'clay-reference-architecture' at the end is good, but the inline code blocks make this a dense single file. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Commit
c8a915c
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.