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".
71
88%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
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 well-crafted skill description that clearly communicates its purpose, lists specific capabilities, and provides explicit trigger guidance. It covers the 'what', 'when', and trigger terms comprehensively while maintaining a distinct niche around Clay cost optimization. The third-person voice is used correctly throughout.
| 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 key management) 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 well-structured, actionable skill with concrete code examples and a clear multi-step workflow for reducing Clay costs. Its main weakness is that the inline code examples make it quite long (~180 lines), and the content could benefit from splitting detailed implementations into separate referenced files. The error handling table and resource links are valuable additions.
Suggestions
Move the longer TypeScript implementations (budget monitor, cost filter, sampler) into separate bundle files and reference them from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure and reduce token consumption.
Tighten the code examples—the BudgetMonitor class and estimateCreditCost function could be shortened to essential patterns with notes to extend as needed.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is mostly efficient with good use of tables and code examples, but includes some unnecessary verbosity—the code examples are quite long and could be tightened (e.g., the full BudgetMonitor class and sampler could be more concise). The overview and prerequisites sections add modest value but aren't strictly necessary for Claude. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable TypeScript code for filtering, sampling, budget monitoring, and cost calculation. The provider key setup instructions are concrete with specific navigation paths, and the waterfall optimization includes specific credit numbers and coverage percentages. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 6-step sequence is logically ordered from highest-impact (own API keys) to monitoring/analysis. Step 4 includes an explicit validation checkpoint (check hit rate before proceeding with full list), and the error handling table provides clear troubleshooting for common failure modes. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is largely monolithic—all code examples are inline rather than referenced from separate files. The file paths in code comments (e.g., src/clay/cost-filter.ts) suggest a structure but no actual bundle files exist. The reference to 'clay-reference-architecture' at the end is a good signal but the main body could benefit from splitting detailed code into referenced files. | 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
09b10d6
- 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.