Files
pragent/tests/pilot
Marcos 2613b3e3af fix(cost-model): calibrate against the first measured review
PR #7 ran under the AI-USAGE label and reported real numbers: 28 agent steps,
348s, 2,071,025 input / 17,303 output tokens, and zero cache reads or writes.
The model predicted ~$0.73 on Opus 5 for that tier. The measurement prices it
at $10.79 — the model was ~15x low.

Two wrong assumptions:

- Step count and per-step growth. `full` assumed 12 steps and 1,200 tokens per
  tool result; the run did 28 steps averaging ~3,300. Cost is roughly quadratic
  in steps, so this compounds. Tier defaults are re-derived from the measured
  per-step growth rather than from guesses.
- Caching. The model defaulted to prompt caching on. The headroom/glm-5.2 path
  reports 0 read / 0 write, so the stable prefix is paid at full input price on
  every step. Budget with caching off until that column is nonzero.

Adds OBSERVED_RUNS as an append-only calibration anchor, an observed-runs
section in the report, and a regression test asserting the model stays within
2.5x of the measurement — so the next drift is caught by the suite rather than
by a surprising invoice.

Corrected blended figures at 350 PRs/month: ~$1,740 Opus 5, ~$1,755 GPT-5.6
Sol, ~$696 Sonnet 5, ~$348 Haiku 4.5, ~$70 GPT-5.6 Luna.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01B11e8TZZxJyzHW7jj7KWUN
2026-08-18 05:08:22 +00:00
..