Marcos
30d2a3d7da
Skills — the primary now loads conditionally (each one is input tokens), per a load table in pragent.md: - attention-tiering: classify every PR trivial/lite/full/oversized BEFORE reading anything, and cap file reads, linter runs and subagent fan-out per tier. This is the cost governor; the other skills defer to its budget. - linter-playbook: per-ecosystem detect-and-run commands scoped to changed files, the never-install rule, and how to turn a diagnostic into a finding instead of pasting tool output. - security-lens: the inline security checklist for when @security isn't worth delegating, built around a source -> sink test each finding must pass. - malicious-change: hostile-PR detection — injection aimed at the reviewer, install/CI-time hooks, obfuscated payloads, dependency confusion, logic backdoors. Complements the runtime containment added in the previous commit: that stops the agent being hijacked, this makes it report the attempt. - comment-craft: how to write problem/fix/suggestion so a maintainer can act in one read, and what to cut. pilot/cost_model.py — prices a review against published Claude and OpenAI rates (fetched 2026-08-18). Prompt sizes are measured from the factory files rather than guessed; per-tier workloads come from the tiering budgets. The model is explicit about the thing that actually dominates an agent loop: the whole conversation is resent every step, so caching moves ~2.3x of the bill. Blended over a 5/35/55/5 mix with caching on: ~$0.61/PR on Opus 5 or GPT-5.6 Sol, ~$0.24 on Sonnet 5 or Terra, ~$0.12 on Haiku 4.5, ~$0.02 on Luna. At 350 PRs/month that's ~$212 / ~$85 / ~$43 / ~$8.50. Tests: 101 -> 122. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01B11e8TZZxJyzHW7jj7KWUN
81 lines
3.5 KiB
Markdown
81 lines
3.5 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: attention-tiering
|
|
description: Decide how much review effort a PR deserves BEFORE doing expensive work — trivial / lite / full / oversized — and what each tier is allowed to spend. Load this first, right after reading the brief.
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Attention tiering
|
|
|
|
Cost scales with what you read, not with what you report. A lockfile bump and a
|
|
new auth middleware must not cost the same. Pick a tier from the diff **before**
|
|
reading repo files, state it in your summary, and stay inside its budget.
|
|
|
|
Deterministic rules decide first. Only an ambiguous case needs judgement.
|
|
|
|
## Pick the tier
|
|
|
|
Read the diff's shape: changed-file count, added+removed lines, and which paths.
|
|
|
|
| Tier | Trigger (first match wins) | Budget |
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
|
| `trivial` | Only lockfiles (`*.lock`, `package-lock.json`, `go.sum`, `poetry.lock`), generated/vendored paths, pure docs/comment/whitespace edits, or `.md` typo fixes | No file reads, no linters, no subagents. One pass over the diff. Usually `findings: []`. |
|
|
| `lite` | < 50 changed lines AND < 4 files AND no risk path | ≤ 3 file reads, linters on changed files only, no subagents. |
|
|
| `full` | The default for anything real | ≤ 15 file reads, linters, subagents only per the rules below. |
|
|
| `oversized` | > 1500 changed lines OR > 40 files | Do NOT read the whole thing. Structural pass + deep pass on the hot subset (see below). |
|
|
|
|
**Risk paths** force at least `full` regardless of size — a 3-line change here is
|
|
not `lite`:
|
|
|
|
- auth, authz, session, token, crypto, password, secret, key
|
|
- SQL / query builders / raw query strings, deserialization, `eval`/`exec`
|
|
- file upload/download, path handling, subprocess, network egress
|
|
- CI/CD config, `Dockerfile`, `.github/`, `.gitea/`, dependency manifests
|
|
- migrations, anything touching money, PII, or permissions
|
|
|
|
## Oversized: what "hot subset" means
|
|
|
|
Rank changed files by risk, then review the top ~10 properly and summarize the
|
|
rest structurally:
|
|
|
|
1. risk-path files (above), highest first
|
|
2. files with the most *logic* churn (ignore pure moves, renames, formatting)
|
|
3. files with no test file changed alongside them
|
|
|
|
Say so explicitly in the summary: "reviewed N of M files in depth; the rest are
|
|
<mechanical rename / generated / config>". A partial review that admits its scope
|
|
is useful. A silent partial review is not.
|
|
|
|
## Subagent delegation
|
|
|
|
Subagents are the single biggest cost multiplier — each one is a fresh context
|
|
that re-reads the diff. Delegate **only** when both hold:
|
|
|
|
- the tier is `full` or `oversized`, AND
|
|
- the lens has real surface: `@security` when a risk path above is touched,
|
|
`@tests` when logic changed and no test file did, `@perf` when a loop, query,
|
|
or request-path function changed.
|
|
|
|
Never fan out on `lite`. Never spawn a lens with nothing to look at. Two
|
|
subagents on one PR is normally the ceiling.
|
|
|
|
## Cheap before expensive
|
|
|
|
In every tier, in this order — stop as soon as findings are grounded:
|
|
|
|
1. the diff itself (free, already in the brief)
|
|
2. `grep` for a symbol's other uses (cheap, targeted)
|
|
3. reading one file around the change (moderate)
|
|
4. linters/typecheck on changed files (moderate, high signal)
|
|
5. reading callers/tests (expensive)
|
|
6. subagents (most expensive)
|
|
|
|
Prefer `grep -n 'symbol'` over reading a whole file to answer "is this used
|
|
elsewhere". Read a *range* around the hunk, not a 2000-line file, when you only
|
|
need the enclosing function.
|
|
|
|
## Report the tier
|
|
|
|
Put it in the summary line so the cost is auditable:
|
|
|
|
> Tier: `full` (312 changed lines, touches `auth/session.go`). 9 files read,
|
|
> `go vet` run, `@security` delegated.
|