← Back to context

Comment by pianopatrick

9 days ago

do you have any data you can share on how many input and output tokens were used in that whole process to fix that bug?

37 comments

pianopatrick

Reply
simonw  9 days ago 

  ~ % uvx agentsview session usage be8850a7-6119-46a0-b5d6-79c7fff5ae2b
  Session:       be8850a7-6119-46a0-b5d6-79c7fff5ae2b
  Agent:         claude
  Output:        68606
  Peak ctx:      113178
  Cost:          ~$12.11 (claude-fable-5, claude-opus-4-8)

  • pianopatrick  9 days ago

    Thanks for the response. That is too expensive for me right now but I appreciate you sharing.

    I hope long term people will figure out how to make such fixes cheaper.

    • simonw  9 days ago

      I didn't have to pay $12 myself - I'm paying $100/month for a subscription which gives me more like ~$1,000/month of credits, depending on how well I space them out.

      This is also a very real outlier. I've been doing little CSS fixes with coding agents for over a year now and most of them finish in seconds and cost in the order of single digit cents.

  • sillysaurusx  9 days ago

    Was the fix worth $12 to you?

    • simonw  9 days ago

      I'd have been pretty annoyed if I'd been paying full price, hadn't paid attention and that one prompt (screenshot plus a line of text) had cost me $12!

      On the discounted subscription I can tolerate it, it took a small bite out of my daily allowance but not enough that I regret anything.

      As an LLM researcher I have no regrets at all because watching it work around the environmental restrictions was fascinating.

      30 replies →