AI Build Cost Tracker
Know exactly what each feature costs to build with AI. Budget smarter, spend less.
Process
Phase 1: Show Current State
node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/tools/cost-tracker.mjs <project-directory> show
Parse the JSON output for cost history and summary.
Phase 2: Cost Dashboard
Present spending overview:
Total Spend:
- All-time total cost
- This week / this month breakdown
- Average cost per task
By Task/Feature:
- Ranked list of features by cost (most expensive first)
- Flag any outliers (tasks costing 3x+ the average)
By Model:
- Cost breakdown by AI model used
- Potential savings from model switching
Daily Trend:
- Last 30 days of daily spending
- Identify high-spend days
Phase 3: Cost Insights
Generate actionable insights:
- Where money goes — what types of tasks cost the most (debugging? features? refactoring?)
- Optimization opportunities — tasks that could use a cheaper model
- Budget projection — at current rate, monthly spend estimate
- Cost per line of code — rough estimate based on git diff
Phase 4: Logging New Costs
To log a new cost entry:
node ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/tools/cost-tracker.mjs <project-directory> log "<label>" <input_tokens> <output_tokens> --model=claude-opus-4-6
Labels should be descriptive kebab-case: auth-feature, bug-fix-login, refactor-api, seo-optimization
Phase 5: Recommendations
Based on spending patterns:
If debugging > 30% of spend:
- "Consider investing in more tests upfront — debugging is your biggest cost driver"
- Suggest running
/test-driven-developmentskill
If a single task > 3x average:
- "The [task] cost $X — consider breaking large tasks into smaller chunks"
Model optimization:
- "Routine refactoring with Sonnet instead of Opus would save ~$X/month"
- "Code review tasks can use Haiku — potential savings of ~$X/month"
Logging Guide
Help the user understand when and how to log costs:
- Log at the END of each task/feature (not during)
- Use consistent labels across sessions
- Include ALL tokens (input + output) from the conversation
- Estimate if exact numbers aren't available (Claude Code shows token usage in the UI)
Phase 6: Build vs. Buy Framework
When reviewing cost data, help the user think about the economics of building with AI:
Worth building with AI (high ROI):
- Features that would take 2+ days manually but 2 hours with AI
- Boilerplate-heavy work (CRUD, migrations, test suites, API endpoints)
- Exploration and prototyping (try 3 approaches, keep the best one)
Consider alternatives:
- If a feature costs >$100 in AI tokens, check if a library or SaaS already does it
- If debugging the same issue costs >$20 in AI tokens, the root cause is architectural — fix the architecture, not the symptom
- If AI-generated code needs significant manual correction, the prompt needs work, not more tokens
Cost benchmarks for solo founders:
| Task Type | Expected Cost | If Higher, Investigate |
|---|---|---|
| New API endpoint | $1-5 | Complex business logic or unclear spec |
| Bug fix | $0.50-3 | Missing tests or hard-to-reproduce issue |
| Full feature (frontend + backend) | $5-20 | Large scope or frequent rework |
| Refactoring | $2-10 | Unclear boundaries or missing tests |
| Content/copy generation | $0.25-1 | Too many revision cycles |
Key Principles
- AI is an investment, not a cost. The goal isn't to minimize spend — it's to maximize ROI. A $50 feature that generates $5K MRR is a great investment. But a $50 bug fix that should have cost $5 with better tests is waste.
- Track to learn, not to punish. Cost data reveals where your process is inefficient. High debugging costs mean insufficient tests. High rework costs mean unclear specs.
- Optimize the expensive tasks, not the cheap ones. Switching from Opus to Haiku for a $0.10 task saves nothing. Reducing a $50 debugging session by improving test coverage saves real money.