name: token-reduction
description: Use for minimizing token usage while preserving quality, through strict context filtering, indexed history retrieval, concise reasoning formats, output budgeting, and low-overhead execution patterns.
Token Reduction
Quick Index (Action-Routed)
Read First (All Actions)
MissionScope BoundaryCore RuleNon-Negotiable Constraints
Action Modules (Read As Needed)
- New project handling:
New-Project Startup Handshake (Required)Project Intake Index (Required for New Projects)Local-First / No-Deploy Default (Required)
- Retrieval efficiency:
History Indexing HandoffContext Retrieval Policy
- Response/output compression:
Output Compression PolicyCompressed Planning Syntax (Internal Use)Reasoning Externalization Policy (Required)
- Execution efficiency:
Tool Usage Token ControlsEditing Token Controls
- Quality safeguards:
Quality Guardrails Under CompressionRisk-Based Detail PolicyAnti-Patterns
Optional Reference Sections (Read Only If Needed)
Pros/Cons of Requested PrinciplesAdditional Token-Saving Strategies (Proposed)Operational ModesSuccess Metrics
Output
Deliverable Format
Mission
Deliver correct results with the fewest practical tokens.
Scope Boundary
This skill governs concise output, targeted reads, and low-overhead execution discipline.
Use History Indexing for:
- building/maintaining
docs/chat-history-index.md - long-session retrieval indexing workflows
- index schema and staleness management
Primary objective:
- maximize signal
- minimize context bloat
- avoid unnecessary reads/writes
- keep responses outcome-first
Core Rule
Users want outcomes, not internal deliberation.
Default behavior:
- show result first
- include only necessary rationale
- omit internal scratch reasoning from final output
- do not restate/reiterate the user's last request
- keep user-facing responses as concise as possible while preserving correctness
- use bullet points and minimal full sentences for user-facing responses
New-Project Startup Handshake (Required)
New project means a project the model has not worked on before.
At the start of every conversation involving a new project, ask this once before running costly verification work:
- whether the model should run tests/build/execution checks by default, or
- whether the user prefers to run them manually to save tokens/time.
Recommended prompt:
- "For this new project, do you want me to run tests/build checks by default, or would you rather run them yourself to save tokens?"
Policy:
- do not assume model-run verification by default on a brand-new project
- record preference and reuse it for the project unless user changes it
- if preference is unknown, ask before starting broad test/build runs
Project Intake Index (Required for New Projects)
Maintain docs/project-index.md with one entry per project.
Each entry must include:
project_id (short unique key)language (primary language)description (max 4 words)model_default_test_build (yes or no)last_confirmed_utc
Rules:
- create index file if missing
- add entry when first encountering a new project
- update
model_default_test_build when user preference changes - keep descriptions <= 4 words
- when using governance automation, treat generated governance artifacts as intake source and keep the index synchronized from those artifacts
Template:
# Project Index
| Project ID | Language | Description (<=4 words) | Model Runs Tests/Build by Default (yes/no) | Last Confirmed UTC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| universal-app | TypeScript/Python | Cross-platform business app | no | 2026-05-12T17:00:00Z |
Local-First / No-Deploy Default (Required)
Execution scope is local by default.
Rules:
- perform requested work locally unless user explicitly asks for deployment actions
- never deploy/release/publish/push to runtime environments implicitly
- if deployment might be inferred, ask for explicit confirmation first
- being aware of an existing deployed app does not change this default
Trigger Examples
Use when users ask for concise output, lower cost/latency, or when conversation length is causing context bloat.
Non-Negotiable Constraints
- Do not sacrifice correctness for brevity.
- Do not omit required safety or high-risk caveats.
- Do not hide critical uncertainty.
- Do not skip mandatory checks for medical/legal/financial/security-sensitive requests.
- Do not perform deployment actions unless explicitly requested.
Pros/Cons of Requested Principles
Canonical Requested List (3 Items)
This section is the authoritative pros/cons list for the exact user-requested items:
- result-focused responses (no internal-thought dump)
- history indexing + avoid unnecessary history reads
- very short internal planning style
1) Result-focused responses (no internal-thought dump)
Pros:
- lower token cost
- faster response delivery
- clearer, action-oriented outputs
Cons:
- can feel opaque for complex or high-risk decisions
- weaker auditability if rationale is removed entirely
Policy:
- default to concise outcome-first responses
- include brief rationale when trust/risk/tradeoff context is material
2) History indexing + avoid unnecessary history reads
Pros:
- substantial token savings on long threads
- lower chance of stale-context contamination
- faster retrieval of relevant prior decisions
Cons:
- requires ongoing index maintenance
- stale/missing index entries can hide relevant dependencies
Policy:
- use index-first retrieval
- read only referenced ranges for matched topics
- skip broad transcript reads for unrelated new inquiries
3) Very short internal planning style
Pros:
- reduced working-token overhead
- faster planning loops
- stronger prioritization discipline
Cons:
- loss of nuance for complex architecture/risk cases
- weaker handoff/debug readability if over-compressed
Policy:
- use compressed notation for transient internal planning
- keep final artifacts precise and unambiguous
Best-Practice Balance (Required)
- default to ultra-concise
- expand only for risk, ambiguity, or explicit user request
- maintain compact indexed history so precision is retained without transcript bloat
Additional Principle in This Skill
The skill also includes one extra supporting principle:
- prioritize
.md files as persistent instruction sources, then use indexed chat only when relevant
Pros:
- deterministic, durable source of project instructions
- lower ambiguity than free-form chat memory
- easier targeted retrieval
Cons:
- docs can lag behind new clarifications
- possible conflict between docs and recent user intent
Policy:
- prefer
.md by default - if conflict appears, ask precedence once and continue
History Indexing Handoff
For long-session indexing rules and artifact maintenance, apply History Indexing.
Context Retrieval Policy
Read in this order:
- task-local files
- relevant
.md policy/instruction files - indexed history ranges (only if needed)
- raw full chat history (last resort)
Never-load list:
- entire transcript without targeting
- binary/large files without purpose
- unrelated dependency directories
Output Compression Policy
Response Shape
Use minimal structure:
- result
- key evidence
- next action (if needed)
Avoid:
- repeated restatements
- excessive hedging
- verbose process narration
- repeating the user's most recent request
Length Controls
- default to short answers for simple requests
- expand only when user asks for depth
- use bullets for dense content instead of prose blocks
- avoid duplicate examples unless comparison is required
- user-facing wording must be coherent full-language (no shorthand abbreviations)
- batch related file reads in one command call
- prefer targeted
rg/sed ranges over full-file dumps - avoid re-reading unchanged files
- cache important findings as compact notes in working summary
- stop exploratory reads once decision confidence threshold is met
Editing Token Controls
- patch only touched lines
- avoid full-file rewrites unless necessary
- consolidate related edits in one patch
- avoid formatting churn unrelated to task
Compressed Planning Syntax (Internal Use)
Use short notation for transient planning notes:
goal: <result>ctx: <needed files only>do: <next command>chk: <validation>risk: <main risk>
Internal style rule:
- keep internal notes as concise as possible (
ultra-short target) - abbreviations/shorthand are allowed only for internal notes
- use common short-form text abbreviations where understandable to human readers
- do not use internal shorthand style in user-facing responses
- prioritize persistent notes in repo artifacts over expanding internal planning text
Example:
goal: add skillctx: skills tree + styledo: mkdir + add SKILL.mdchk: find + frontmatterrisk: policy mismatch
Reasoning Externalization Policy (Required)
Prefer storing useful detail in durable repo artifacts, not in long hidden reasoning.
Priority order:
- code-adjacent comments for non-obvious logic/tradeoffs
- relevant docs (
README.md, docs/*.md, governance artifacts) - concise user-facing summary
- internal transient notes (minimal only)
Rules:
- if detail helps future maintainers, write it in code comments or docs
- keep comments/doc notes concise, specific, and directly tied to changed behavior
- avoid verbose internal deliberation when the same value can be captured in repo notes
- do not add noisy comments for obvious code
- when risks/assumptions drive choices, capture them in docs or governance artifacts
Quality Guardrails Under Compression
Token reduction must still preserve:
- factual accuracy
- requirement coverage
- explicit uncertainty when present
- reproducible validation evidence
- complete quizme clarification rounds while
quizme-mode is active
Minimum correctness checklist:
- all user constraints addressed
- no contradictory instructions introduced
- critical commands/results verified
- unresolved blockers explicitly stated
Risk-Based Detail Policy
Adjust verbosity by risk:
- low risk: concise answer + minimal evidence
- medium risk: concise answer + targeted rationale
- high risk: concise answer + explicit safeguards + verification summary
Anti-Patterns
- "Concise" but missing requested deliverables
- re-reading broad history by default
- dumping tool output without synthesis
- answering with generic templates unrelated to user context
- over-compressing until ambiguity increases rework
Additional Token-Saving Strategies (Proposed)
- Decision checkpointing
- save compact "state snapshot" every major turn to avoid repeated re-analysis
- Relevance tagging in docs
- tag project docs by domain (
auth, payments, deploy) for precise retrieval
- Command output truncation discipline
- request only needed lines/fields; avoid full logs by default
- One-pass synthesis
- aggregate findings from parallel reads before responding once
- Ask-then-expand policy
- provide short answer first, expand on demand
- Stable artifact references
- link to canonical files instead of repeating content
Operational Modes
lean (default): concise answers, targeted readsultra-lean: minimal narration, result-only unless risk requires detailaudit: still concise, but includes explicit evidence trail
Mode selection:
- if user says "quick", "short", or "just result" =>
ultra-lean - if user asks "why" or "prove" =>
audit
When using this skill, provide:
- concise result
- essential evidence only
- optional "expand?" prompt when deeper detail may help
Success Metrics
Track, when practical:
- reduced average response length for simple tasks
- reduced redundant file/history reads
- unchanged or improved task success rate