Flight Reservation Modification Flight Cancellation Refund Other Flight Booking Flight Delay Compensation

derived-flight-reservation-modification · Based on 116 threads · medium confidence

Flight Reservation Modification

Derived primarily from user-authored prompts across a 300-thread slice. Full-slice prompt clustering ran on every thread, and Claude consolidated the major workflow types from cluster exemplars because the slice exceeds the non-sampling threshold.

Projected spend / mo$7.84sample $2.36

Projected savings / mo$5.21sample $1.57 · Could cut spend by ~66%

Projected runs / mo385sample 116

Projected total tokens1.6Mavg 4.2K per run

Projected input / output286.2K / 1.3M

Metric scope

Workflow metrics are projected; evidence stays tied to analyzed threads

Projected workflow runs385 / moThis workflow represented 116 of 300 analyzed threads.

Analyzed workflow sample116 threadsFindings, recommendations, and evidence cards are still anchored to the normalized workflow sample.

Projection factor3.3xApplied to this workflow's spend, savings, runs, and token totals. Confidence: medium.

Source pool996 sessionsThe full source-pool population used by the dashboard projection.

This workflow

Token and spend trend

17 hour buckets

Dec 4 4AM

Dec 4 5AM

Dec 4 6AM

Dec 4 7AM

Dec 4 8AM

Dec 4 9AM

Dec 4 11AM

Dec 4 12PM

Dec 4 11PM

Dec 5 12AM

Dec 17 4PM

Dec 17 5PM

Dec 17 6PM

Dec 17 7PM

Dec 17 8PM

Dec 17 9PM

Dec 17 10PM

Input tokensOutput tokens

Model mix

Tokens and spend by model

6 models

Tokens by model

input + output

Claude Opus 4.5307.3K tokens

578 calls36.8% of total

gemini-3-pro-preview193.3K tokens

521 calls23.1% of total

GPT-5.2152.4K tokens

407 calls18.2% of total

Kimi-K2133K tokens

492 calls15.9% of total

GPT-5.1-CODEX39.9K tokens

113 calls4.8% of total

Qwen3-Coder9.1K tokens

26 calls1.1% of total

Spend by model

estimated cost

Claude Opus 4.5$6.08

75.6% of total

GPT-5.2$1.26

15.7% of total

GPT-5.1-CODEX$0.26

3.2% of total

gemini-3-pro-preview$0.23

2.8% of total

Kimi-K2$0.20

2.5% of total

Qwen3-Coder$0.01

0.1% of total

Opportunities

5 opportunities for this workflow

$5.21 projected

Outcome cohort gap

Failed runs diverge from successful runs before the final outcome

47% of runs fail or partially pass. Failed runs average 19.8 tool calls and 934 input tokens versus 9.9 calls and 565 tokens for successful runs.

$1.63projected / month savedsample $0.49/mo

high riskhigh confidence

Recommended first move

Set a tool call limit per run to stop runaway loops early.

Learn more

What we saw

Nearly half of all scored runs fail or only partially pass.
Failed runs make roughly twice as many tool calls as successful ones.
Failed runs consume 65% more input tokens, raising cost with no benefit.
Extra tool calls suggest the agent loops or retries instead of resolving the task.

More recommended changes

Alert or pause a run when tool calls exceed roughly 12 to 14.
Review the most-used tool in failed runs to find where the agent gets stuck.

Evidence (2)

StepFailed cohort outcome

Imported benchmark outcome ended with failure

StepSuccessful cohort outcome

Imported benchmark outcome ended with success

Tool misuse

Failed benchmark outcomes are still paying the full workflow cost

55 of 116 runs fail at full cost. Adding early exit checks before heavy tool calls could cut waste fast.

$1.23projected / month savedsample $0.37/mo

high riskmedium confidence

Recommended first move

Add a preflight prompt step to validate inputs before any tool calls run.

Learn more

What we saw

47% of runs end in failure or partial success, paying full token and tool call cost.
No early exit appears to stop failing runs before they reach expensive steps.
Preflight checks are likely absent or too weak to catch bad inputs early.
Monthly spend is low now, but failure rate will scale cost as volume grows.

More recommended changes

Set an early exit rule that stops a run when key retrieval returns no results.
Log the step where each failure first occurs to find the most costly failure point.

Evidence (1)

StepImported failing outcome

Imported benchmark outcome ended with failure

Tool misuse

Tool loops are dense enough to need batching or early stopping

tool dominates repeated tool activity, so the workflow is likely doing incremental calls where batching, caching, or tighter stop conditions would reduce churn.

$0.93projected / month savedsample $0.28/mo

medium riskmedium confidence

Recommended first move

Batch or cache repeated tool calls where the inputs overlap across adjacent steps.

Learn more

More recommended changes

Add a per-run tool budget and stop condition so failed runs do not keep exploring after the likely answer is already unreachable.

Tool error loop

The same tool error repeats instead of triggering a new plan

The agent retried a broken tool call 193 times across 2 threads without changing its approach, burning context and making no progress.

$0.80projected / month savedsample $0.24/mo

high riskhigh confidence

Recommended first move

Add a circuit breaker that stops retrying after 3 identical errors.

Learn more

What we saw

The same SyntaxError fired 193 times with no change in the tool input.
Two threads were affected, so the loop spread beyond a single run.
Each failed call consumed context, shrinking room for useful work.
No recovery plan triggered after the first failure.

More recommended changes

Prompt the agent to revise its tool input when an error repeats.
Log the first error and skip further calls until input changes.

Evidence (1)

DataRepeated tool error

SyntaxError: invalid syntax (<unknown>, line 1)

Output contract mismatch

Users are correcting missing fields or output shape

Users are fixing incomplete or incorrectly shaped responses from your assistant. This suggests the assistant isn't following its output rules consistently. A validator can catch these problems before users see them.

$0.63projected / month savedsample $0.19/mo

medium riskhigh confidence

Recommended first move

Define exact output shape: required fields, data types, and format rules

Learn more

What we saw

20 correction messages across 10 threads show users fixing missing data or wrong format
Users mention expected fields the assistant didn't include or got wrong
Pattern appears in ~9% of runs, indicating a systematic gap not random errors
High confidence finding based on clear correction language in transcripts

More recommended changes

Add a check after each assistant response to verify it matches the contract
Log failures to find which prompts or tools cause shape mismatches

Evidence (1)

DataUser correction signal

I see the difference is $222, but I have insurance on my reservation. According to your website, change fees and fare differences should be waived for insured tickets. Can you ple…

Prompt composition

Input token breakdown

85.9K tokens

user85.9K · 100%

Tool signals

How this workflow runs

Retries0

How often steps had to re-run.

Delegated subtasks0

Tasks handed off to sub-agents during the workflow.

Documents retrieved0

Total documents pulled in across all tool calls.

Median step latency0 ms

Typical time each step takes to finish.

Stage order

Typical workflow path

3 steps

RespondKimi-K2
Respond step in the workflow.
Latency unavailable232 tok avg
2
Loop×99
Loop: plan → tool — repeats 99 times.
Latency unavailable24K tok avg
1. 1
  PlanKimi-K2
  Plan the next steps in the workflow.
  Latency unavailable101 tok avg
2. 2
  Tooltool
  Tool step in the workflow.
  Latency unavailable141 tok avg
Verify
Verify step in the workflow.
Latency unavailable143 tok avg

Threads

Pick a thread to see what happened

116 threads

Cost per run$0.13

Monthly runs1

Monthly cost$0.13

Operation path68 named tool/models

1
RespondRespond
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
7 tok · $0.00
2
RespondRespond
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
101 tok · $0.00
3
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
45 tok · $0.00
4
toolTool
Run tooltool
237 tok
5
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
170 tok · $0.00
6
toolTool
Run tooltool
16 tok
7
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
131 tok · $0.00
8
toolTool
Run tooltool
229 tok
9
RespondRespond
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
248 tok · $0.01
10
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
154 tok · $0.00
11
toolTool
Run tooltool
237 tok
12
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
154 tok · $0.00
13
toolTool
Run tooltool
98 tok
14
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
154 tok · $0.00
15
toolTool
Run tooltool
16 tok
16
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
81 tok · $0.00
17
toolTool
Run tooltool
233 tok
18
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
154 tok · $0.00
19
toolTool
Run tooltool
38 tok
20
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
154 tok · $0.00
21
toolTool
Run tooltool
38 tok
22
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
154 tok · $0.00
23
toolTool
Run tooltool
43 tok
24
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
154 tok · $0.00
25
toolTool
Run tooltool
1.1K tok
26
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
178 tok · $0.00
27
toolTool
Run tooltool
39 tok
28
RespondRespond
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
428 tok · $0.01
29
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
156 tok · $0.00
30
toolTool
Run tooltool
6 tok
31
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
156 tok · $0.00
32
toolTool
Run tooltool
9 tok
33
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
156 tok · $0.00
34
toolTool
Run tooltool
9 tok
35
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
156 tok · $0.00
36
toolTool
Run tooltool
9 tok
37
RespondRespond
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
370 tok · $0.01
38
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
174 tok · $0.00
39
toolTool
Run tooltool
6 tok
40
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
148 tok · $0.00
41
toolTool
Run tooltool
163 tok
42
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
148 tok · $0.00
43
toolTool
Run tooltool
9 tok
44
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
148 tok · $0.00
45
toolTool
Run tooltool
9 tok
46
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
148 tok · $0.00
47
toolTool
Run tooltool
5 tok
48
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
148 tok · $0.00
49
toolTool
Run tooltool
14 tok
50
RespondRespond
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
417 tok · $0.01
51
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
192 tok · $0.00
52
toolTool
Run tooltool
315 tok
53
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
192 tok · $0.00
54
toolTool
Run tooltool
188 tok
55
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
192 tok · $0.00
56
toolTool
Run tooltool
12 tok
57
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
192 tok · $0.00
58
toolTool
Run tooltool
70 tok
59
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
192 tok · $0.00
60
toolTool
Run tooltool
12 tok
61
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
192 tok · $0.00
62
toolTool
Run tooltool
9 tok
63
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
192 tok · $0.00
64
toolTool
Run tooltool
9 tok
65
PlanPlan
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
192 tok · $0.00
66
toolTool
Run tooltool
175 tok
67
RespondRespond
claude-opus-4-5claude-opus-4-5
470 tok · $0.01
68
dataset evaluationTool
Run dataset_evaluationdataset_evaluation
100 tok
69
Imported benchmark outcomeVerify
Imported benchmark outcome
120 tok

The old plan/tool string was the normalized span order. Rows above use imported operation records; when a tool name is missing, the source only provided the normalized stage and operation label.

Snapshots

full_transcriptSnapshot 1 · imported

Hi! How can I help you today? Hi! I’d like to make some changes to my upcoming flight. Can you help me with that? Of course, I'd be happy to help you make changes to your upcoming…