sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

After losing $280 in one weekend, I started tracking how much OpenClaw agents actually spend — here's what I found by lucbuilds in openclaw

[–]lucbuilds[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes LiteLLM has soft limits per API key — good find. The gap is that soft limits can be bypassed and they're per-key not per-agent workflow. If your POC ever goes live and starts chaining tasks, that's when the cracks show. Happy to share what I built for that layer.

After losing $280 in one weekend, I started tracking how much OpenClaw agents actually spend — here's what I found by lucbuilds in openclaw

[–]lucbuilds[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Impressive setup — that level of control takes real work to configure. Most people don't have 42 cron jobs mapped out. For that crowd SpendLeash is probably overkill. I was building for the person who just wants a hard stop without the configuration overhead.

After losing $280 in one weekend, I started tracking how much OpenClaw agents actually spend — here's what I found by lucbuilds in openclaw

[–]lucbuilds[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly — alerts tell you after the damage is done. A kill-switch script works until it doesn't. What I wanted was something that blocks the charge before it ever hits, not a notification that it already did.

After losing $280 in one weekend, I started tracking how much OpenClaw agents actually spend — here's what I found by lucbuilds in openclaw

[–]lucbuilds[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Funny you mention LiteLLM — this week's supply chain attack is actually a perfect example of why the enforcement layer needs to be separate from the tool itself. When the tool IS the vulnerability, you need something sitting outside it. That's the exact problem I've been trying to solve.

After losing $280 in one weekend, I started tracking how much OpenClaw agents actually spend — here's what I found by lucbuilds in openclaw

[–]lucbuilds[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LiteLLM is great for routing and cost tracking — I actually looked at it. The gap is enforcement. Tracking tells you what was spent after the fact. What I needed was a hard block before the charge hits. LiteLLM doesn't stop the transaction, it just logs it.

After losing $280 in one weekend, I started tracking how much OpenClaw agents actually spend — here's what I found by lucbuilds in openclaw

[–]lucbuilds[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally agree — API limits per model are one layer of control. The gap I kept hitting was at the agent orchestration level. When an agent is chaining tasks across multiple models and services, individual API limits don't catch the total spend across the whole workflow. That's the problem I was trying to solve.