Bigquery cost audit
Curated power-ups for coding agents: skills, slash commands, MCP configs, hooks, AGENTS.md templates, and workflows for serious software engineering. Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity CLI, Cursor and more
npx -y skills add yeaight7/agent-powerups --skill bigquery-cost-auditAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 6 stars6 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Use when reviewing BigQuery spend, query failure patterns, or scan inefficiencies -- identifying which jobs, users, or projects drive cost, or preparing optimization recommendations for a cost review.
SKILL.md
4.2 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
BigQuery Cost Audit
When to Use
- Reviewing BigQuery query costs, failure patterns, or performance inefficiencies.
- Identifying which jobs, users, or projects are driving the highest spend.
- Preparing optimization recommendations for an engineering or cost-review meeting.
- Auditing governance: scheduled jobs, duplicated logic, or low-value recurring queries.
Goals
- Identify the main cost drivers by job, project, and user.
- Detect repeated waste patterns (full scans, failed retries, duplicated logic).
- Suggest realistic optimizations with estimated impact.
- Translate technical waste into business-language findings.
What to Inspect
Cost hotspots
-- Top 20 most expensive jobs in the past 7 days
SELECT
job_id, user_email, query,
total_bytes_processed / POW(1024, 4) AS tb_processed,
ROUND(total_bytes_processed / POW(1024, 4) * 6.25, 2) AS estimated_cost_usd,
creation_time
FROM `region-us`.INFORMATION_SCHEMA.JOBS
WHERE creation_time > TIMESTAMP_SUB(CURRENT_TIMESTAMP(), INTERVAL 7 DAY)
AND job_type = 'QUERY'
AND state = 'DONE'
ORDER BY total_bytes_processed DESC
LIMIT 20;
Repeated failures
SELECT
error_result.reason, COUNT(*) AS failure_count, user_email,
ANY_VALUE(query) AS sample_query
FROM `region-us`.INFORMATION_SCHEMA.JOBS
WHERE creation_time > TIMESTAMP_SUB(CURRENT_TIMESTAMP(), INTERVAL 7 DAY)
AND error_result IS NOT NULL
GROUP BY error_result.reason, user_email
ORDER BY failure_count DESC;
Missing partition pruning
Look for queries that scan full tables despite available partition columns:
- No
WHEREfilter on the partition column. _PARTITIONTIMEor_PARTITIONDATEnot in the filter.LIMITused without a partition filter (does not reduce scan cost).
Missing clustering
Check high-scan queries that filter on non-clustered columns after partitioning is already in place.
Scheduled jobs with low value
-- Find scheduled queries with high scan volume (via Data Transfer Service run history)
-- Note: scheduled query metadata lives in region-specific transfer_run tables.
-- Substitute your project and region:
SELECT
config.display_name,
run.state,
run.end_time,
run.error_status
FROM `<project>.<region>.INFORMATION_SCHEMA.SCHEDULED_QUERY_RUNS` AS run
JOIN `<project>.<region>.INFORMATION_SCHEMA.SCHEDULED_QUERIES` AS config
ON run.scheduled_query_id = config.scheduled_query_id
WHERE run.end_time > TIMESTAMP_SUB(CURRENT_TIMESTAMP(), INTERVAL 30 DAY)
ORDER BY config.display_name, run.end_time DESC;
-- Then cross-reference with JOBS to find per-run bytes_processed.
Output Format
- Top cost hotspots — job ID, user, bytes scanned, estimated USD, query snippet.
- Recurring failure patterns — error reason, count, user, sample query.
- Optimization opportunities:
- Partition pruning gaps.
- Clustering candidates.
- Queries eligible for materialization or caching.
- Scheduled jobs that should be retired or narrowed.
- Quick wins vs larger refactors — flag which optimizations are a one-line WHERE clause fix vs a schema change.
- Engineering summary — technical root causes and remediation steps.
- Business summary — cost impact in plain language; approximate monthly savings per opportunity.
Rules
- Focus on practical opportunities, not theoretical micro-optimizations.
- Prefer changes that reduce cost without increasing operational fragility.
- Do not run destructive operations.
- Do not edit code or queries unless explicitly asked.
- Acknowledge uncertainty when cost estimates depend on assumptions about query frequency.
Verification
- Hotspots listed with job, user, bytes scanned, and estimated USD
- Failure patterns grouped by error reason with counts and a sample query
- Each optimization classified as a quick win or a larger refactor
- Savings estimates state the assumptions behind them
- Findings include both an engineering summary and a business summary