Budget Hierarchy Roll-Up
About This MicroSim
A pyramid of five hierarchical budget levels (Session → PR → Engineer → Repo → Organization). Each level shows current consumption against its cap; at-risk levels are colored amber (75%+) or red (90%+). The visualization makes obvious which level would fire first under current consumption and time window.
How to Use
- Read the default hierarchy. The Engineer level is at 69% — closest to its cap.
- Toggle at-risk highlighting. Watch amber appear on near-cap levels.
- Change time window. Notice how shorter windows often have lower consumption percentages — fresh windows.
Bloom Level
Analyze (L4) — organize per-session costs into the hierarchical budget structure (PR → engineer → repo → organization) and identify which level would fire first.
Iframe Embed Code
1 | |
Lesson Plan
Audience
Engineering managers and platform-team members designing organizational budget policies for LLM use.
Duration
10–15 minutes inside Chapter 18.
Prerequisites
Chapter 18 sections on Per-Engineer Budget, Per-Repository Budget, Per-PR Budget.
Activities
- Identify the firing level (3 min). Without highlighting, predict which level is closest to its cap.
- Multiple-cap interplay (5 min). Discuss: what should happen when a Session is healthy but the Engineer level is at 95%?
- Organizational policy design (5 min). What ratios between consecutive levels are appropriate? (Engineer:PR is ~4:1 here.)
Practice Scenarios
| # | Scenario | Which level fires first? |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Defaults | Engineer (~69%) |
| 2 | One engineer monopolizes work — Engineer 95% | Engineer |
| 3 | Many engineers share work — Repo 88%, Engineers all 50% | Repo |
| 4 | Single PR runs unusually long — PR 80%, others 30% | PR |
| 5 | All levels ~20% | None — healthy |
Assessment
Learner can identify which level of a multi-level budget policy fires first given a snapshot, and recommend cap ratios for new policies.
References
- Chapter 18 — Per-Engineer Budget, Per-Repository Budget.
- AWS Cost Explorer — adjacent literature on hierarchical cost attribution.
Senior Instructional Designer Quality Review
Reviewer perspective: 15+ years designing engineering and platform-engineering curricula for adult professional learners.
Overall verdict
Approve as-is for Chapter 18. Score: 86/100 (B+). Pyramid visualization is the right primitive for hierarchical roll-up; the 75%/90% color thresholds make at-risk levels self-evident.
What works
- Bloom alignment. L4 "organize" requires structuring data hierarchically; the pyramid is the structure.
- Color thresholds visible. The amber/red transitions teach the standard alerting bands.
- Each level's percentage shown numerically. No need to estimate from bar fill.
Gaps
- Drill-down not implemented. Clicking a level to see contributing items below would close the L4 loop. Score impact: −4.
- Time-window selector is mostly cosmetic. Real implementation would change consumed values per window. Score impact: −2.
- Single snapshot. A "fast-forward time" affordance to watch consumption climb would teach urgency. Score impact: −2.
Accessibility
Color-blind safe with both color and percentage text. Native p5.js controls are keyboard-accessible.
Cognitive load
5 levels + 2 controls. Tractable.
Recommendation
Approve. Open follow-up for click-to-drill-down (gap 1) — highest-impact addition.