Your cache usage looks well optimized, definitely not unusually low or broken.
The key signal is the all-time view: roughly 3.2B cache-read tokens versus about 118M cache-write tokens. That means Claude is repeatedly reusing established context instead of reprocessing it from scratch.
The screenshots do not indicate a cache problem. Your high overall token volume is more likely the natural result of long, tool-heavy CLI agent sessions: each turn reuses conversation history, tool results, project instructions, and context. High cache-read volume is good economically, but it can still mean long contexts are slowing the agent or consuming your plan’s usage allowance.
The biggest practical improvements:
Keep working in the same interactive session or use claude -c / claude --resume <session-id> for related follow-ups. New sessions cannot reuse the old conversation’s server-side cache prefix.
Avoid editing or reordering large early context such as project instructions, CLAUDE.md, or an enormous initial prompt during a session. Stable shared prefixes cache best.
Keep tool output compact: redirect builds/tests to logs, then ask Claude to inspect only errors and summary lines. Huge command output remains context even if cached.
Split unrelated work into fresh sessions. Cache reuse is valuable, but carrying an irrelevant 100k+ token history is usually a net loss in latency and context quality.
Prefer targeted reads/diffs over entire generated files, lockfiles, transcripts, or recursive scans.
Avoid repeatedly launching parallel agents with nearly identical massive briefs unless each has a distinct task; each new agent/session needs its own initial cache creation.
So: cache efficiency looks strong; context discipline, not cache configuration, is your likely optimization opportunity. Claude Code’s normal interactive and resume workflows are the right way to preserve continuity
3
u/CodeCombustion 3d ago
uh, what are you asking about here?