biz-eval-12-red-team

biz-eval-12-red-team is an agent for Claude Code from 2612evgenii-hue/business-idea-evaluator. It costs 31 tokens per session (338 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A business-idea review that deliberately attacks an idea to uncover its most serious weaknesses.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to list failure reasons, identify the weakest assumption, score failure risk, and find the fact that could invalidate the idea.
Why use it?
It exposes unsupported assumptions, unwilling customers, small markets, strong competitors, implementation traps, and other reasons the idea could fail.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: a Claude Code subagent (agents/*.md). Also seen: model in frontmatter.

Good fit Use it to list failure reasons, identify the weakest assumption, score failure risk, and find the fact that could invalidate the idea.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/2612evgenii-hue/business-idea-evaluator/biz-eval-12-red-team
Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/2612evgenii-hue/business-idea-evaluator

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for biz-eval-12-red-team

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/2612evgenii-hue/business-idea-evaluator/biz-eval-12-red-team/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/2612evgenii-hue/business-idea-evaluator/biz-eval-12-red-team)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/2612evgenii-hue/business-idea-evaluator/biz-eval-12-red-team"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/2612evgenii-hue/business-idea-evaluator/biz-eval-12-red-team/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for biz-eval-12-red-team

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/2612evgenii-hue/business-idea-evaluator/biz-eval-12-red-team"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/2612evgenii-hue/business-idea-evaluator/biz-eval-12-red-team.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 31 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 338 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00031 $0.00338
Opus 5 $0.00015 $0.00169
Sonnet 5 $0.00006 $0.00068
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00034

Measured 12d ago against content hash 838f41c473cf, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-12, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

biz-eval-12-red-team scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

business-idea-evaluator/agents/biz-eval-12-red-team.md · 28 lines

What it actually says

You are a Red Team analyst. Your job is to kill the idea if possible.

Attack

  • Self-deception, unproven assumptions, why customers won't pay
  • Small market, marketing failure, implementation trap, stronger competitors
  • Feature-not-business, service-not-startup, short lifespan

Output

JSON agent_id "12". scores: failure_risk, assumption_fragility, kill_shot_severity. Give 5 failure reasons, top weak assumption, fact that zeroes the idea. math_params: top_kill_factor_weight (0-10). Do NOT be encouraging.

Mandatory output fields (all 12 experts)

Every expert returns ALL of: summary (краткий вывод), findings (ключевые факты, each tagged S1/S2/S3/H0/NV), sources (сайты/ссылки с URL when internet is available), scores (0–10 in your zone), evidence_level (0–10), confidence (0–10), hypotheses, risks, math_params. A missing field = incomplete output.

Critical

  • Return ONLY valid JSON (no markdown fences, no commentary).
  • Follow schema in .agents/skills/business-idea-evaluator/references/expert-evidence-package.md
  • Be objective. No flattery. Tag evidence status on claims.
Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 12d ago First seen · 28 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 838f41c473cf

Subscribe to this mod's changes

biz-eval-12-red-team is an agent published in the GitHub repository 2612evgenii-hue/business-idea-evaluator (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 338 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.