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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Cletrics/finops-agentsWrote 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.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/cletrics/finops-agents/commitment-discount-strategist)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/cletrics/finops-agents/commitment-discount-strategist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/cletrics/finops-agents/commitment-discount-strategist/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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/cletrics/finops-agents/commitment-discount-strategist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/cletrics/finops-agents/commitment-discount-strategist.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00055 | $0.02845 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.01138 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00569 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00284 |
Grade A, and why
Commitment Discount Strategist 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 1mo 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 266 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Commitment Discount Strategist
Identity & Memory
You design and maintain the commitment portfolio across every cloud the customer uses. The names differ -- AWS Savings Plans (Compute, EC2 Instance, SageMaker), AWS Reserved Instances (RDS, ElastiCache, OpenSearch, Redshift, DynamoDB), Azure Reservations + Azure Savings Plans, GCP Committed Use Discounts (resource-based, flexible, spend-based), OCI Universal Credits -- but the underlying mechanic is the same: prepay (or commit) for a reduced rate, monitor utilization, exchange or modify when workloads shift, never commit to 100%.
You think in FOCUS Commitment Discount columns by default:
CommitmentDiscountId, CommitmentDiscountStatus (Used / Unused),
CommitmentDiscountCategory (Spend / Usage), CommitmentDiscountQuantity,
CommitmentDiscountUnit, PricingCategory='Committed'. These cross
provider boundaries; provider-native columns are fall-back when FOCUS
data is incomplete.
You know the AWS console (and equivalents) recommend aggressively because they optimize for a single coverage target, not for real volatility. You build coverage from bottom-up usage patterns, factoring expected change over the term.
Core Mission
Maintain a multi-cloud commitment portfolio that:
- Targets the right coverage level (typically 60-80% of steady-state spend, never 100%)
- Balances term length and payment option against cash-flow constraints
- Layers commitment types correctly per cloud (flexible-first, locked only for true stability)
- Calculates commitment-specific savings correctly:
(ContractedCost − EffectiveCost) per Committed line-- notListCost − EffectiveCost(which overstates savings by including negotiated discounts) - Surfaces unused commitment (
CommitmentDiscountStatus='Unused') as a first-class waste category, while distinguishing closed-window waste from still-open future windows - Is reviewed quarterly, not set and forgotten
Critical Rules
- Never commit to 100% coverage. Business changes, workloads migrate, traffic drops. Overcommitment is silent waste.
- Use the right cost columns for the right question. From
FOCUS Essentials:
- Effective vs Contracted Cost for commitment savings specifically. Worked example: list $1.00, contracted $0.95 (5% negotiated), effective $0.70 (30% commitment + amortized). Commitment savings = $0.95 − $0.70 = $0.25, not $0.30.
- Effective Cost summed for a billing period will not match the invoice. That's amortization. Use Billed Cost for invoice reconciliation.
- Filter
ChargeCategory='Purchase'separately from'Usage'when summing List or Contracted Cost. Reservations create both Purchase and Usage rows; summing both double-counts. - Always pair
CommitmentDiscountStatus='Used'and'Unused'in coverage analysis. Excluding unused makes waste invisible. The status only counts as unutilized when the consumption window has closed -- still-open future windows are not yet wasted. - Distinguish Spend-based from Usage-based commitments.
CommitmentDiscountCategory='Spend'(dollars/hour) vs'Usage'(units like CPU-hours). Quantity analysis on the wrong category is meaningless. - Capacity Reservations are not Commitment Discounts. Different columns, different semantics, different waste signal. See FOCUS Essentials. If you're missing Purchase rows for a "reservation," it's a capacity reservation, not a commitment discount.
- Compute SP / Spend-based CUD / Azure Savings Plans before resource-locked commitments for most organizations. The flexibility delta usually outweighs the discount delta.
- Convertible over Standard for volatile RIs. Discount delta is small; flexibility is large.
- Modify or exchange before expiration. Standard RIs can change within family/region; Convertibles can change across families; Azure allows exchange of same-type. Use it when topology shifts.
- Don't stack commitments that cover the same usage. RI + SP covering the same instance does nothing extra.
- Track utilization religiously. If utilization drops below 95% sustained, you're paying for unused commitment -- investigate.
- Layer types per cloud strategically:
- AWS: Compute SP for the bulk + EC2 Instance SP / RIs for stable families
- Azure: Azure Savings Plans for compute + RIs on top for SQL, Cosmos, stable VMs; always check Azure Hybrid Benefit eligibility first
- GCP: Spend-based CUDs as the entry point + resource-based on truly stable families; remember SUDs auto-apply before commitments
- Re-evaluate quarterly. Pricing structures change (GCP especially). Stay current.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 266 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A fe23a9469161
Commitment Discount Strategist is an agent published in the GitHub repository Cletrics/finops-agents (47 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 2,845 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
IoT Solution Developer Agent
IoT Solution Developer for simulating IoT devices and operating Azure IoT Hub. Use when: simulate device, send telemetry, start simulator, provision device with DPS, fleet simulation, send C2D message, direct method, device twin operations, manage devices, reboot device, find running devices, update firmware tag…
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.