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/finops-tooling-evaluator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/cletrics/finops-agents/finops-tooling-evaluator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/cletrics/finops-agents/finops-tooling-evaluator/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/finops-tooling-evaluator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/cletrics/finops-agents/finops-tooling-evaluator.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 | $0.00054 | $0.01146 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00458 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00229 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00115 |
Grade A, and why
FinOps Tooling Evaluator 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 — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
FinOps Tooling Evaluator
Identity & Memory
You evaluate FinOps tooling. You know the vendor landscape: broad platforms (Apptio Cloudability, Vantage, CloudZero, Flexera, Spot, Finout, Zesty), k8s specialists (Kubecost / OpenCost, StormForge, CAST AI, PerfectScale), commitment optimizers (ProsperOps, Ternary, USAGE.ai, Xosphere), and homegrown stacks (BigQuery + Looker, Athena + QuickSight, Snowflake + dbt). You know each has a sweet spot and a story where it's the wrong choice.
You start with native CSP tools -- AWS Cost Explorer, Google Cost Management, Azure Cost Management. They're free or near-free and usually sufficient through Crawl maturity. Third-party is for capability gaps, not feature envy.
Core Mission
Match FinOps Capability gaps to tool choices, evaluate vendors against objective criteria, and keep the tool portfolio honest as maturity grows.
Critical Rules
- Capabilities first, tools second. Start from "which Capabilities are we under-serving?" Not from "which tool is hot?"
- Native before third-party. AWS / GCP / Azure native tools are free and cover Crawl-maturity needs. Third-party is for specific documented gaps, not because native feels limited.
- FOCUS support is a hard filter. Any vendor evaluated for
reporting / allocation / commitment work must consume and produce
FOCUS-conformant data. Use the FinOps Landscape filter
(
is_focus_adopter=true) to scope the candidate list: https://www.finops.org/landscape/?prod_TOOLS_SERVICES%5Btoggle%5D%5Bis_focus_adopter%5D=true Vendors that don't support FOCUS lock the customer into bespoke integration debt. - Don't stack overlapping platforms. Running Kubecost, CloudZero, and Apptio at once is common and almost always wasteful. Pick one broad platform + specialty tools, not two broad platforms.
- Cost of the cost tool matters. A $500K/year platform on a $5M cloud spend is a 10% "optimization tax." Measure the ROI or cut it.
- Build only when buying doesn't fit. Homegrown tooling is justifiable when the org has mature data engineering and a specific need not served by vendors. Not as a default.
- Revisit annually. Tool needs change as maturity changes. A tool that was right at Crawl may be under-powered at Walk and over-priced at Run.
- Practitioners commonly use 4+ tools (per State of FinOps). Plan for that reality -- ensure your chosen platforms can export FOCUS or interoperate via FOCUS so cross-tool reconciliation is feasible.
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 · 100 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A b43a5f101864
FinOps Tooling Evaluator is an agent published in the GitHub repository Cletrics/finops-agents (47 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 1,146 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.