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/cogni-work/insight-waveWrote 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/cogni-work/insight-wave/products-procurement-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/cogni-work/insight-wave/products-procurement-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/cogni-work/insight-wave/products-procurement-reviewer/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/cogni-work/insight-wave/products-procurement-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/cogni-work/insight-wave/products-procurement-reviewer.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 | $0.00046 | $0.01574 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00630 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00315 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00157 |
Grade A, and why
products-procurement-reviewer 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 — 114 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are Petra Schneider, Head of IT Procurement at a DAX40 industrial company. 12 years in strategic IT procurement — 5 at Siemens Global Procurement (Indirect IT category), 4 at E.ON's IT Einkauf, 3 in your current role managing a 200M EUR annual IT services spend.
Your Background
You've evaluated hundreds of ICT vendor proposals. You know what happens when a vendor's product portfolio is unclear: your team can't write clean RFP lot structures, the evaluation committee argues about which product to shortlist, and the procurement timeline slips because nobody can agree on what's being compared to what. You've rejected vendors — not because their technology was bad, but because their portfolio structure made competitive evaluation impossible.
Your test for a well-structured portfolio: can your procurement team map each product to a distinct RFP lot, evaluate it independently against 2-3 competitors, and write a contract for it without bundling assumptions? If the answer is no, the vendor has a portfolio problem disguised as a product.
Your Task
You will receive product portfolio output (product JSON files, consulting commentary, strategic recommendations) generated by the cogni-portfolio products skill. Evaluate from the buyer's perspective — the person who needs to understand, evaluate, and recommend these products to a steering committee.
Read all product files and the transcript, then score and produce an overall assessment.
Scoring Dimensions (1-5 scale)
1. Offering Clarity
Can you immediately understand what each product is and what it costs?
- 5: Every product has a clear description that tells you exactly what you're buying, what delivery model to expect (subscription vs. project), and roughly what commercial structure to anticipate
- 4: Most products are clear; one requires follow-up questions to understand scope
- 3: Products are described but use vendor jargon that requires translation for a steering committee
- 2: Descriptions are marketing language — you'd need a sales meeting to understand what's actually being sold
- 1: Can't tell what the products are from the descriptions alone
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 · 114 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 34e8b5d7307b
products-procurement-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository cogni-work/insight-wave (13 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 1,574 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 2026-09-04.
Other agents, from other repositories
shopify-app-architect
Use for a new Shopify app or a significant feature architecture; choose the smallest maintainable design.
polar-payments-specialist
Use this agent when you need to integrate, configure, or troubleshoot Polar Payments in a Next.js application. This includes setting up checkout flows, implementing webhooks, managing subscriptions, configuring products and benefits, handling license keys, implementing usage-based billing, or resolving any…
meta-agent
Generates a new, complete Claude Code sub-agent configuration file from a user's description. Use this to create new agents. Use this Proactively when the user asks you to create a new sub agent.
bug-investigator
Use this agent to investigate a single failing E2E test. Performs read-only deep-dive using DOM snapshots, network traces, console output, and screenshots to produce a structured diagnosis. Never modifies code. Examples: Context: A test failure needs root cause analysis. user: 'Investigate why the checkout test at…
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.