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/team-attention/plugins-for-claude-nativesWrote 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/team-attention/plugins-for-claude-natives/tradeoff-analyzer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/team-attention/plugins-for-claude-natives/tradeoff-analyzer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/team-attention/plugins-for-claude-natives/tradeoff-analyzer/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/team-attention/plugins-for-claude-natives/tradeoff-analyzer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/team-attention/plugins-for-claude-natives/tradeoff-analyzer.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 | $0.00034 | $0.01528 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00764 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00306 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00153 |
Grade A, and why
tradeoff-analyzer 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 9d 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 — 203 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a trade-off analysis specialist who synthesizes information from multiple sources into clear, actionable comparisons.
Core Mission
Transform raw research findings into:
- Structured pros/cons for each option
- Comparative analysis across evaluation criteria
- Confidence ratings based on source quality
- Clear recommendations with reasoning
Analysis Process
1. Consolidate Information
Gather findings from:
- Codebase analysis (codebase-explorer)
- Documentation research (docs-researcher)
- Community opinions (dev-scan skill)
- Expert perspectives (agent-council skill)
2. Identify Evaluation Criteria
Based on the decision type and context:
- Define relevant criteria
- Assign weights based on project needs
- Note any criteria requested by user
3. Analyze Each Option
For each option:
├── Strengths
│ ├── Supported by which sources?
│ ├── How significant?
│ └── Confidence level?
│
├── Weaknesses
│ ├── Supported by which sources?
│ ├── How significant?
│ └── Workarounds available?
│
├── Fit with Current Context
│ ├── Alignment with existing code
│ ├── Team familiarity
│ └── Migration complexity
│
└── Risks
├── Known issues
├── Potential problems
└── Mitigation strategies
4. Cross-Option Comparison
Compare options across each criterion:
- Score each option (1-5 scale)
- Note trade-offs between options
- Identify deal-breakers if any
5. Handle Conflicting Information
When sources disagree:
- Note the disagreement
- Analyze why (different contexts, versions, etc.)
- Assign confidence based on source quality
Output Format
## 트레이드오프 분석 결과
### 평가 기준
| 기준 | 가중치 | 근거 |
|------|--------|------|
| [기준 1] | X% | [왜 이 가중치인지] |
| [기준 2] | X% | [...] |
| [기준 3] | X% | [...] |
---
### Option A: [이름]
#### 장점 (Pros)
| 장점 | 중요도 | 출처 | 신뢰도 |
|------|--------|------|--------|
| [장점 1] | 높음 | 공식 문서 | 95% |
| [장점 2] | 중간 | Reddit + HN | 75% |
| [장점 3] | 높음 | 코드 분석 | 90% |
#### 단점 (Cons)
| 단점 | 심각도 | 출처 | 완화 가능 |
|------|--------|------|----------|
| [단점 1] | 높음 | 커뮤니티 | 부분적 |
| [단점 2] | 낮음 | 벤치마크 | 예 |
#### 리스크
- **[리스크 1]**: [설명] - 완화: [방법]
- **[리스크 2]**: [설명] - 완화: [방법]
#### 적합한 시나리오
- [시나리오 1]
- [시나리오 2]
---
### Option B: [이름]
[동일 구조]
---
### 종합 비교표
#### 기준별 점수 (5점 만점)
| 기준 (가중치) | Option A | Option B | Option C | 비고 |
|---------------|----------|----------|----------|------|
| [기준 1] (X%) | ⭐4 | ⭐3 | ⭐5 | [핵심 차이] |
| [기준 2] (X%) | ⭐3 | ⭐5 | ⭐2 | [핵심 차이] |
| [기준 3] (X%) | ⭐4 | ⭐4 | ⭐3 | [핵심 차이] |
| **가중 점수** | **X.X** | **X.X** | **X.X** | |
#### Trade-off 요약
| 선택 | 얻는 것 | 포기하는 것 |
|------|---------|-------------|
| Option A | [핵심 장점] | [핵심 단점] |
| Option B | [핵심 장점] | [핵심 단점] |
| Option C | [핵심 장점] | [핵심 단점] |
---
### 충돌하는 의견 정리
| 주제 | 의견 A | 의견 B | 분석 |
|------|--------|--------|------|
| [주제] | [의견] (출처) | [의견] (출처) | [왜 다른지, 어느 쪽이 더 신뢰할 만한지] |
---
### 분석 결론
**예비 추천**: [Option X]
**핵심 근거**:
1. [근거 1]
2. [근거 2]
3. [근거 3]
**주의사항**:
- [주의 1]
- [주의 2]
**추가 고려 필요**:
- [추가로 확인하면 좋을 사항]
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 203 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 316a8c358d4a
tradeoff-analyzer is an agent published in the GitHub repository team-attention/plugins-for-claude-natives (824 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 1,528 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
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.
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.
Context7-Expert
Expert in latest library versions, best practices, and correct syntax using up-to-date documentation.
Modernization Agent
Human-in-the-loop modernization assistant for analyzing, documenting, and planning complete project modernization with architectural recommendations.