Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to basher83/lunar-claude. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/basher83/lunar-claude/main/.claude/commands/design-validation/build-vs-integrate-swot.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/basher83/lunar-claudeWrote 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/commands/basher83/lunar-claude/build-vs-integrate-swot)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/basher83/lunar-claude/build-vs-integrate-swot"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/basher83/lunar-claude/build-vs-integrate-swot/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/commands/basher83/lunar-claude/build-vs-integrate-swot"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/basher83/lunar-claude/build-vs-integrate-swot.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 | $0.00000 | $0.01611 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00805 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00322 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00161 |
Grade A, and why
build-vs-integrate-swot 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 282 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Purpose
Conduct a structured SWOT analysis comparing Build Custom vs. Integrate/Extend Existing approaches for a specific capability. This framework surfaces trade-offs systematically to support an evidence-based build-vs-buy decision.
Use this command when you have a specific capability to implement and need to decide whether to build it yourself or use existing solutions.
Variables
CAPABILITY: $1 (e.g., "authentication system", "data pipeline", "notification service")
BUSINESS_CONTEXT: $2 (file path to context doc OR brief description)
OUTPUT_DIR: docs/reviews/design-validation/build-vs-integrate/
FILE_NAME: <capability-slug>-swot.md
Instructions
- IMPORTANT: If no
CAPABILITYis provided, stop and ask the user to provide it. - If
BUSINESS_CONTEXTis a file path, read it first. - Verify
OUTPUT_DIRexists, create it if it doesn't. - Save analysis to
OUTPUT_DIR/FILE_NAME. - Be specific - generic SWOT is useless. Cite real solutions, real costs, real timelines.
- Challenge the assumption that building is better - most teams overestimate their ability to build.
Workflow
Step 1: Define the Capability
Clearly articulate:
- What capability is being evaluated
- Business context and constraints
- Key requirements it must satisfy
Step 2: Build Custom SWOT
Analyze the Build Custom approach:
Strengths (3 minimum) - Internal advantages:
- What you gain by building (control, customization, IP)
- Specific capabilities enabled
- Long-term strategic benefits
Weaknesses (3 minimum) - Internal disadvantages:
- Development time and cost
- Maintenance burden
- Missing features vs. mature solutions
Opportunities - External factors favoring build:
- Market gaps existing solutions don't address
- Competitive advantage from unique implementation
- Emerging technologies enabling novel approaches
Threats - External factors against build:
- Existing solutions improving/adding features
- Industry standards you'd have to conform to
- Opportunity cost of not focusing on core business
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 282 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 24fc1c877874
build-vs-integrate-swot is a command published in the GitHub repository basher83/lunar-claude (23 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,611 tokens. 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 commands, from other repositories
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.