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.
npx skills add camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit --skill vendor-evaluationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkitWrote 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/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/vendor-evaluation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/vendor-evaluation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/vendor-evaluation/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/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/vendor-evaluation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/vendor-evaluation.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 | $0.00020 | $0.01113 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00557 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00223 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00111 |
Grade A, and why
vendor-evaluation 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 — 124 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Vendor Evaluation & Build vs Buy Analysis
When to Use
- Evaluating whether to build in-house or buy a SaaS solution
- Comparing multiple vendor options for a specific need
- Assessing vendor lock-in risk for existing integrations
- Negotiating SLA terms with a vendor
Build vs Buy Decision Framework
Score each dimension (1-5):
| Dimension | Build | Buy |
|---|---|---|
| Core competency | Is this your core business? (5=yes) | Is this commodity functionality? (5=yes) |
| Time to market | How fast can you build? (1=slow, 5=fast) | How fast can you integrate? (1=slow, 5=fast) |
| Total Cost (3yr) | Dev salary + maintenance + infra | License + integration + migration risk |
| Customization need | How unique are your requirements? (5=very) | Does the vendor fit 80%+ of needs? (5=yes) |
| Team expertise | Do you have the skills? (5=yes) | Is integration straightforward? (5=yes) |
| Strategic value | Does owning this give competitive advantage? (5=yes) | Is this a differentiator? (1=yes → build) |
| Maintenance burden | Can you sustain ongoing maintenance? (5=yes) | Is vendor reliable long-term? (5=yes) |
Decision: Sum scores. Higher score wins. Tie-breaker: If core competency + strategic value > 7, BUILD. Otherwise, BUY.
Vendor Evaluation Scorecard
Technical Fit (40%)
- Covers 80%+ of functional requirements
- API quality (REST/GraphQL, documentation, versioning)
- SDK available for your stack (Node.js, Flutter, Java)
- Webhook/event support for real-time integration
- Data export capability (avoid lock-in)
- Performance SLA matches your needs (latency, throughput)
- Multi-region/multi-tenant support
Security & Compliance (25%)
- SOC2 Type II certified
- LGPD/GDPR compliant
- Data encryption at rest and in transit
- SSO/SAML support
- Audit logging
- Data residency options (Brazil)
- Penetration test reports available
Business Viability (20%)
- Company age > 3 years
- Funding/revenue stability
- Customer references in similar industry
- SLA with financial penalties
- Clear pricing model (no hidden costs)
- Exit clause and data portability
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 · 124 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A 54b246bd33bb
vendor-evaluation is a skill published in the GitHub repository camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit (7 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 1,113 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
sla-review-skill
Reviews SLAs and KPIs for clear metrics, measurement, reporting, remedies, escalation, and business criticality. Use before award or during contract management.
business-operations-skills
Use when running, diagnosing, or designing internal business operations — process documentation, vendor SLAs, capacity planning, internal comms, SOP/runbook authoring, procurement spend. Triggers on "BizOps review", "where's the bottleneck", "vendor health", "internal SOP", "all-hands deck", "spend categorization"…
business-operations-skills
Use when running, diagnosing, or designing internal business operations — process documentation, vendor SLAs, capacity planning, internal comms, SOP/runbook authoring, procurement spend. Triggers on "BizOps review", "where's the bottleneck", "vendor health", "internal SOP", "all-hands deck", "spend categorization"…
vendor-review
Evaluate a vendor — cost analysis, risk assessment, and recommendation. Use when reviewing a new vendor proposal, deciding whether to renew or replace a contract, comparing two vendors side-by-side, or building a TCO breakdown and negotiation points before procurement sign-off.
entity-compliance
Entity compliance tracker — initialize, report upcoming deadlines, update status, run health audit, export to CSV. Maintains a compliance-tracker.yaml built from the entity table, calculates filing deadlines by entity and jurisdiction, and surfaces what's due in the next 30/60/90 days. Use when user says "entity…
matter-workspace
Manage matter workspaces — new, list, switch, close, or detach (practice-level). File-management logic for keeping one client or engagement's context separate from every other. Use when working across multiple clients or matters, when the user says "new matter", "switch matter", "list matters", "close matter", or when…