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 daddia/claude-for-strategy --skill build-vs-buy-vs-partnergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/daddia/claude-for-strategyWrote 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/daddia/claude-for-strategy/build-vs-buy-vs-partner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/daddia/claude-for-strategy/build-vs-buy-vs-partner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/daddia/claude-for-strategy/build-vs-buy-vs-partner/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/daddia/claude-for-strategy/build-vs-buy-vs-partner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/daddia/claude-for-strategy/build-vs-buy-vs-partner.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 | $0.00061 | $0.00756 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00302 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00151 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00076 |
Grade A, and why
build-vs-buy-vs-partner 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 2mo 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 — 86 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Build vs. Buy vs. Partner
When to use
When a capability gap needs build/buy/partner framing — forces each path's known failure pattern into the conversation, not cost comparison alone.
What this skill does not do
- Does not close capability gaps without strategic relevance — question worth closing first.
- Does not re-derive synergy discipline — buy path defers to
synergy-stress-test. - Does not pick path without naming failure pattern — recommendation includes mitigation.
Preconditions
| Input | If missing |
|---|---|
| Capability gap stated precisely | Ask before evaluating paths |
| Strategic priority link | Question whether gap worth closing |
Provisional mode
Missing build track record: note haircut cannot be calibrated — [review].
Trust spine
- Strategic advice vs. support (mandatory): Compares paths with failure patterns; strategist owns choice.
- Escalation: No exit mechanism on partner path → flag; buy without synergy test → route to
synergy-stress-test.
Workflow
- State capability gap and strategic relevance.
- Core vs commodity test.
- Build: time/cost + overrun failure pattern + haircut from track record.
- Buy: headline terms + synergy handoff if live.
- Partner: structure + exit mechanism.
- Recommend with most likely failure pattern and mitigation.
Output format
CAPABILITY GAP: [...]
CORE OR COMMODITY: [...]
BUILD: [...] — Failure pattern risk: [...]
BUY: [...] — [synergy-stress-test if live]
PARTNER: [...] — Exit mechanism: [...]
RECOMMENDATION: [build | buy | partner] — [failure pattern + mitigation]
Worked example
Input: Need ML fraud model. Team has no ML delivery track record.
Excerpt: Commodity-adjacent capability; BUILD failure pattern high (overrun history); PARTNER exit mechanism missing — flag. Recommend partner with defined exit or buy [review].
Quality checks before delivering
- Core/commodity named
- Each path's failure pattern explicit
- Partner exit asked
- Buy synergies routed if needed
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 86 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A 650a96c3cb73
build-vs-buy-vs-partner is a skill published in the GitHub repository daddia/claude-for-strategy (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 756 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 2026-08-31.
build-vs-buy-vs-partner compared with skills from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| build-vs-buy-vs-partnerdaddia/claude-for-strategy | Skill | 2 | 4mo ago | MIT | A | 61 | Claude Code |
| reviewhelderberto/agent-skills | Skill | 20 | 11d ago | MIT | A | 0 | Claude Code |
| tddhelderberto/agent-skills | Skill | 20 | 11d ago | MIT | A | 71 | Claude Code |
| visual-reviewhelderberto/agent-skills | Skill | 20 | 11d ago | MIT | A | 84 | Claude Code |
| to-prhelderberto/agent-skills | Skill | 20 | 11d ago | MIT | A | 25 | Claude Code |
| to-ticketshelderberto/agent-skills | Skill | 20 | 11d ago | MIT | A | 0 | Claude Code |
| debatehelderberto/agent-skills | Skill | 20 | 11d ago | MIT | A | 28 | Claude Code |