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 Ingramradical235/anty-framework --skill disruptiongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Ingramradical235/anty-frameworkWrote 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/ingramradical235/anty-framework/disruption)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ingramradical235/anty-framework/disruption"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ingramradical235/anty-framework/disruption.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00052 | $0.01048 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00524 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00210 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00105 |
Grade A, and why
disruption 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 8d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to disruption — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Disruption Analysis
When to Apply
- Entering a market with established incumbents
- Evaluating competitive threats or opportunities
- Periodic strategic scan (six-force monitoring)
- When a competitor makes a move
- Strategy Kernel diagnosis of competitive landscape
Core Framework
Cannibalization Exposure Analysis
Incumbents fail not from blindness but from RATIONAL cannibalization avoidance. Estimate how much existing revenue an incumbent would destroy by adopting the disruptive approach:
Incumbent: [Competitor X]
Legacy revenue at risk: [estimated %]
HIGH exposure (>20% revenue at risk):
-> Incumbent has rational incentive to DELAY adoption
-> Window of opportunity: 18-24 months
-> "Half-hearted" response = signal of continued vulnerability
LOW exposure (<5% revenue at risk):
-> Incumbent can adopt without pain
-> Expect fast competitive response
-> Differentiation must be deeper than feature parity
Competitor Response Classification
| Response Type | Signal | Agent Advice |
|---|---|---|
| No response | Ignoring the threat | "Move fast. Build moat before they wake up." |
| Half-hearted (limited features bolted on) | MOST vulnerable — worst strategy | "Their hedge burns cash without commitment. This is your best window." |
| Full commitment (dedicated team, new product) | Genuine threat | "They're serious. Differentiate on depth, speed, or segment." |
Half-hearted response is the best signal for the disruptor. It means the incumbent recognizes the threat but cannot fully commit due to cannibalization risk. This is when to accelerate.
Market Entry Signal (Barrier Inference)
Observe entry patterns to infer innovation barrier height:
Entry/Prize Ratio:
Estimated TAM: $[X]B
New entrants (last 12 months): [N]
HIGH ratio (many entrants, moderate prize):
-> Innovation barrier is LOW
-> Rapid commoditization expected
-> "Many entrants for the prize size. Moat is critical."
LOW ratio (few entrants, large prize):
-> Innovation barrier is HIGH
-> Structural moat if you can enter
-> "Few entrants despite enormous prize. If you enter,
the barrier itself is your moat."
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 100 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A 5849962fa4c5
disruption is a skill published in the GitHub repository Ingramradical235/anty-framework (1 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 1,048 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to disruption, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
pipeline
Cash Machine 10-step B2B sales pipeline with 3 presets, verifiable checkpoints per step, trajectory logging, bottleneck detection with utilization formula, lead qualification gate (BANT 6-criteria), pipeline velocity and stall detection (2x threshold), two-tier probability scoring, BBS tracking, end-of-quarter…
quest-interview
QUEST Socratic interview methodology — beginner stance, empathic neutrality, downward/upward questioning, echo questions, concept identification, permission checks, critical point pursuit, anti-pattern safeguards, resolution imbalance diagnostic, workaround discovery, painkiller vs vitamin test, locally famous test.…
review-engine
5-question review framework (result, execution, plan, strategy, analysis), KPI propagation monitoring with 4-layer anomaly patterns, One-Way/Two-Way Door classification, withdrawal decision protocol, and assumption provenance auditing. Use during periodic reviews, buffer zone changes, or when evaluating why results…
anticipatory-selling
Auto-generate 5 sales support materials for pipeline Steps 5-7 — competitive comparison table, 3-year TCO analysis, internal proposal template, objection rebuttals, phased implementation timeline. Core principle is arming the buyer to sell internally. Use when deals reach Step 5+ or when win rates at Steps 5-7 are low.
choice-architecture
Nudge-based choice architecture for 3-option selection UI — smart default vs active choice, outcome mapping, channel factors, RECAP, operational transparency with source attribution, post-decision reinforcement, error-forgiving undo, peak-end session design, user contribution acknowledgment. Use when presenting…
confidence
Contextual confidence calibration — DEFLATE for One-Way Doors and RED zones, PROTECT for Two-Way Doors and fundraising, "How does this work step by step?" depth testing, values-to-consequences redirect, unanimity as risk signal. From Knowledge Illusion — overconfidence is sometimes functional. Use when calibrating…