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 rampstackco/claude-skills --skill vendor-evaluationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rampstackco/claude-skillsWrote 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/rampstackco/claude-skills/vendor-evaluation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rampstackco/claude-skills/vendor-evaluation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rampstackco/claude-skills/vendor-evaluation.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00099 | $0.02497 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00049 | $0.01248 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00499 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00250 |
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 4d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- vendor-evaluation — 92% identical, 8 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 287 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Vendor Evaluation
Pick the right tool or service, negotiate fair terms, and avoid the lock-in traps. Stack-agnostic. Applies to SaaS, infrastructure providers, agencies, and any external dependency.
When to use
- Selecting a tool or vendor for a new need
- Evaluating alternatives to a current vendor
- Build vs buy analysis
- Renewal coming up: should we stay or switch?
- Running a formal RFP or RFI
- Comparing finalists in a vendor selection
- Negotiating a contract
- Assessing vendor risk (financial, security, dependency)
When NOT to use
- General cost reduction (use
cost-optimization) - Specific contract legal terms (those go to legal)
- Performance issues with an existing vendor (try fixing before switching)
- Hiring an agency for a one-off project (lighter framework needed)
Required inputs
- The need (what problem are you solving, what would success look like)
- Constraints (budget, timeline, integration requirements)
- Stakeholders (users, IT, security, finance, legal)
- Existing context (what's already used, what's been tried)
- Compliance requirements
The framework: 5 phases
A structured vendor evaluation. Skip phases at your peril.
Phase 1: Define the need
Before looking at vendors, define what you actually need.
- What problem are you solving?
- What's the user / use case?
- What does "success" look like in 6 months? In 2 years?
- What's the budget (range, not just ceiling)?
- What's the timeline?
- Are there must-have integrations or constraints?
The temptation: skip this and start demoing. Vendors are happy to show off; you end up choosing what looks shiny rather than what fits.
Phase 2: Build vs buy
Before evaluating vendors, decide whether you should build instead.
Build when:
- It's core to the business (differentiating)
- The need is so specific no vendor matches
- The economics work at your scale
- You have the team to maintain it
- Vendor lock-in would be unacceptable
Buy when:
- It's table stakes (not differentiating)
- The need is well-served by existing products
- The economics favor it
- The team should focus elsewhere
- The vendor's specialization beats your generalism
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 287 lines · 99 tokens per session scan A 44b1e50b7f52
vendor-evaluation is a skill published in the GitHub repository rampstackco/claude-skills (826 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 99 tokens to every session and 2,497 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
67-agency-vendor-brief
Dung khi thue NGUOI NGOAI lam — agency, freelancer, production house, vendor: scope of work, spec deliverable, so vong sua, quy trinh duyet, moc thanh toan, dieu khoan IP va bao mat, bang danh gia vendor sau du an. Kich hoat khi user nhac 'brief agency', 'thue freelancer', 'quan ly vendor', 'scope of work', 'agency…
collab-vendor
A supplier-management guide for comparing vendors, organising contracts, and tracking risks in the supply chain. It also covers cross-border purchasing tasks such as customs documents and trade terms.
contract-redliner
Contract review, redlining, and negotiation support with clause analysis, risk identification, and markup templates. Use when reviewing contracts, identifying unfavorable terms, suggesting amendments, or preparing negotiation positions.
customer-success
Support workflows, ticketing systems (Zendesk, Intercom), knowledge base design, chatbot design, and metrics (CSAT, NPS). Use when building support infrastructure, designing help centers, or optimizing customer experience.
event-planner
Event planning with timelines, budgets, vendor coordination, logistics checklists, and post-event evaluation. Use when organizing conferences, workshops, galas, or corporate events.
ai-policy-generator
AI governance policy creation for nonprofits and enterprises with frameworks, risk assessment, ethical guidelines, and compliance templates. Use when drafting AI usage policies, responsible AI frameworks, or organizational AI governance documents.