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 tom-barkan/CEO-Review-Plugin --skill strategic-frameworksgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tom-barkan/CEO-Review-PluginWrote 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/tom-barkan/ceo-review-plugin/strategic-frameworks)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tom-barkan/ceo-review-plugin/strategic-frameworks"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tom-barkan/ceo-review-plugin/strategic-frameworks/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/tom-barkan/ceo-review-plugin/strategic-frameworks"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tom-barkan/ceo-review-plugin/strategic-frameworks.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 | $0.00117 | $0.02358 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00059 | $0.01179 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00472 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00236 |
Grade A, and why
strategic-frameworks 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 — 101 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Strategic Frameworks for Feature & Product Evaluation
Apply the following business strategy frameworks when evaluating features, products, or strategic decisions. Each framework illuminates a different dimension of strategic value. Select the appropriate framework based on the type of question being asked, or combine multiple frameworks for a comprehensive evaluation.
Strategic evaluation is not about applying a single lens. The best feature decisions emerge from layering complementary frameworks: one to validate demand, another to assess competitive dynamics, and a third to quantify and prioritize. The frameworks below are organized from customer-facing (demand validation) through structural (competitive positioning) to quantitative (prioritization and sizing).
Framework Overview
Hamilton Helmer's 7 Powers
The 7 Powers framework, from Hamilton Helmer's book of the same name, identifies the only seven sources of durable competitive advantage that allow a business to sustain differential returns over time. The seven powers are: Scale Economies (unit cost declines with volume), Network Effects (value grows with each user), Counter-Positioning (a model incumbents cannot adopt without self-damage), Switching Costs (the pain of leaving), Branding (durable reputation-based value attribution), Cornered Resource (exclusive access to talent, data, patents), and Process Power (embedded processes that are nearly impossible to replicate). Apply this framework when evaluating whether a feature creates or strengthens a lasting strategic moat. A feature that does not create or reinforce at least one power may generate short-term value but is unlikely to sustain differentiation.
Porter's Five Forces
Porter's Five Forces analyzes the competitive intensity and attractiveness of a market by examining five structural forces: threat of new entrants (how easily can newcomers enter?), bargaining power of suppliers (how much leverage do they hold?), bargaining power of buyers (can customers pressure pricing?), threat of substitutes (what alternatives exist?), and competitive rivalry (how intense is head-to-head competition?). Use this framework to assess how a feature affects the company's position relative to these forces and whether it shifts industry dynamics in the company's favor. A strong feature investment raises barriers to entry, reduces buyer power, or neutralizes substitute threats. A weak one inadvertently commoditizes the offering or escalates rivalry without margin improvement.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 101 lines · 117 tokens per session scan A a8bd2872968e
strategic-frameworks is a skill published in the GitHub repository tom-barkan/CEO-Review-Plugin (1 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 117 tokens to every session and 2,358 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
dashboards-to-decisions
Convert dashboard requests into decision specifications. The missing layer between "build me a dashboard" and "help me decide." Use when receiving dashboard requests, reviewing analytics backlogs, prioritizing data team work, or when someone asks "what dashboard do you need?" Apply this BEFORE building anything.
data-pipeline-quality
Automated data quality checks for pipelines. Testing pyramids, dbt test patterns, data contracts, circuit breakers, and monitoring. Use when implementing data quality checks, writing dbt tests, defining data contracts, setting up pipeline validation, building automated quality monitoring, or when someone asks "how do…
metrics-definition
Precise metric definitions for data products. Outcome metric trees, naming conventions, grain specification, and the "what does this number mean?" problem. Use when defining KPIs, writing metric specifications, resolving conflicting metric definitions, building a metrics catalog, or when someone asks "how should we…
arbitrage-audit-data
3 diagnostic questions for evaluating data product markets through the arbitrage gap lens. Identifies whether your data product sits on a durable or closing advantage. Use when assessing data product positioning, evaluating market risk, or when someone asks "is AI going to replace this?" or "what's our moat?".
healthcare-data-readiness-debrief
Debrief one healthcare data project where preparation took more work than expected. Use a project summary or short interview to identify evidence gaps, trace their effect on the intended use, and produce a practical next-check brief. Works without patient records or database access.
data-consumer-discovery
Discover what internal data consumers actually need. Adapted Mom Test and JTBD for data teams. Use when conducting user research, interviewing stakeholders, gathering consumer requirements, running discovery sessions, or when someone asks "what do they need?" or "how do I figure out what to build?".