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 vigneshbarani24/sap-superpowers --skill solution-architecturegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vigneshbarani24/sap-superpowersWrote 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/vigneshbarani24/sap-superpowers/solution-architecture)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/vigneshbarani24/sap-superpowers/solution-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vigneshbarani24/sap-superpowers/solution-architecture.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 | $0.00039 | $0.03637 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.01818 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00727 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00364 |
Grade A, and why
solution-architecture 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 294 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
SAP Solution Architecture
This skill enforces rigorous, evidence-based SAP solution architecture so that no design is produced without documenting integration points, passing a clean core compliance check, and addressing performance at design time — the three shortcuts that cause production failures.
Iron Laws
- NEVER DESIGN WITHOUT DOCUMENTING INTEGRATION POINTS. Every component in an SAP landscape touches something else. A design that does not name every interface, protocol, and data flow is incomplete. Incomplete architectures become production incidents.
- NEVER SKIP CLEAN CORE COMPLIANCE CHECK. Every custom extension must be classified against SAP's clean core tiers before design is finalized. Extensions that violate clean core boundaries block cloud migration and increase upgrade cost exponentially.
- ALWAYS CONSIDER PERFORMANCE AT DESIGN TIME. Performance requirements — transaction volumes, peak loads, response time SLAs — must be factored into every architectural decision. "We'll optimize later" has ended more SAP go-lives than any other phrase.
- NO BTP DECISION WITHOUT A COMPARISON. Recommending BTP vs. on-premise extension requires a documented assessment of deployment model, licensing, latency, data residency, and long-term maintainability. Gut feel is not architecture.
- NO ARCHITECTURE WITHOUT SECURITY LAYERS. Every design must address: authentication, authorization (role concept), data encryption in transit and at rest, and network segmentation. Security retrofitted post-go-live costs 5x more.
Rationalization Table
| Agent Will Try To... | Why It Seems Reasonable | Why It Fails | Counter |
|---|---|---|---|
| Skip interface documentation | "The integrations are well-known" | Undocumented interfaces get missed during testing, cutover, and upgrades. Every interface needs a data flow diagram. | Iron Law 1: Every integration point named with protocol, direction, volume, and error handling before design is approved. |
| Defer clean core assessment | "We'll refactor later if needed" | Technical debt from clean core violations compounds with every SAP update. Retrofit during upgrade costs 3-5x initial build. | Iron Law 2: Clean core tier assigned to every extension at design time. Tier 3 requires written justification and architect sign-off. |
| Design without volume data | "Architecture works regardless of scale" | A design valid for 100 users fails for 10,000. SAP HANA in-memory architecture, buffering, and partitioning decisions are volume-dependent. | Iron Law 3: Transaction volumes and peak concurrency must be documented before architecture is finalized. |
| Recommend BTP reflexively | "BTP is the modern way" | BTP adds latency, licensing cost, and operational complexity. For simple extensions, key user extensibility or in-app customization is faster, cheaper, and safer. | Iron Law 4: Document BTP vs. on-premise trade-off table before recommending BTP. |
| Reuse architecture from previous projects | "This is the same landscape as [client X]" | Every SAP landscape has unique data volumes, org structures, integration ecosystems, and legacy constraints. Reused templates miss client-specific risks. | Verification: Architecture must reference this client's specific systems, modules, and entity counts. |
| Skip disaster recovery design | "DR is an infrastructure decision" | SAP application-layer DR (system replication, backup frequency, RTO/RPO for SAP-specific objects) is an architecture concern, not just infrastructure. | Checklist Step 6: RTO, RPO, and backup strategy are architecture deliverables. |
| Combine data architecture with process design | "Data flows from the process" | Data architecture (master data governance, data residency, archiving strategy, GDPR) is a separate discipline. Conflating it with process design produces gaps in both. | Checklist Step 5: Data architecture section is mandatory and separate from process flows. |
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 · 294 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A f63b04d79017
solution-architecture is a skill published in the GitHub repository vigneshbarani24/sap-superpowers (9 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 3,637 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
sap-expert
Expert in SAP ERP systems, ABAP programming, SAP HANA, S/4HANA, Fiori applications, and SAP integration patterns including OData, RFC, and IDoc. Use when the user mentions ERP, enterprise, business apps, ABAP, HANA, or S/4HANA, or when the task involves SAP Ecosystem, ABAP Development, Integration Technologies, or…
add-dial-tool
Give chosen NanoClaw agents a real phone number as a container tool — the dial CLI baked into the agent image plus OneCLI credential injection for api.getdial.ai, scoped per agent, so the agents you pick can send SMS, place AI voice calls, and receive verification codes from inside the sandbox. Independent of the Dial…
add-signal
Add Signal channel integration via signal-cli device-link. Native adapter — no Chat SDK bridge.
add-telegram
Add Telegram channel integration via Chat SDK.
add-matrix
Add Matrix channel integration via Chat SDK. Works with any Matrix homeserver.
add-gchat
Add Google Chat channel integration via Chat SDK.