agentsclimarketplace

Vendor review

Skill nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles/profiles/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins/anthropics_knowledge-work-plugins_operations/for-codex/.agents/skills/vendor-review

Evaluate a vendor — cost analysis, risk assessment, and recommendation. Use when reviewing a new vendor proposal, deciding whether to renew or replace a contract, comparing two vendors side-by-side, or building a TCO breakdown and negotiation points before procurement sign-off.From its SKILL.md

Install
npx -y skills add nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles --skill vendor-review

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

SKILL.md

3.1 KB, 662 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

/vendor-review

If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.

Evaluate a vendor with structured analysis covering cost, risk, performance, and fit.

Usage

/vendor-review $ARGUMENTS

What I Need From You

  • Vendor name: Who are you evaluating?
  • Context: New vendor evaluation, renewal decision, or comparison?
  • Details: Contract terms, pricing, proposal document, or current performance data

Evaluation Framework

Cost Analysis (Total Cost of Ownership)

  • Total cost of ownership (not just license fees)
  • Implementation and migration costs
  • Training and onboarding costs
  • Ongoing support and maintenance
  • Exit costs (data migration, contract termination)

Risk Assessment

  • Vendor financial stability
  • Security and compliance posture
  • Concentration risk (single vendor dependency)
  • Contract lock-in and exit terms
  • Business continuity and disaster recovery

Performance Metrics

  • SLA compliance
  • Support response times
  • Uptime and reliability
  • Feature delivery cadence
  • Customer satisfaction

Comparison Matrix

When comparing vendors, produce a side-by-side matrix covering: pricing, features, integrations, security, support, contract terms, and references.

Output

## Vendor Review: [Vendor Name]
**Date:** [Date] | **Type:** [New / Renewal / Comparison]

### Summary
[2-3 sentence recommendation]

### Cost Analysis
| Component | Annual Cost | Notes |
|-----------|-------------|-------|
| License/subscription | $[X] | [Per seat, flat, usage-based] |
| Implementation | $[X] | [One-time] |
| Support/maintenance | $[X] | [Included or add-on] |
| **Total Year 1** | **$[X]** | |
| **Total 3-Year** | **$[X]** | |

### Risk Assessment
| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|-----------|--------|------------|
| [Risk] | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low | [Mitigation] |

### Strengths
- [Strength 1]
- [Strength 2]

### Concerns
- [Concern 1]
- [Concern 2]

### Recommendation
[Proceed / Negotiate / Pass] — [Reasoning]

### Negotiation Points
- [Leverage point 1]
- [Leverage point 2]

If Connectors Available

If ~~knowledge base is connected:

  • Search for existing vendor evaluations, contracts, and performance reviews
  • Pull procurement policies and approval thresholds

If ~~procurement is connected:

  • Pull current contract terms, spend history, and renewal dates
  • Compare pricing against existing vendor agreements

Tips

  1. Upload the proposal — I can extract pricing, terms, and SLAs from vendor documents.
  2. Compare vendors — "Compare Vendor A vs Vendor B" gets you a side-by-side analysis.
  3. Include current spend — For renewals, knowing what you pay now helps evaluate price changes.

What ships with it

Read from the repository

Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 325,949. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.