vendor-evaluation

Evaluate, select, and contract with vendors and SaaS tools. Use this skill when comparing alternatives, running an RFP, scoring vendors against criteria, negotiating contracts, planning a switch, or assessing a vendor's risk. Triggers on vendor evaluation, RFP, vendor selection, build vs buy, SaaS evaluation, vendor scorecard, vendor comparison, contract negotiation, vendor switch, procurement. Also triggers when a renewal is coming up or when a tool isn't meeting expectations.

Quality

78%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/vendor-evaluation/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-structured, actionable vendor-evaluation skill with a clear phased framework, concrete scorecard, and a properly signaled one-level reference file. The main weakness is length — discursive commentary and an extensive failure-patterns list could be trimmed or moved to the reference to improve token efficiency.

Suggestions

Trim discursive prose (e.g., 'The temptation: skip this and start demoing', 'Most teams over-build. The rule of thumb...') to tighten the body and respect the token budget.

Move or condense the large 'Failure patterns' list into the references file, keeping only the highest-signal anti-patterns inline.

Provide the scorecard as an inline fillable template (or a clear pointer to one in the reference) so Claude can execute scoring without reconstructing the structure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is informative and largely non-redundant, but it is long and includes discursive prose ('The temptation: skip this and demo', 'Most teams over-build. The rule of thumb...') and a large 'Failure patterns' section that adds length beyond what Claude strictly needs to be told.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete, executable guidance — explicit scorecard dimensions with weights, a 1-5 scoring method, negotiable term lists, and a 9-step workflow — with only minor gaps (e.g., the scorecard is described but not given as a fillable template inline).	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clearly sequenced 9-step workflow with checkpoints and explicit cautions ('Run negotiations with #2 in parallel', 'Start early' for security), plus a data-availability rule that functions as a validation gate; minor validation gaps keep it just below 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Good structure with clear section headers and a well-signaled one-level-deep reference to references/evaluation-rubric.md (verified to exist), with the bulk of detailed scoring material appropriately split into the reference file; minor organization gaps in the inlined failure-patterns list.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

88%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong description that clearly states what the skill does and when to use it, with rich, natural trigger terms covering the vendor lifecycle. Minor tightening of the opening verb phrase and a touch more distinctiveness from generic procurement skills would push it to a perfect score.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete actions ('Evaluate, select, and contract with vendors and SaaS tools', 'comparing alternatives, running an RFP, scoring vendors against criteria, negotiating contracts, planning a switch, assessing a vendor's risk') but some are slightly generic ('Evaluate, select') and coverage of the full lifecycle is strong with minor gaps.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both 'what' ('Evaluate, select, and contract with vendors and SaaS tools') and 'when' with a clear 'Use this skill when...' clause plus concrete trigger phrases and additional trigger conditions.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Comprehensive coverage of natural terms users would say — 'vendor evaluation, RFP, vendor selection, build vs buy, SaaS evaluation, vendor scorecard, vendor comparison, contract negotiation, vendor switch, procurement' plus renewal/tool-not-meeting-expectations scenarios; rich synonyms across the domain.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clear niche (vendor/SaaS selection and procurement) with distinct triggers; minor overlap risk with adjacent procurement or cost-optimization skills, but 'build vs buy', 'RFP', and 'vendor scorecard' anchors it well.	4 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: rampstackco/claude-skills
Path: skills/vendor-evaluation/SKILL.md
Commit: a67dd34

Reviewed: 8 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.