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.
Instructions your experts follow when using this skill.
Packaging adaptation by AutoGPT, 2026-09-25. Original authorship and licence are retained. Changes are limited to the recorded name, metadata and local references; see ATTRIBUTION.md in this package.
If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see .
Evaluate a vendor with structured analysis covering cost, risk, performance, and fit.
/vendor-review $ARGUMENTS
When comparing vendors, produce a side-by-side matrix covering: pricing, features, integrations, security, support, contract terms, and references.
## 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 ~~knowledge base is connected:
If ~~procurement is connected:
Files installed alongside these instructions.
When the user wants to create or update their product marketing context document. Also use when the user mentions 'product context,' 'marketing context,' 'set up context,' 'positioning,' 'who is my target audience,' 'describe my product,' 'ICP,' 'ideal customer profile,' or wants to avoid repeating foundational information across marketing tasks. Use this at the start of any new project before using other marketing skills — it creates `.agents/product-marketing.md` that all other skills reference for product, audience, and positioning context.
When the user wants to research, profile, or analyze competitors from their URLs. Also use when the user mentions 'competitor profile,' 'competitor research,' 'competitor analysis,' 'profile this competitor,' 'analyze competitor,' 'competitive intelligence,' 'competitor deep dive,' 'who are my competitors,' 'competitor landscape,' 'competitor dossier,' 'competitive audit,' or 'research these competitors.' Input is a list of competitor URLs. Output is structured competitor profile markdown files. For creating comparison/alternative pages from profiles, see competitors. For sales-specific battle cards, see sales-enablement.
When the user wants to conduct, analyze, or synthesize customer research. Use when the user mentions "customer research," "ICP research," "talk to customers," "analyze transcripts," "customer interviews," "survey analysis," "support ticket analysis," "voice of customer," "VOC," "build personas," "customer personas," "jobs to be done," "JTBD," "what do customers say," "what are customers struggling with," "Reddit mining," "G2 reviews," "review mining," "digital watering holes," "community research," "forum research," "competitor reviews," "customer sentiment," "PMF survey," "product/market fit survey," "customer interview questions," "interview outreach," "Sales Safari," or "find out why customers churn/convert/buy." Use for analyzing existing research assets, mining online sources, AND running primary research (interviews and surveys). For writing copy informed by research, see copywriting. For acting on research to improve pages, see cro.