Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

vendor-performance-audit(供应商绩效审计)

用于辅助安全审计、权限检查、凭据风险、认证流程和常见漏洞排查。它适合让 Agent 梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险、分析鉴权逻辑或生成安全复核清单。使用时不能把工具输出直接当最终结论,涉及密钥、令牌、用户数据或生产系统时,应先确认最小权限、脱敏方式和操作边界。

vendor-performance-audit 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为只读;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 11,652。

总安装 11,050周安装 447GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 3,469核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT-0
版本
1.0.0

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:vendor-performance-audit(供应商绩效审计)
来源仓库:https://github.com/flynndavid/vendor-performance-audit
安装命令:
openclaw skills install vendor-performance-audit
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install vendor-performance-audit

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

供应商绩效审计基于交付、质量、沟通等多维度KPI进行季度评估。辅助制定供应商更新、改进或淘汰策略。输出评分报告与改进建议清单。安装命令:openclaw skills install vendor-performance-audit,需访问供应商数据库。评估结果应多方验证,避免单一指标误判合作关系。

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 openclaw skills install vendor-performance-audit;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它标注为只读,先用只读任务试一次,确认行为符合预期再扩大使用范围。

常见问题

6 条

vendor-performance-audit 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install vendor-performance-audit。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

vendor-performance-audit 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

vendor-performance-audit 需要什么权限?

权限级别是只读。该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

vendor-performance-audit 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

vendor-performance-audit 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 11,050 次,近一周安装 447 次,下载 3,469 次。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

vendor-performance-audit 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 标注为只读权限,试用阶段不容易误改本地文件。

先想清楚的地方

  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 只想先试试效果、不希望它改动本地文件的人。

不太适合

  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
vendor-performance-audit

供应商绩效审计 · 本页

11,050—只读MIT-0有提醒

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

name
Vendor Performance Audit
version
1.0.0
price
29
category
productivity
author
Remy Claw
last_validated
2026-03-03
tagline
Quarterly vendor review system with KPI scoring, improvement plans, and offboarding triggers.

Vendor Performance Audit

Framework: Vendor Performance Scorecard (VPS) Output: Scored vendor review, improvement plan or offboarding recommendation

Most vendor relationships drift because nobody's measuring them. This quarterly audit system gives you a structured way to evaluate every significant vendor, surface problems before they escalate, and make data-driven decisions about renewing, renegotiating, or replacing.


When to Run This Audit

  • Quarterly for all Priority vendors (ACV > $10K or operationally critical)
  • Semi-annually for Standard vendors
  • Triggered any time a major incident occurs (SLA breach, security issue, delivery failure)
  • Pre-renewal (minimum 60 days before contract end)

Phase 1: KPI Scorecard

Rate each dimension 1-5. Be honest — this is for your decision-making, not the vendor's feelings.

Dimension 1: Delivery & SLA Performance (Weight: 30%)

ScoreCriteria
5Consistently exceeds SLA. Proactive communication on any hiccup. Zero surprise failures.
4Meets SLA >95% of the time. Issues are rare and resolved quickly.
3Meets SLA most of the time. Occasional misses with reasonable resolution.
2Frequent SLA misses. Resolution is slow or requires escalation.
1Regular delivery failures. SLA is aspirational, not operational.

Evidence required: Pull ticket data, delivery logs, or incident records. Don't score from memory.

Dimension 2: Quality of Output (Weight: 25%)

ScoreCriteria
5Output exceeds expectations. Error rate near zero. Rework is essentially unheard of.
4Output meets quality bar consistently. Minor issues handled proactively.
3Generally acceptable quality. Some rework required.
2Quality is inconsistent. Rework is common. Internal team spends time fixing vendor output.
1Output frequently doesn't meet standards. Significant internal overhead to compensate.

Dimension 3: Responsiveness & Communication (Weight: 20%)

ScoreCriteria
5Always reachable. Proactively surfaces issues. Communication is clear and timely.
4Responsive within agreed SLA. Communicates proactively most of the time.
3Generally responsive but reactive. Sometimes requires chasing.
2Slow to respond. You often initiate all communication. Escalations required.
1Unreliable contact. Incidents discovered by you, not surfaced by them.

Dimension 4: Value vs. Cost (Weight: 15%)

ScoreCriteria
5Clear ROI. Cost is at or below market for quality delivered. Strong value demonstrated.
4Good value. Cost is reasonable given output and relationship quality.
3Market rate. Neither a bargain nor obviously overpriced.
2Starting to feel overpriced relative to value delivered or market alternatives.
1Overpriced for what we get. Alternatives would deliver more for less.

Dimension 5: Strategic Alignment & Roadmap (Weight: 10%)

ScoreCriteria
5Deeply aligned. They understand our business and proactively help us get where we're going.
4Good alignment. They know our goals and adjust accordingly.
3Transactional but functional. Delivers what's scoped, no more.
2Misaligned in places. Their direction and ours are diverging.
1No alignment. Product/service is moving away from our needs.

Phase 2: Composite Score & Tier Classification

Weighted score calculation:

VPS = (D1 × 0.30) + (D2 × 0.25) + (D3 × 0.20) + (D4 × 0.15) + (D5 × 0.10)

Max score = 5.0

VPS RangeTierRecommended Action
4.0 – 5.0🟢 Green — Trusted PartnerRenew, consider expanding scope or strategic partnership
3.0 – 3.9🟡 Yellow — WatchRenew with conditions; issue improvement plan for lowest-scoring dimension
2.0 – 2.9🟠 Orange — At RiskRenegotiate terms or begin sourcing alternatives; 60-day improvement window
1.0 – 1.9🔴 Red — ReplaceBegin active replacement process; do not renew

Phase 3: Issue Log Review

Before finalizing the score, review your incident/ticket log for this vendor over the review period:

  • How many incidents were opened? How many are still open?
  • What was the average resolution time? Compare to SLA.
  • Were any incidents flagged as critical/high-impact?
  • Did any incidents result in downstream business impact (revenue loss, client complaints, compliance exposure)?

Incident severity modifier:

  • 1+ critical incident with unresolved root cause → drop tier by one level
  • 3+ medium incidents unresolved → flag for improvement plan regardless of VPS score

Phase 4: Improvement Plan Template (Yellow & Orange Tiers)

If VPS < 4.0, issue a formal improvement plan:

Improvement Plan — [Vendor Name] — [Quarter]

  • Review Period: [start] – [end]
  • VPS Score: [X.X] / 5.0
  • Tier: Yellow / Orange
  • Review Date: [90 days from today]

Key Issues Identified:

  1. [Specific issue with evidence]
  2. [Specific issue with evidence]

Required Improvements:

  1. [Specific, measurable change required] — Target: [metric] by [date]
  2. [Specific, measurable change required] — Target: [metric] by [date]

Consequences if not met:

  • Yellow: Move to Orange tier; begin parallel sourcing
  • Orange: Contract not renewed; active replacement begins

Acknowledgment: Share this plan with the vendor. Get written acknowledgment.


Phase 5: Offboarding Trigger Criteria

Initiate replacement when ANY of the following are true:

  • VPS score < 2.0
  • Two consecutive quarters in Orange tier
  • Critical incident with material business impact and no credible root cause fix
  • Vendor signals they are discontinuing the product/service
  • Market alternative offers >30% better value at equivalent quality
  • Compliance or security failure

When trigger is met: immediately move to replacement sourcing and set a hard cutover date.


Audit Schedule Template

VendorCategoryACVTierLast AuditNext AuditOwner
[Name]Software$XGreen[date][date][name]

Run this as a quarterly review in your ops calendar.

平台分布

OpenClaw

79.37%
按下载量换算2,753

安全审计

VirusTotal

可疑

ClawScan

可疑

Static analysis

未展示

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills