Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索只读clawhub未标认证来源可访问clear审计提醒

vendor-performance-audit供应商绩效审计

Agent Skill

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。

总安装

11,050

周安装

447

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

3,469
OpenClaw

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

MIT-0

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

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

简介

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。

SKILL.md

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.

适合场景

01

OpenClaw 用户查找和安装 Skill 时

02

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

03

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

04

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

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 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills