ai-vendor-evaluator

star 1

Use when comparing AI platforms, tools, or services. Use before procurement. Produces structured vendor comparison, scoring, and recommendation.

Ethical-AI-Syndicate By Ethical-AI-Syndicate schedule Updated 1/24/2026

name: ai-vendor-evaluator description: Use when comparing AI platforms, tools, or services. Use before procurement. Produces structured vendor comparison, scoring, and recommendation.

AI Vendor Evaluator

Overview

Conduct structured evaluation of AI vendors, platforms, and services. Compare options objectively and make defensible procurement decisions.

Core principle: AI vendor selection is a strategic decision. Evaluate beyond features—consider support, roadmap, security, and total cost.

When to Use

  • Selecting LLM provider
  • Choosing ML platform
  • Evaluating AI SaaS tools
  • Renewing vendor contracts
  • Build vs buy decisions

Output Format

vendor_evaluation:
  project: "[What we're selecting for]"
  evaluation_date: "[YYYY-MM-DD]"
  evaluators: ["[Name]"]
  
  requirements:
    must_have:
      - requirement: "[Requirement]"
        rationale: "[Why essential]"
    
    should_have:
      - requirement: "[Requirement]"
        weight: "[1-5]"
    
    nice_to_have:
      - requirement: "[Requirement]"
  
  vendors:
    - vendor: "[Vendor name]"
      product: "[Product name]"
      
      overview:
        description: "[What they offer]"
        pricing_model: "[How they charge]"
        contract_terms: "[Key terms]"
      
      scores:
        - category: "[Category]"
          criteria:
            - criterion: "[Criterion]"
              score: "[1-5]"
              evidence: "[How verified]"
              notes: "[Details]"
          category_score: "[Weighted average]"
      
      pros: ["[Advantage]"]
      cons: ["[Disadvantage]"]
      risks: ["[Concern]"]
      
      total_score: "[Weighted total]"
      rank: "[Position vs others]"
  
  comparison_matrix:
    headers: ["[Criterion]", "[Vendor A]", "[Vendor B]"]
    rows:
      - ["[Criterion 1]", "[Score]", "[Score]"]
  
  total_cost_analysis:
    - vendor: "[Vendor]"
      year_1: "[$]"
      year_3: "[$]"
      assumptions: ["[Assumption]"]
  
  recommendation:
    selected: "[Vendor name]"
    rationale: "[Why chosen]"
    conditions: ["[Any conditions]"]
    risks_accepted: ["[Known risks]"]
    next_steps: ["[Actions to proceed]"]

Evaluation Categories

Technical Capability

Criterion What to Evaluate
Model performance Accuracy, quality on your data
Scalability Handle your volume
Latency Response time requirements
Customization Fine-tuning, configuration options
Integration APIs, SDKs, connectors

Security & Compliance

Criterion What to Evaluate
Data handling Where data goes, retention
Certifications SOC2, ISO27001, HIPAA
Privacy GDPR compliance, consent
Access control Authentication, authorization
Audit capability Logging, monitoring

Operational

Criterion What to Evaluate
Reliability SLA, uptime history
Support Response time, expertise
Documentation Quality, completeness
Monitoring Observability tools
Disaster recovery Backup, failover

Strategic

Criterion What to Evaluate
Vendor stability Financial health, market position
Roadmap Future direction alignment
Lock-in risk Portability, standards
Ecosystem Partners, community

Commercial

Criterion What to Evaluate
Pricing clarity Understandable pricing
Cost predictability Usage-based risks
Contract flexibility Terms, exit clauses
Total cost Implementation, operation, exit

Scoring Methodology

Score Scale

Score Meaning
5 Excellent - exceeds requirements
4 Good - meets requirements well
3 Adequate - meets minimum requirements
2 Weak - partially meets requirements
1 Poor - does not meet requirements

Weighted Scoring

category_weights:
  technical: 30%
  security: 25%
  operational: 20%
  strategic: 15%
  commercial: 10%
  
total_score: "Sum of (category_score × weight)"

Evaluation Process

Phase 1: Requirements (Week 1)

steps:
  - "Document must-have requirements"
  - "Prioritize should-have requirements"
  - "Define evaluation criteria"
  - "Set weights by category"
  - "Identify stakeholders for input"

Phase 2: Research (Week 2)

steps:
  - "Identify vendor long list"
  - "Gather public information"
  - "Issue RFI if needed"
  - "Create short list (3-5 vendors)"

Phase 3: Evaluate (Weeks 3-4)

steps:
  - "Request demos"
  - "Technical proof of concept"
  - "Security questionnaire"
  - "Reference checks"
  - "Pricing negotiation"

Phase 4: Decide (Week 5)

steps:
  - "Score all criteria"
  - "Calculate weighted totals"
  - "Document recommendation"
  - "Present to stakeholders"
  - "Obtain approval"

Proof of Concept Design

poc_design:
  duration: "[2-4 weeks typical]"
  
  success_criteria:
    - criterion: "[What must be demonstrated]"
      measurement: "[How to measure]"
      threshold: "[Acceptable value]"
  
  test_scenarios:
    - scenario: "[Description]"
      data: "[What data to use]"
      expected: "[Expected outcome]"
  
  evaluation_questions:
    - "Does it work with our data?"
    - "What's the integration effort?"
    - "How does support respond to issues?"
    - "What's the actual cost at our scale?"

TCO Calculation

total_cost_of_ownership:
  year_1:
    license_subscription: "[$]"
    implementation: "[$]"
    integration: "[$]"
    training: "[$]"
    internal_effort: "[$]"
    total: "[$]"
  
  year_3:
    recurring: "[$ × 3]"
    scaling_assumptions: "[Volume growth]"
    price_changes: "[Expected changes]"
    total: "[$]"
  
  hidden_costs:
    - "Egress fees"
    - "Overage charges"
    - "Support tiers"
    - "Add-on features"

Red Flags

Red Flag Concern
Unclear pricing Unpredictable costs
No customer references Limited real-world validation
Vague roadmap May not evolve with needs
Poor security responses Risk exposure
High switching costs Lock-in
New/unstable company Continuity risk

Checklist

  • Requirements documented
  • Evaluation criteria defined
  • Weights assigned
  • Short list created
  • Demos completed
  • POC executed (if needed)
  • Security review done
  • References checked
  • TCO calculated
  • Scores documented
  • Recommendation justified
Install via CLI
npx skills add https://github.com/Ethical-AI-Syndicate/skills --skill ai-vendor-evaluator
Repository Details
star Stars 1
call_split Forks 0
navigation Branch main
article Path SKILL.md
More from Creator
Ethical-AI-Syndicate
Ethical-AI-Syndicate Explore all skills →