tool-stack-audit
Skill0 starsChanged 17 days agoMITView on GitHub
Inventory every tool a product or go-to-market team uses — what it's for, who uses it, what it costs, where it overlaps with others, and who owns it — and recommend what to keep, consolidate, or cut. Use when someone asks for a tool audit, software or SaaS inventory, tech stack review, wants to cut tool spend, find overlapping tools, or figure out who owns which system.
In this repository33 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- beta-program-managerSkill
- cross-team-dependency-mapSkill
- customer-advisory-board-prepSkill
- data-request-routerSkill
- decision-logSkill
- deprecation-planSkill
- duplicate-request-mergingSkill
- experiment-logSkill
- feature-flag-trackingSkill
- feedback-taggingSkill
- information-debt-auditSkill
- internal-enablement-briefSkill
- kpi-health-checkSkill
- launch-readiness-checklistSkill
- meeting-to-action-converterSkill
- new-pm-onboarding-packSkill
- pricing-packaging-change-logSkill
- process-documentationSkill
- product-metrics-definitionsSkill
- product-ops-contextSkill
- quarterly-planning-prepSkill
- raci-builderSkill
- release-notes-draftingSkill
- request-intake-triageSkill
- retro-facilitationSkill
- ritual-calendarSkill
- roadmap-hygieneSkill
- sprint-review-summarySkill
- support-escalation-patternsSkill
- vendor-evaluation-scorecardSkill
- voice-of-customer-digestSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 45
Right-size: keep, but reduce seats or tier
- Distinctive: line 47
Cut: not used or fully replaced
- Distinctive: line 50
When recommending consolidation, note what would be lost (features, integrations, data, habits) and what migration would take.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Tool stack audit
Teams add tools one at a time and almost never remove them. An audit shows the whole stack at once, so overlap, unused seats, and ownerless tools become visible.
Before you start
If .agents/product-ops-context.md exists (or .claude/product-ops-context.md), read it first. Use the team, owners, tools, meetings, and metric definitions it already has, and only ask for what's missing or specific to this task. If it doesn't exist, go ahead with what you're given, and suggest running product-ops-context once so the next skill doesn't have to ask.
Step 1: Inventory
List every tool in scope. Capture what the source shows and mark the rest "Unknown":
| Tool | What it's used for | Team(s) | Owner | Seats paid | Seats active | Annual cost | Renewal date | Contract type | Connects to |
"What it's used for" is the job, in plain words ("collect in-app feedback"), not the vendor's category name.
Compute totals with real arithmetic.
Step 2: Find the problems
Flag each tool with any that apply:
- Overlap: two or more tools doing the same job. Group them by job.
- Low use: many seats paid, few active
- No owner: nobody responsible for the contract, setup, or renewal
- Unknown cost: nobody knows what it costs
- Shadow tool: used by a team but not on any official list
- Renewal soon: renewing within the next couple of months, so now is the time to decide
- Single point of failure: one person knows how it's set up
- Data island: holds important data that doesn't connect to anything else
Step 3: Recommend
For each tool, one recommendation:
- Keep: clear job, used, owned
- Right-size: keep, but reduce seats or tier
- Consolidate into [tool]: overlap; name which one stays and why
- Cut: not used or fully replaced
- Investigate: missing information; say what to find out
When recommending consolidation, note what would be lost (features, integrations, data, habits) and what migration would take. A cheaper stack that breaks a workflow isn't a saving.
Output
# Tool stack audit — [Team or scope] — [Date]
**Summary:** [N] tools · [total annual cost] · [N] overlapping jobs · [potential savings, if computable]
## Decide before renewal
| Tool | Renews | Cost | Recommendation | Owner |
## Overlap
- **[Job]:** [Tool A], [Tool B] → Keep [A] because [reason]. Losing: [what]
## All tools
[Inventory table with a Recommendation column]
## Missing information
- [Tool]: [what's unknown] — ask [name]Recommend only. Never cancel, downgrade, or change any tool or contract.
Related skills
- vendor-evaluation-scorecard — compare replacements for tools you cut
- information-debt-audit — find docs stranded in retired tools
- raci-builder — name an owner for each tool
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

