Works with the AI Agents you already use
Claude Code
Cursor
Codex CLI
Muse
Dots+21 moreClaude CodeCursorCodex CLIMuseDots
Manus
Grok
Grok Bot+18 agentsPrice With Confidence — Tiers, Packaging + Test Plan
Unlike free "how should I price this?" prompts: an evidence ledger, tiers with clear limits, guardrails and a safe price-test plan.
$9
Price With Confidence — Tiers, Packaging + Test Plan
Example session with this skill installed
offer: 24/7 Server Monitoring for MSPs
pricing_question: Should we move from a flat monthly fee to per-node billing?
current_pricing: £500/month flat fee per client.
customer_evidence: Feedback from 5 clients.
- Read your context and instructions
- Compiled the price with confidence
- Generated the document
I have analyzed your server monitoring offer and current client feedback to draft a pricing transition memo. The following document focuses on moving from flat-fee billing to a per-node model while managing migration risks.
Pricing & packaging memo: 24/7 Server Monitoring
Pricing question: Should we move from a flat monthly fee to per-node billing?
Audience: Managed Service Providers (MSPs)
Goal / horizon: Transition, target date [VERIFY]
Generated: 2026-10-19 · Draft for human verification
1. Decision at a glance
- Recommendation: Proceed with a hybrid pilot (Base + Per-Node) rather than a pure per-node switch.
- Confidence: Medium
Why: Per-node billing may worry smaller clients who value predictable bills [VERIFY with the 5 client notes]; per-node pricing may align better with delivery costs (assumption E2).
- What this does not claim: No guaranteed revenue increase or retention stability.
2. Offer and customer value frame
- Customer / job: MSPs needing to outsource infrastructure uptime.
- Included / excluded: 24/7 monitoring, automated alerts. Excludes manual remediation.
- Value metric candidates: Number of nodes (hypothesized primary driver).
3. Evidence and assumptions ledger
| ID | Statement | Source / date | Type | Confidence | Verification needed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | Clients find £500 flat fee predictable | Feedback from 5 clients | Reported | Medium | Confirm with the 5 client notes |
| E2 | High-node clients cost more to serve [VERIFY: cost per node] | Not supplied | Assumption | Low | Pull per-node delivery costs from ops logs |
5. Package architecture hypothesis
| Package | Best fit | Job / promise | Included | Boundary / limit | Price hypothesis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Starter | Small MSPs | Entry level uptime | Up to 10 nodes | 11th node | £250/mo |
| Professional | Growing MSPs | Scalable monitoring | Up to 50 nodes | 51st node | £600/mo |
8. Learning and test plan
| Step | Hypothesis | Method | Signal to watch | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Flat fee clients will accept a £300 base + £10/node model | Interviews with 3 top clients | Sentiment on predictability | Product |
Next steps
- Audit node counts for every current client to model margin impact.
- Draft a "Grandfathering" policy for existing flat-fee customers.
- Review infrastructure API costs to ensure the per-node margin is maintained.
1791908550820-b04j.png
PDF · document
Example file from a real run - the skill writes it into your workspace.
Connects securely to your tools. The creator never sees your data.
About this skill
Unlike free "how should I price this?" prompts that name a magic number, this skill never claims to know your optimal price. It sorts your evidence into facts and assumptions, gives each package a clear limit and upgrade trigger, sets discount and migration guardrails, and turns the open questions into a small, controlled price test. Any missing cost or demand data gets a [VERIFY] slot instead of a guess.
Sample output (excerpt; input: 24/7 Server Monitoring for MSPs · £500/month flat fee per client · "Should we move from a flat monthly fee to per-node billing?" · feedback from 5 clients): Recommendation: Hybrid pilot (base + per-node) rather than a pure per-node switch · Confidence: medium What this does not claim: no guaranteed revenue increase or retention stability.
| ID | Statement | Source | Type | Confidence | Verification needed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | Clients find £500 flat fee predictable | Feedback from 5 clients | Reported | Medium | Confirm with the 5 client notes |
| E2 | High-node clients cost more to serve [VERIFY: cost per node] | Not supplied | Assumption | Low | Pull per-node delivery costs from ops logs |
| Package | Best fit | Included | Boundary / limit | Price hypothesis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Starter | Small MSPs | Up to 10 nodes | 11th node | £250/mo |
| Professional | Growing MSPs | Up to 50 nodes | 51st node | £600/mo |
Test step 1: flat-fee clients will accept a £300 base + £10/node model · method: interviews with 3 top clients · signal: sentiment on predictability · owner: Product Next steps: audit node counts for every current client · draft a grandfathering policy for existing flat-fee customers · check infrastructure API costs per node.
You get 10 fixed sections every time: decision at a glance, offer and value frame, evidence and assumptions ledger, current pricing audit, package architecture, pricing and commercial guardrails, risks and open questions, learning and test plan, launch checklist (billing, tax, contracts, migration), suggested next step.
Works in Claude Code, Cursor and Codex · tested on real data · no invented demand, revenue or ROI · v1.0, updated Oct 2026 · questions answered via Agensi messages within 24h · More Cygnix Labs tools: https://apify.com/cygnix_labs
The problem Pricing gets set once by guesswork and never tested. Give your agent your offer, customers, costs and current pricing and get a pricing memo with tiers, packaging and a controlled price test plan: current-state audit, value-metric hypotheses, package architecture, commercial guardrails, risks, and a controlled learning plan. Useful for founders, product teams, consultants, and agencies—without pretending to know the optimal price or inventing demand, revenue, margin, or ROI.
Process and templates only. All prices, costs, calculations, and customer signals must be supplied or verified by the buyer. No financial, tax, legal, revenue, ROI, or success guarantees.
How to use
- 1
Connect your agent to the Agensi MCP
Copy the prompt and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor or any agent that supports MCP. It sets up the connection for you. Manual setup
- 2
Sign in to Agensi
Your agent shows a sign-in link. Sign in and click Allow.
- 3
Ask for what you need
Your agent loads this skill and uses it on your task. It always asks before any payment.
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be one of the first to try it. Every listed skill goes through the trust checks below.
Security scanned
Checked by our 8-point scan before listing
Fresh listing
Recently published to Agensi
Money-back guarantee
Doesn't do what its page promises? You get your money back.
Trust & safety
Security scan
Security scan passed 1 month ago