qualification
Skill1 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Lead qualification using BANT 6-criteria gate (Problem, Budget, Authority, Timeline, Fit, Margin) at marketing-sales handoff. Qualified leads enter pipeline, unqualified go to nurture. If bottleneck is downstream, reduce upstream lead gen. Use when evaluating leads, managing marketing-sales handoff, or when pipeline quality is poor.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
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 12
When pipeline quality is poor (low conversion rates)
- Distinctive: line 13
When downstream bottleneck exists (too many unqualified leads)
- Distinctive: line 20
Every lead must pass all 6 criteria before entering the pipeline at Step 2:
- Distinctive: line 54
When the pipeline bottleneck is downstream (e.g., demo capacity at 90% utilization):
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 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
Lead Qualification
When to Apply
- Evaluating new leads for pipeline entry
- Marketing-sales handoff decisions
- When pipeline quality is poor (low conversion rates)
- When downstream bottleneck exists (too many unqualified leads)
- Configuring qualification criteria during onboarding
Core Framework
BANT 6-Criteria Gate
Every lead must pass all 6 criteria before entering the pipeline at Step 2:
| Criteria | Question | Pass Condition |
| Problem | Does the prospect have a problem our product solves? | Specific, articulated pain point matching our solution |
| Budget | Is budget allocated or likely? | Budget exists or can be created within purchase timeline |
| Authority | Is the decision-maker engaged or accessible? | Direct contact with buyer, or champion with access to buyer |
| Timeline | Is there a reasonable purchase timeframe? | Active evaluation, not "maybe someday" |
| Fit | Does our product capability match their need? | Core use case alignment, not edge-case stretching |
| Margin | Can we achieve acceptable margin on this deal? | Deal economics above minimum threshold |
Qualification Flow
Incoming lead
|
+-> Score against 6 criteria
|
+-> All 6 pass: QUALIFIED
| -> Enter pipeline Step 2
| -> Assign to appropriate sales Actions
|
+-> 1-2 fail: NURTURE
| -> Add to nurture sequence
| -> Re-evaluate in 30/60/90 days
| -> Do NOT add to pipeline
|
+-> 3+ fail: DISQUALIFY
-> Remove from active tracking
-> Log reason for future pattern analysisDownstream Bottleneck Rule
When the pipeline bottleneck is downstream (e.g., demo capacity at 90% utilization):
Reduce upstream lead gen volume, don't increase it.
Bottleneck: Demo capacity (30/month, 90% utilized)
Qualified leads waiting: 15 in queue
WRONG: "Generate more leads to increase pipeline"
RIGHT: "Reduce lead gen to match demo throughput.
Generating more leads than demo can handle is waste."This is TOC's subordination principle applied to the sales pipeline.
Quality vs Quantity Tradeoffs
| Scenario | Recommendation |
| High volume, low qualification rate (<20%) | Tighten lead gen targeting. "39% qualification means 61% wasted effort." |
| Low volume, high qualification rate (>80%) | Expand lead gen. Quality is proven, need more volume. |
| High volume, high qualification rate | Scale carefully — check downstream capacity first. |
| Low volume, low qualification rate | Fix targeting AND qualification criteria. Both broken. |
Qualification Criteria Calibration
Criteria should be reviewed quarterly:
- Too strict: pipeline starves (qualification rate >90%, pipeline-to-quota <2x)
- Too loose: pipeline polluted (qualification rate <20%, downstream conversion drops)
- Target: 30-50% qualification rate with healthy downstream conversion
Decision Rules
- All 6 criteria must pass — partial qualification goes to nurture, not pipeline
- Nurture is not rejection — unqualified today may qualify later
- Downstream capacity limits upstream — never flood a constrained pipeline
- Qualification rate is a health metric — track it, calibrate criteria
- Log disqualification reasons — patterns reveal targeting problems
- Quarterly criteria review — criteria drift over time, recalibrate
Anti-Patterns to Detect
| Anti-Pattern | Signal | Response |
| Pipeline pollution | Unqualified leads in pipeline | "These leads don't meet criteria. Move to nurture." |
| Upstream flooding | Lead gen outpacing downstream capacity | "Subordinate upstream volume to downstream throughput." |
| Over-strict criteria | >90% qualification, starving pipeline | "Criteria may be too strict. Consider relaxing [specific criterion]." |
| Missing criteria | Qualification without checking all 6 | "Budget and Authority not checked. These are common failure points." |
| Wishful qualification | "Budget probably exists" | "Unverified. Mark as hypothesis, verify before pipeline entry." |
| Ignoring nurture | Disqualified leads abandoned | "Nurture sequences convert 5-15% over 6 months. Don't abandon." |
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- Ken-Technology/cold-email-skills★ 2same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository24 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- anticipatory-sellingSkill
- choice-architectureSkill
- confidenceSkill
- content-rulesSkill
- critical-chainSkill
- culture-mapSkill
- disruptionSkill
- effectuationSkill
- failure-essenceSkill
- growth-metricsSkill
- kpi-treeSkill
- network-effectsSkill
- pipelineSkill
- plan-bSkill
- pre-mortemSkill
- quest-interviewSkill
- retention-cohortsSkill
- review-engineSkill
- root-causeSkill
- strategy-kernelSkill
- stupid-gamesSkill
- unit-economicsSkill
- value-stickSkill
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
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.

