lead-scoring-model
Skill378 starsChanged 53 days agoMITView on GitHub
Builds a custom lead scoring model for a business. Takes ICP definition, historical win/loss data, CRM export. Analyzes which attributes correlate with closed-won deals. Generates lead-scoring-model.md with scoring dimensions, point values, thresholds, CRM implementation guide, and validation methodology. Can also score a batch of current leads against the model.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- prosyo-ai/gtm-skilltheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- prosyo-ai/gtm-skill★ 13same 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 repository229 other files it gives its agents.
- accessibility-auditorSkill
- agent-armySkill
- agent-eval-harnessSkill
- agent-swarm-deployerSkill
- agent-team-builderSkill
- agent-to-agentSkill
- ai-coding-guardrailsSkill
- ai-readiness-assessmentSkill
- animateSkill
- api-documentation-writerSkill
- api-endpoint-scaffolderSkill
- api-load-testerSkill
- athlete-social-media-managerSkill
- before-you-buildSkill
- bi-measure-builderSkill
- board-deck-generatorSkill
- bookkeeping-closeSkill
- bracket-predictorSkill
- brand-consistency-checkerSkill
- brand-voice-analyzerSkill
- browser-test-loopSkill
- budget-optimizerSkill
- cash-flow-forecasterSkill
- champion-identifierSkill
- churn-autopsySkill
- claude-design-criticSkill
- claude-design-system-architectSkill
- claude-landing-composerSkill
- claude-md-writerSkill
- client-health-dashboardSkill
- client-proposal-generatorSkill
- code-review-proSkill
- cold-email-sequence-generatorSkill
- color-palette-extractorSkill
- commercial-lease-analyzerSkill
- company-announcement-writerSkill
- competitor-content-analyzerSkill
- competitor-intel-agentSkill
- competitor-price-trackerSkill
- compliance-checkerSkill
- contact-hunterSkill
- content-repurposerSkill
- context-budgetSkill
- contract-analyzerSkill
- contract-redlinerSkill
- conversation-archaeologistSkill
- cowork-calendar-defragSkill
- cowork-contract-renewal-radarSkill
- cowork-data-room-builderSkill
- cowork-deal-roomSkill
- cowork-expense-auditSkill
- cowork-folder-organizerSkill
- cowork-hiring-screenerSkill
- cowork-home-inventorySkill
- cowork-inbox-triageSkill
- cowork-invoice-chaserSkill
- cowork-medical-bill-auditorSkill
- cowork-qbr-builderSkill
- cowork-rfp-responseSkill
- cowork-sop-writerSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is 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.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 19
Simplicity over complexity: Keep total dimensions to 20-30 signals maximum.
- Very specific: line 30
Generate the deliverable: Write lead-scoring-model.md following references/output-template.md.
- Distinctive: line 37
Start conservative: under-scoring a few Hot leads beats drowning reps in false positives.
- Distinctive: line 38
Never include a signal the CRM cannot reliably capture.
≈ “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
Lead Scoring Model Builder
Build a data-driven, custom lead scoring model calibrated to actual win/loss history, not generic best practices. Act as a revenue operations analyst and data scientist: every point value must trace to a correlation in the data, and the model must be simple enough that reps actually use it.
Contents
references/inputs.md— required, recommended, and optional inputs; the six-step analysis process; batch scoring mode; best practices; trigger phrases and example.references/output-template.md— the fulllead-scoring-model.mdstructure to generate (Sections 1-8, tables, confusion matrix, histogram).
Core Principles
- Data over intuition. Trace every point value to a measured lift. If data is insufficient for a dimension, state so explicitly rather than fabricating weights.
- Simplicity over complexity. Keep total dimensions to 20-30 signals maximum. A model reps use beats a perfect model they ignore.
- Continuous calibration. Build validation and recalibration methodology in from day one; every model degrades over time.
- No vanity scores. The model exists to prioritize rep time. If the score does not change rep behavior, it is not useful.
Workflow
- Gather inputs. Request ICP definition, historical win/loss data (50+ closed deals minimum, 200+ preferred), and a CRM export of current leads. Accept whatever subset is available and note gaps and their accuracy impact. See
references/inputs.mdfor the full input checklist. - Run the analysis process. Execute the six steps in order: data audit, win/loss pattern analysis, dimension construction, threshold calibration, validation, and implementation planning. Do not skip steps. See
references/inputs.mdfor the detailed procedure. - Build the four-dimension model. Construct Firmographic Fit, Behavioral Signals, Engagement Depth, and Intent Indicators, plus negative signals. Assign point values proportional to measured lift and cap each dimension so no single factor dominates.
- Calibrate thresholds. Plot won vs. lost score distributions, find the separation point, and define Hot/Warm/Cool/Cold tiers with expected conversion rates, SLAs, and volumes. Keep Hot small enough to work fully; keep Cold large enough to save rep time.
- Validate. Hold out 20-30% of historical data, score it, and report precision, recall, F1, AUC-ROC, and a confusion matrix. Analyze false positives and false negatives and iterate.
- Generate the deliverable. Write
lead-scoring-model.mdfollowingreferences/output-template.md. Fill every placeholder with data-derived values. Include Section 7 only when a batch of current leads was provided. - Score current leads (when provided). Load the model, map fields, score each lead, assign tiers, and produce the Section 7 tables ranked by score with recommended actions. See the Batch Scoring Mode in
references/inputs.md.
Guardrails
- Refuse to build a model on intuition alone. Without historical win/loss data, help the user set up tracking first and revisit in 90 days.
- Show the lift calculation behind every point value.
- Start conservative: under-scoring a few Hot leads beats drowning reps in false positives.
- Never include a signal the CRM cannot reliably capture.
- Insist on holdout validation before any model goes live.
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.

