deal-qualification
Skill15 starsChanged 9 months agoMITView on GitHub
Qualify sales deals using MEDDIC, BANT, SPICED, or CHAMP frameworks with structured scoring and gap analysis. Use this skill whenever a rep needs to qualify a deal, assess deal health, decide whether to invest more time in an opportunity, says "should I pursue this deal", "qualify this opportunity", "MEDDIC score", "BANT check", or asks about deal qualification criteria. Also trigger when a manager reviews pipeline quality or when someone mentions deal scoring, opportunity assessment, or go/no-go decisions.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- prosyo-ai/gtm-skilltheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- erickdronski/gtm-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 16, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- prosyo-ai/gtm-skill★ 13same name
- erickdronski/gtm-skills★ 0same 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 repository17 other files it gives its agents.
- battle-cardsSkill
- buyer-personaSkill
- campaign-to-fieldSkill
- content-healthSkill
- discovery-guideSkill
- expansion-playbookSkill
- gtm-memorySkill
- handoff-builderSkill
- objection-handlingSkill
- partner-enablementSkill
- pipeline-intelligenceSkill
- playbook-builderSkill
- proposal-builderSkill
- rep-profileSkill
- roi-calculatorSkill
- sales-coachingSkill
- win-loss-analysisSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
40 rules. About 0 are common, 20 are distinctive, and 20 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈20
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
20
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 23
B — Budget: Do they have money allocated?
- Distinctive: line 25
N — Need: Do they have a real problem you solve?
- Distinctive: line 88
CRITICAL: Before asking the user for deal context, check what MCP tools are available and pull data automatically.
- Very specific: line 92
Check if you have access to CRM tools (look for tools containing search_crm_objects, get_crm_objects, or similar CRM search/get functions …
- Distinctive: line 94
If CRM tools ARE available:
- Very specific: line 96
Find the deal: Search the deals object type using whatever identifier the user gave you.
- Very specific: line 98
If the user said "qualify my Acme deal", search with query "Acme" on the deals object type
- Distinctive: line 99
If multiple deals match, present them and ask which one
- Very specific: line 102
Search the contacts object type with association filter: associatedWith → objectType: "deals", operator: "EQUAL", objectIds: ["<deal_id>"]
- Very specific: line 110
Pull associated company: Search companies with association to the deal.
- Distinctive: line 112
Use this to assess deal size relative to company size
- Very specific: line 121
Check if you have access to chat tools (look for slack_search_public, slack_search_public_and_private, chat_message_search).
- Distinctive: line 123
If chat tools ARE available:
- Distinctive: line 124
Search for the company/deal name in sales channels
- Distinctive: line 125
Look for competitive intel, blockers, or internal sentiment
- Very specific: line 130
Check if you have access to Gong tools (look for tools prefixed with gong_).
- Distinctive: line 132
If Gong tools ARE available:
- Very specific: line 133
Pull discovery calls: Use gong_search_calls with the company/deal name.
- Distinctive: line 134
Look for discovery and qualification calls specifically
- Very specific: line 135
Use gong_get_transcript on the most recent calls to extract:
- Very specific: line 140
Assess champion engagement: Use gong_search_calls_by_participant with the champion's email.
- Very specific: line 143
Get call stats: Use gong_get_call_stats for calls related to this deal.
- Very specific: line 151
Validate company profile: Use zoominfo_search_company with the prospect company name.
- Very specific: line 154
Map buying committee: Use zoominfo_get_org_chart to identify:
- Very specific: line 158
Get tech stack: Use zoominfo_get_tech_stack for the prospect company.
- Very specific: line 162
Enrich prospect company: Use clay_enrich_company for recent signals.
- Very specific: line 167
Research key contacts: Use linkedin_get_profile for the Economic Buyer and Champion.
- Very specific: line 171
Validate org structure: Use linkedin_search_leads at the prospect company.
- Very specific: line 176
Check if you have access to calendar or email tools (look for outlook_calendar_search, outlook_email_search).
- Distinctive: line 179
Search upcoming meetings with the prospect company name
- Distinctive: line 180
Search recent emails for engagement signals
- Distinctive: line 184
After pulling data, present a brief summary:
- Distinctive: line 192
After the auto-pull, ask ONLY for information you couldn't find in the tools.
- Distinctive: line 198
If I pulled data from your CRM, I'll pre-fill what I can and only ask about gaps.
- Distinctive: line 215
After generating the scorecard:
- Very specific: line 216
Update memory/deal-patterns.md with qualification insights and scores
- Very specific: line 217
Update memory/team.md if rep-specific patterns emerge
- Distinctive: line 219
If the deal scored 🔴 on Champion, suggest running the discovery-guide skill
- Distinctive: line 308
0 — Missing/Negative: No information or actively concerning signals
- Distinctive: line 314
When reviewing multiple deals, I'll produce a ranked list:
≈ “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
Deal Qualification
Help reps and managers objectively assess whether a deal is worth pursuing, identify gaps in qualification, and decide where to invest their time. The worst thing in sales is spending months on a deal that was never going to close — qualification prevents that.
Frameworks
MEDDIC (Recommended for Enterprise B2B SaaS)
The gold standard for complex, multi-stakeholder deals:
- M — Metrics: What quantifiable outcomes does the prospect expect?
- E — Economic Buyer: Who has the budget authority and final say?
- D — Decision Criteria: What factors will they use to choose a vendor?
- D — Decision Process: What are the steps, stakeholders, and timeline?
- I — Identify Pain: What specific problem are they solving?
- C — Champion: Who inside the account is actively selling for you?
BANT (Good for Simpler or Faster Sales Cycles)
- B — Budget: Do they have money allocated?
- A — Authority: Are you talking to the decision-maker?
- N — Need: Do they have a real problem you solve?
- T — Timeline: Is there urgency to act?
SPICED (Good for Customer-Centric Selling)
- S — Situation: What's their current state?
- P — Pain: What's broken or missing?
- I — Impact: What happens if they don't fix it?
- C — Critical Event: Is there a forcing function or deadline?
- E — Economic Decision: Who decides and how?
- D — Decision Criteria: How will they evaluate options?
How It Works
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ DEAL QUALIFICATION │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ MODES │
│ 1. Score a Deal — Rate a specific opportunity on all criteria │
│ 2. Gap Analysis — Identify what's missing and how to fill it │
│ 3. Go/No-Go — Make a structured decision on whether to pursue │
│ 4. Pipeline Audit — Score multiple deals for prioritization │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ OUTPUT │
│ • Qualification scorecard with red/yellow/green per criterion │
│ • Gap analysis with specific next actions │
│ • Risk assessment and overall confidence level │
│ • Comparison against ideal deal profile │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ SUPERCHARGED (when you connect your tools) │
│ + ~~CRM: Deal data, contacts, company, and engagement velocity │
│ + ~~CRM: Stage progression and probability scoring │
│ + ~~conversation intelligence (Gong): Discovery call transcripts│
│ + ~~conversation intelligence (Gong): Champion engagement signals│
│ + ~~conversation intelligence (Gong): Competitor mentions in calls│
│ + ~~data enrichment (ZoomInfo): Company profile validation │
│ + ~~data enrichment (ZoomInfo): Org chart for buying committee │
│ + ~~data enrichment (Clay): Company signals and enrichment │
│ + ~~data enrichment (LinkedIn): Stakeholder backgrounds │
│ + ~~data enrichment (LinkedIn): Champion activity and tenure │
│ + ~~chat: Internal deal discussions and risk flags │
│ + ~~calendar/email: Meeting history and engagement signals │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Getting Started
- "Score this deal using MEDDIC"
- "Is this deal worth pursuing? Here's what I know..."
- "What gaps do I have in qualifying [Company]?"
- "Review my pipeline — which deals are real?"
- "I have a go/no-go meeting — help me prepare"
Execution Flow
Step 0: Automatic Data Pull (Before Asking the User Anything)
CRITICAL: Before asking the user for deal context, check what MCP tools are available and pull data automatically. Reps should never have to paste data that already lives in their tools.
CRM Data Pull
Check if you have access to CRM tools (look for tools containing search_crm_objects, get_crm_objects, or similar CRM search/get functions in your available tools).
If CRM tools ARE available:
- Find the deal. Search the
dealsobject type using whatever identifier the user gave you.- Request these properties:
dealname,amount,dealstage,closedate,pipeline,hubspot_owner_id,dealtype,description,notes_last_updated,notes_last_contacted,num_notes,hs_deal_stage_probability,hs_forecast_amount - If the user said "qualify my Acme deal", search with query "Acme" on the
dealsobject type - If multiple deals match, present them and ask which one
- Request these properties:
- Pull associated contacts. Once you have the deal ID, search for contacts associated with this deal.
- Search the
contactsobject type with association filter:associatedWith→objectType: "deals",operator: "EQUAL",objectIds: ["<deal_id>"] - Request these contact properties:
firstname,lastname,jobtitle,email,phone,company,hs_lead_status,lifecyclestage - Map contacts to MEDDIC roles based on job title:
- C-suite, VP, Director titles → likely Economic Buyer candidates
- Primary contact with most engagement → likely Champion
- Technical titles (Engineer, Architect, IT) → Technical Evaluator
- Procurement, Legal, Finance titles → Decision Process gatekeepers
- Search the
- Pull associated company. Search
companieswith association to the deal.- Properties:
name,domain,industry,numberofemployees,annualrevenue,total_revenue,description,about_us,founded_year,country - Use this to assess deal size relative to company size
- Properties:
- Assess engagement velocity.
notes_last_contacted— No contact in 14+ days on an active deal = 🔴 risk flagnum_notes— Low activity count + long cycle = stalling signalhs_deal_stage_probability— Compare CRM probability vs your MEDDIC assessment
Chat Data Pull
Check if you have access to chat tools (look for slack_search_public, slack_search_public_and_private, chat_message_search).
If chat tools ARE available:
- Search for the company/deal name in sales channels
- Look for competitive intel, blockers, or internal sentiment
- Surface risk flags mentioned by teammates — this context rarely makes it into the CRM
Conversation Intelligence Data Pull (Gong)
Check if you have access to Gong tools (look for tools prefixed with gong_).
If Gong tools ARE available:
- Pull discovery calls. Use
gong_search_callswith the company/deal name.- Look for discovery and qualification calls specifically
- Use
gong_get_transcripton the most recent calls to extract:- Pain points articulated by the prospect (fills Identify Pain)
- Decision process details mentioned (fills Decision Process)
- Budget/metrics discussions (fills Metrics and Economic Buyer)
- Competitor mentions (flags competitive risk)
- Assess champion engagement. Use
gong_search_calls_by_participantwith the champion's email.- Frequency of calls → Champion still engaged or going dark?
- Talk patterns → Are they selling internally for you?
- Get call stats. Use
gong_get_call_statsfor calls related to this deal.- Talk-to-listen ratio → Did the rep actually do discovery or just pitch?
- Questions asked → Was qualification thorough?
- Next steps confirmed → Is the process advancing?
Sales Intelligence Data Pull (ZoomInfo / Clay / LinkedIn)
ZoomInfo (check for tools prefixed with zoominfo_):
- Validate company profile. Use
zoominfo_search_companywith the prospect company name.- Employee count, revenue, industry → Validate deal size is realistic
- Growth signals → Is this company in a position to buy?
- Map buying committee. Use
zoominfo_get_org_chartto identify:- Who reports to the Economic Buyer → potential blockers
- Technical evaluators not yet in the CRM → missing stakeholders
- Procurement/Legal contacts → anticipate Decision Process steps
- Get tech stack. Use
zoominfo_get_tech_stackfor the prospect company.- Current tools they use → competitive displacement opportunity or integration angle
Clay (check for tools prefixed with clay_):
- Enrich prospect company. Use
clay_enrich_companyfor recent signals.- Funding rounds, hiring surges, leadership changes → buying triggers or red flags
- Growth trajectory → validates budget availability
LinkedIn (check for tools prefixed with linkedin_):
- Research key contacts. Use
linkedin_get_profilefor the Economic Buyer and Champion.- Career tenure → Will they be around to see the deal through?
- Previous companies → Did they use your product (or a competitor's) before?
- Shared connections → Warm introduction opportunities
- Validate org structure. Use
linkedin_search_leadsat the prospect company.- Cross-check against CRM contacts → Are we missing stakeholders?
Calendar/Email Pull
Check if you have access to calendar or email tools (look for outlook_calendar_search, outlook_email_search).
If available:
- Search upcoming meetings with the prospect company name
- Search recent emails for engagement signals
Present What You Found
After pulling data, present a brief summary:
"I pulled the [Deal Name] deal from your CRM — $[amount] in [stage] stage, expected close [date]. I found [N] contacts including [Name] ([Title]) who looks like your Economic Buyer and [Name] ([Title]) as your primary contact. The company is a [industry] company with [N] employees.
Here's what I still need from you to complete the qualification: [list specific gaps]"
Step 1: Gather Remaining Context
After the auto-pull, ask ONLY for information you couldn't find in the tools.
What I Need From You
If I pulled data from your CRM, I'll pre-fill what I can and only ask about gaps. If no tools are connected, tell me everything you know:
- Company and deal size — Who and how big?
- What you're selling — Product, use case, proposed solution
- Who you're talking to — Names, titles, roles in the decision
- What you've learned — Pain points, requirements, timeline
- Where you are in the process — Stage, next steps, blockers
- Framework preference — MEDDIC, BANT, SPICED, or "you decide"
When tools are connected: I'll already have items 1, 3, and 5 from your CRM. I'll focus on items 2, 4, and 6 — the context that lives in your head, not your CRM.
Step 2: Score Using Framework
Apply the framework against ALL evidence — CRM data, chat context, calendar signals, and user input. Cite tool-sourced evidence in the scorecard: "Per CRM, last contact was 18 days ago — scoring Engagement low."
Step 3: Store Insights
After generating the scorecard:
- Update
memory/deal-patterns.mdwith qualification insights and scores - Update
memory/team.mdif rep-specific patterns emerge - Flag competitive intel for
memory/competitors.md - If the deal scored 🔴 on Champion, suggest running the discovery-guide skill
Output Format: Deal Scorecard
# Deal Qualification: [Company Name]
**Date:** [Today]
**Framework:** [MEDDIC]
**Deal Size:** [$ amount]
**Stage:** [Current stage]
**Rep:** [Name]
---
## Qualification Score: [X / 30]
| Criterion | Score (0-5) | Status | Evidence |
|-----------|------------|--------|----------|
| **Metrics** | [0-5] | 🟢🟡🔴 | [What we know] |
| **Economic Buyer** | [0-5] | 🟢🟡🔴 | [What we know] |
| **Decision Criteria** | [0-5] | 🟢🟡🔴 | [What we know] |
| **Decision Process** | [0-5] | 🟢🟡🔴 | [What we know] |
| **Identify Pain** | [0-5] | 🟢🟡🔴 | [What we know] |
| **Champion** | [0-5] | 🟢🟡🔴 | [What we know] |
**Score Guide:** 🟢 25-30 (Strong) | 🟡 15-24 (Needs Work) | 🔴 0-14 (At Risk)
---
## Confidence Level: [High / Medium / Low]
[One paragraph assessment of overall deal health and likelihood to close]
---
## Gap Analysis
### Critical Gaps (Must Fill)
1. **[Gap]** — [Why it matters] — **Action:** [Specific step to fill this gap]
2. **[Gap]** — [Why it matters] — **Action:** [Step]
### Important Gaps (Should Fill)
1. **[Gap]** — **Action:** [Step]
### Nice to Have
1. **[Gap]** — **Action:** [Step]
---
## Risk Assessment
| Risk | Severity | Mitigation |
|------|----------|------------|
| [Risk 1] | High/Med/Low | [What to do] |
| [Risk 2] | ... | ... |
---
## Recommended Next Steps
1. [Most important action with specific guidance]
2. [Second priority]
3. [Third priority]
---
## Go / No-Go Recommendation
**Recommendation:** [PURSUE / PURSUE WITH CAUTION / DEPRIORITIZE / WALK AWAY]
**Rationale:** [Why — based on the evidence]
**Conditions to Continue:** [What must be true to keep investing in this deal]Scoring Guide
Each criterion scores 0-5:
- 5 — Fully Validated: Clear evidence, confirmed by the prospect
- 4 — Strong Indication: Good evidence but not fully confirmed
- 3 — Partial: Some information but significant gaps remain
- 2 — Assumed: Based on inference, not direct confirmation
- 1 — Unknown: We know we need this but don't have it
- 0 — Missing/Negative: No information or actively concerning signals
Pipeline Audit Mode
When reviewing multiple deals, I'll produce a ranked list:
# Pipeline Qualification Audit
| Rank | Deal | Size | Score | Confidence | Key Risk | Action |
|------|------|------|-------|------------|----------|--------|
| 1 | [Deal A] | $X | 26/30 | High | [Risk] | [Action] |
| 2 | [Deal B] | $X | 21/30 | Medium | [Risk] | [Action] |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
## Summary
- **Strong deals:** [Count] worth $[total]
- **At-risk deals:** [Count] worth $[total] — need attention this week
- **Recommended deprioritize:** [Count] worth $[total]Related Skills
- discovery-guide — Fill qualification gaps with better discovery
- proposal-builder — Build proposals for well-qualified deals
- win-loss-analysis — Learn from past deal outcomes to improve qualification
- roi-calculator — Quantify the Metrics criterion
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.

