agentleFS
Sign inStart free
marichalnickmarichalnick/sales-skills-for-claude/skills/objection-handler/SKILL.md

objection-handler

Skill0 starsChanged 25 days agoMITView on GitHub

Helps respond to a sales objection, live or by message. Diagnoses what is really behind the objection, gives a short spoken or written response using acknowledge-clarify-reframe-advance, and suggests when to walk away. Use when the user pastes an objection ("too expensive", "we already have a tool", "send me info", "not a priority", "we build it ourselves", "bad timing") or asks how to handle pushback.

13 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use offer-builder.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • duncan-buildroomSkill

    offer-builder

    Build a Hormozi-style "Grand Slam Offer" so good people feel stupid saying no — engineered around the Value Equation (bigger dream outcome, higher belief it'll work, less time, less effort). Use this when the user says "build my offer", "make my offer irresistible", "help me package what I sell", "I don't know how to price/pitch this", "grand slam offer", "I built a product but nobody's buying", or when they have a thing to sell but no compelling way to present it. Push to run this before they try to sell anything.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 13 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    If the context is too thin to tell, say which two types are most likely and give a clarifying question that separates them.

    line 27
  2. Distinctive:

    Keep spoken responses under 30 seconds.

    line 35

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 13 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Objection Handler

Most objections are not the real reason. The job is to find out what is behind it, not to win an argument.

Do not overcome an objection that reveals a real lack of fit. Sometimes the right question is not "how do I handle this?" but "is this account actually a fit?". Diagnose first; disqualify when appropriate. No pressure tactics, no false urgency.

Workflow

1. Diagnose before answering

Classify the objection:

TypeSounds likeOften really means
Brush-off"Send me some info"Not convinced it's relevant yet
Status quo"We already have something"Doesn't see a gap
Priority"Not a priority right now"No urgency, no owner, or no budget
Price"Too expensive"Value unclear, or wrong person
Build"We'll build it ourselves"Underestimates scope, or genuinely can
Timing"Call me next quarter"Real timing, or polite no
Authority"I'm not the right person"A door to the right person

If the context is too thin to tell, say which two types are most likely and give a clarifying question that separates them.

2. Respond: acknowledge → clarify → reframe → advance

  • Acknowledge: show you heard it. No "but".
  • Clarify: one question to find the real reason.
  • Reframe: a different way to see it, only after you understand.
  • Advance: a small, concrete next step, or an honest exit.

Keep spoken responses under 30 seconds. Written responses under 60 words.

3. Know when to stop

Recommend walking away (or nurturing) when there is no real need, no access to the decision, or no timing. Pushing a bad fit wastes both sides' time and burns the relationship.

Output

Objection: "<as given>"
Most likely meaning: <type + one line>
Clarifying question: "<…>"
Response (spoken): "<…>"
Response (written): "<…>"
If they repeat it: <walk away / nurture / try a different stakeholder>

Examples of good clarifying questions

  • "Of course. To make it relevant: is it mainly X, Y or Z that matters to you?"
  • "Makes sense. Is that because it's handled well today, or because nobody owns it yet?"
  • "Too expensive compared to what: the budget you have, or the value you expect?"
  • "Which parts would you build: A, B or C? That changes a lot."

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.

Check your setup, free