lead-scoring-model
Skill13 starsChanged 21 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use this skill when you need a lead scoring model that sales trusts: inbound leads pile up unworked, marketing and sales argue about MQL quality, or reps chase the wrong leads first. Designs a two-axis model (fit and engagement) from your won and lost data, sets point values and decay, defines the handoff threshold and the SLA, and includes the test that proves the model works. Produces a documented scoring model ready to configure in any CRM or marketing system.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- OneWave-AI/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 21, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- OneWave-AI/claude-skills★ 378same 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 repository77 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- abm-account-planSkill
- account-research-briefSkill
- account-tieringSkill
- aeo-answer-optimizerSkill
- breakup-emailSkill
- buyer-persona-builderSkill
- buying-committee-mapperSkill
- buying-signal-scoringSkill
- call-coaching-scorecardSkill
- campaign-performance-analyzerSkill
- case-study-writerSkill
- churn-win-backSkill
- closed-lost-reactivationSkill
- cold-call-scriptSkill
- cold-email-sequenceSkill
- cold-email-writerSkill
- comparison-page-writerSkill
- competitive-battlecardSkill
- competitor-teardownSkill
- crm-hygiene-auditSkill
- customer-interview-guideSkill
- deal-qualificationSkill
- deliverability-auditSkill
- discovery-call-prepSkill
- domain-warmup-planSkill
- email-authentication-setupSkill
- email-copy-reviewSkill
- event-follow-upSkill
- expansion-opportunity-finderSkill
- first-line-personalizationSkill
- follow-up-email-writerSkill
- funding-signal-outreachSkill
- gtm-global-rulesSkill
- hiring-signal-outreachSkill
- icp-builderSkill
- job-change-playsSkill
- lead-list-builderSkill
- lead-magnet-builderSkill
- linkedin-comment-strategySkill
- linkedin-connection-noteSkill
- linkedin-message-sequenceSkill
- linkedin-post-writerSkill
- linkedin-profile-optimizerSkill
- list-cleaningSkill
- lookalike-account-finderSkill
- meeting-booking-replySkill
- messaging-matrixSkill
- multichannel-cadenceSkill
- mutual-action-planSkill
- negotiation-playbookSkill
- no-show-recoverySkill
- objection-handlerSkill
- outbound-ab-testSkill
- outbound-mathSkill
- outreach-compliance-checkSkill
- pipeline-reviewSkill
- post-engagement-outreachSkill
- proposal-follow-upSkill
- prospect-research-briefSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈5
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 16
Use this when the question is "which leads should sales call first?".
- Distinctive: line 62
MUST keep fit and engagement as separate scores.
- Distinctive: line 63
MUST include decay and negative scoring.
- Distinctive: line 64
MUST backtest before going live.
- Distinctive: line 65
NEVER route a direct demo or pricing request through scoring delays.
≈ “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
Use this when the question is "which leads should sales call first?". It produces a scoring model with point tables, a threshold and a validation test, documented well enough that anyone can configure it.
Inputs
- 6 to 12 months of leads with outcome: became an opportunity, won, or went nowhere.
- Firmographic and role data on each lead.
- Engagement events: form fills, page visits, email replies, event attendance, product sign-ups.
- Sales capacity: how many leads a week the team can work properly.
The play
1. Two axes, never one
- Fit (who they are): role, company size, industry, region, stack. Changes rarely.
- Engagement (what they did): actions, weighted by intent, decaying over time.
A single blended number lets a student who downloads ten ebooks outrank a VP who visited pricing once.
2. Derive points from data
For each attribute and action, compare the opportunity rate of leads that have it with the base rate. Points roughly follow the lift: an action with 4x the base opportunity rate earns about twice the points of one with 2x. Read references/scoring-tables.md for starter tables and the lift method.
3. Add negative scores and decay
Subtract for students, competitors, personal emails, job seekers and unsubscribes. Halve engagement points every 30 days so old activity does not keep a lead hot.
4. Set the threshold from capacity
Choose the fit and engagement cut-offs that send sales roughly the number of leads they can work within the SLA. A threshold that produces 300 leads a week for a team that can work 80 trains reps to ignore scores.
5. Define the handoff
- High fit + high engagement: route to sales, first touch within 1 business hour (inbound) or same day.
- High fit + low engagement: targeted outbound or nurture.
- Low fit + high engagement: self-serve path or marketing nurture.
- Low fit + low engagement: no action.
High-intent actions such as a demo request or pricing contact bypass scoring entirely.
6. Validate before launch
Backtest on last quarter: the top 20% of scored leads should hold at least 50% of the opportunities. Then review monthly.
What good looks like
- Sales can explain any score from the point table in 30 seconds.
- The top-scored decile converts to opportunity at 3x or more the average.
- Demo requests never wait for a score.
- The common mistake is guessing points in a meeting ("a webinar feels like 10 points") instead of deriving them from outcomes.
Rules
- MUST keep fit and engagement as separate scores.
- MUST include decay and negative scoring.
- MUST backtest before going live.
- NEVER route a direct demo or pricing request through scoring delays.
Example prompts
- "Build a lead scoring model from this export of 4,000 leads with outcomes."
- "Our MQLs convert at 3%. Redesign the scoring so sales trusts it."
- "Set a threshold that sends my 5 reps about 60 leads a week."
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.

