lead-scoring
Skill331 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
When a founder needs to qualify inbound leads, define their ICP, build a lead scoring model, set MQL criteria, or route prospects through pipeline stages. Activate when the user mentions lead scoring, ICP, MQL, SQL, lead qualification, inbound leads, or pipeline design.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
3
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
- Distinctive: line 61
Before scoring, check for overlaps and route accordingly:
- Distinctive: line 85
Watch for score inflation: If 80% of leads become MQLs, the threshold is too low.
- Distinctive: line 86
Track MQL-to-SQL acceptance rate: If sales rejects more than 30% of MQLs, adjust the model.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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.
Files
Lead Scoring
When to Use
Activate when a founder needs to evaluate inbound prospects against ICP criteria, build a systematic qualification workflow, score and route leads, establish MQL/SQL definitions, or design pipeline stages. Also use when the user says "which leads should I focus on," "how do I qualify inbound leads," "define my ICP," "set up lead scoring," or "how do I route leads to the right person."
Context Required
From startup-context or the user:
- ICP definition — Who is the ideal customer (company size, industry, stage, geography, use case)
- Lead sources — Where inbound leads come from (website, events, content, referrals)
- CRM and tooling — Current stack for managing leads and deals
- Current customers — Who are the best existing customers and why
- Pipeline data — Existing deals, active customers, prior contacts
- Sales capacity — Who handles leads and what is their bandwidth
Work with whatever the user provides. If they have a clear problem area, start there. Do not block on missing inputs.
Workflow
- Load ICP and configuration — Read startup-context if available. Establish the qualification criteria across company attributes, person attributes, and use case fit.
- Parse the lead data — Accept leads in any format (CSV, list, CRM export, single name). Identify data gaps and flag what needs enrichment.
- Check pipeline overlap — Before scoring, check for existing customers (route to upsell), active deals (flag for sales coordination), and prior contacts (note history). Pipeline overlaps are routing flags, not disqualifiers.
- Score company fit — Evaluate against company size, industry, stage, geography, and use case alignment. Weight each dimension based on what predicts closed-won deals.
- Score person fit — Evaluate title, seniority, department, and decision-making authority. A perfect company with the wrong contact still needs routing, not rejection.
- Score use case alignment — Connect the lead's inferred intent to specific product capabilities. Inbound signals (demo requests, pricing page visits) tip borderline cases toward qualification.
- Generate composite score and verdict — Produce a 0-100 composite score and assign a routing recommendation.
- Export structured output — Deliver results in a table or CSV with all qualification data, scores, and routing.
Output Format
Deliver these documents:
- Scored lead report — Each lead with composite score (0-100), sub-scores by dimension, verdict category, and routing recommendation
- ICP definition — Firmographic and demographic criteria with priority tiers
- Scoring model — Complete point-value table for company, person, and use case dimensions with threshold definitions
- Pipeline routing rules — How each verdict category gets handled
Frameworks & Best Practices
Verdict Categories
Assign every lead to one of these routing buckets based on composite score:
| Verdict | Score | Action |
| Qualified — Hot | 85-100 | Immediate sales outreach. High urgency, strong fit. |
| Qualified — Warm | 75-84 | Active pursuit within 24 hours. Good fit, moderate urgency. |
| Borderline | 50-74 | Requires human review. Qualified with caveats — flag specific concerns. |
| Near Miss | 30-49 | Nurture sequence or referral opportunity. Not ready for sales. |
| Disqualified | 0-29 | Does not fit ICP. Includes competitor employees. Polite decline. |
Handling Unknown Data
Score unknown dimensions at 30 points (out of 100 for that dimension). This acknowledges data absence without automatically rejecting leads. A lead missing company size data is not the same as a lead with the wrong company size. Flag unknowns for enrichment rather than penalizing them.
Inbound Intent Premium
Prospects who initiate contact demonstrate genuine interest. For borderline cases (scores 50-74), inbound signals should tip the scoring decision toward qualification. A borderline lead who requested a demo is a better prospect than a slightly-above-threshold lead who has never engaged.
Pipeline Overlap Routing
Before scoring, check for overlaps and route accordingly:
- Existing customer — Route to account management for upsell/expansion conversation
- Active deal in pipeline — Flag for the assigned sales rep to coordinate, do not create a duplicate
- Prior contact with no deal — Note history and score normally, but include context for the sales rep
- Competitor employee — Auto-disqualify and log for competitive intelligence
Multi-Dimensional Scoring
Company evaluation — Score against: company size, industry vertical, company stage/funding, geography, and use case fit. Weight dimensions based on which most predict closed-won deals in your data.
Person assessment — Score against: job title, seniority level, department alignment, and decision-making authority. A Director of Engineering at a perfect-fit company scores higher than a junior developer at the same company.
Use case alignment — Map the lead's stated or inferred needs to specific product capabilities. Strong alignment on the core use case matters more than broad but shallow fit.
Dual-Threshold MQL Definition
An MQL requires BOTH fit and engagement. Neither alone is sufficient.
- Minimum fit score: 30 points (must have basic ICP match)
- Minimum engagement score: 20 points (must show some intent)
- Combined minimum: 60 points
A perfect-fit company that never engages is not an MQL. A student downloading every whitepaper is not an MQL. The dual-threshold prevents both failure modes.
Maintaining and Iterating
- Recalibrate quarterly. Pull closed-won data and check if the model correctly predicted winners.
- Watch for score inflation. If 80% of leads become MQLs, the threshold is too low.
- Track MQL-to-SQL acceptance rate. If sales rejects more than 30% of MQLs, adjust the model.
- Start simple. Score the first 50-100 leads by hand before automating.
- Speed-to-lead is critical. Contact within 5 minutes is 21x more likely to qualify.
Related Skills
cold-outreach— Use the ICP and scoring to prioritize who to reach out to firstsales-script— Use pipeline stage definitions to prepare the right script for each stage
Examples
Example prompt: "We get 200 inbound leads a month from our website and events. Most go nowhere. Help me build a system to score and route them."
Good output excerpt:
Lead Qualification Report (Sample)
Lead Company Score Person Score Use Case Score Composite Verdict Jane Smith, VP Eng @ Acme (200 emp, SaaS) 88 85 90 88 Qualified — Hot Bob Lee, Developer @ TinyCo (15 emp, Agency) 35 40 50 40 Near Miss Unknown Title @ MegaCorp (10K emp, Finance) 60 30 (unknown) 45 47 Near Miss — Enrich Routing: Jane gets immediate sales outreach (AE assigned within 1 hour). Bob enters nurture sequence. MegaCorp lead flagged for enrichment — title and use case data needed before routing.
Example prompt: "A lead from a current customer's company just filled out our demo form. What do I do?"
Good output approach: Flag the pipeline overlap — check if this is a new department/team or the same buyer. If same account, route to the existing account manager for upsell coordination. If new department, score normally but include account context. Never create a duplicate deal.
Other versions6 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- Maudeunfledged834/startup-founder-skills★ 8100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 5
- ilya-a11y/growthband-outbound-skills★ 13same name
- Ekos-Labs/skills★ 3same name
- automatewithuday/gtm-prospecting-system★ 1same name
- sidchaudhary/gtm-skills★ 1same name
- mbfinotti/revops-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 repository49 other files it gives its agents.
- accelerator-applicationSkill
- architecture-designSkill
- board-updateSkill
- churn-analysisSkill
- cicd-setupSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- cold-outreachSkill
- community-discoverySkill
- competitive-analysisSkill
- competitor-monitoringSkill
- content-strategySkill
- contract-reviewSkill
- daily-product-digestSkill
- data-roomSkill
- earned-media-outreachSkill
- email-marketingSkill
- employer-brandSkill
- event-hostingSkill
- feedback-synthesisSkill
- founder-thought-leadershipSkill
- fundraising-emailSkill
- interview-kitSkill
- investor-researchSkill
- job-descriptionSkill
- landing-pageSkill
- launch-strategySkill
- market-researchSkill
- mvp-scopingSkill
- onboarding-flowSkill
- partnership-outreachSkill
- pitch-deckSkill
- prd-writingSkill
- privacy-policySkill
- process-docsSkill
- proposal-generationSkill
- review-miningSkill
- roadmap-planningSkill
- sales-scriptSkill
- security-reviewSkill
- sentiment-monitoringSkill
- seo-technicalSkill
- soc2-prepSkill
- social-contentSkill
- sourcing-outreachSkill
- startup-contextSkill
- support-docsSkill
- tech-stack-evalSkill
- terms-of-serviceSkill
- user-research-synthesisSkill
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.

