CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

reactivation-specialist

Use when the user asks to "build a win-back campaign", "re-engage lapsed subscribers", "run a re-permission / re-consent sweep", or "sunset my dead list"; produces a closed-loop reactivation program — a lapsed-cohort definition, a staged offer ladder, a re-consent (re-permission) capture step, and a sunset-confirm / suppression rule. Owns none of the SEND-N sub-item notes: engagement-decay / sunset is email-sequence-designer's and preference-center / frequency options is preference-frequency-manager's — this skill references those notes, it does not re-emit them. Not for the general lifecycle flows (welcome/cart/post-purchase) — use email-sequence-designer; not for the preference-center / opt-down ladder — use preference-frequency-manager; not for the consent record itself — use consent-registry; not for computing EQS or the N1 veto — use email-quality-auditor. 流失召回/重新授权/沉默用户清理

73

Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is highly actionable with a clear, checkpointed workflow and clean one-level-deep references. The main drag is conciseness: the critical scope boundary (hand N-sub-item facts to their owners, do not score them here) is restated six or more times, inflating the body without adding clarity.

Suggestions

State the 'do not author N sub-item notes / hand the facts to email-sequence-designer and preference-frequency-manager' boundary once canonically (e.g., in step 7) and reference it from the intro, Skill Contract, Scope guard, Save Results, and Next Best Skill instead of restating it each time.

Fold the Scope guard paragraph's unique content (the EQS/veto boundary with email-quality-auditor) into step 7 and drop the paragraph, since the rest restates the intro and step 7 verbatim.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Content is accurate and domain-specific (not basic-concept padding that would warrant a 1), but the 'do not author N sub-item notes / hand facts to their owners' boundary is restated across the intro, Skill Contract, step 7, Scope guard, Save Results, References, and Next Best Skill — could be tightened to one canonical statement.

2 / 3

Actionability

Gives concrete, specific, copy-paste-ready guidance — exact profile weights (0.15/0.30/0.15/0.20), 'no open in 90 days, no click in 180', 'cap the reactivation touches (typically 3–4)' — and per the scoring notes the absence of code in this instruction-only skill is not penalized because the guidance is actionable.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A numbered 7-step sequence is paired with explicit Decision Gates (stop-and-ask vs continue-silently) as validation checkpoints, a 'Done when' completion checklist, and an auditor-BLOCK repair feedback loop, matching the level-3 anchor rather than the checkpoint-missing level 2.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized and the handoff schema and SEND benchmarks are referenced one level deep (skill-contract.md, send-benchmark.md, CONNECTORS.md, SECURITY.md) in a dedicated Reference Materials section rather than inlined, matching the level-3 'clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references' anchor; no bundle files exist to evaluate further.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is strong across all four dimensions: concrete actions, natural quoted triggers, explicit what-and-when, and unusually thorough sibling-skill disambiguation. Its one weakness is verbosity — the ownership disclaimer and four negative carve-outs pad what should be a tight trigger statement, and the trailing Chinese tagline duplicates the summary field.

Suggestions

Move the 'Owns none of the SEND-N sub-item notes ...' ownership disclaimer out of the description into the body's Skill Contract; keep the description a tight what + when trigger.

Drop the trailing '流失召回/重新授权/沉默用户清理' tagline from the description — it duplicates the summary field and adds noise without aiding triggering.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'a lapsed-cohort definition, a staged offer ladder, a re-consent (re-permission) capture step, and a sunset-confirm / suppression rule' — matching the level-3 anchor of several specific concrete actions rather than a single named action (level 2).

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('produces a closed-loop reactivation program ...') and when ('Use when the user asks to ...'), with an explicit trigger clause so it is not capped at 2 by the missing-'Use when' rule.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Quotes natural phrasings a user would say — 'build a win-back campaign', 're-engage lapsed subscribers', 'run a re-permission / re-consent sweep', 'sunset my dead list' — giving good coverage of natural terms rather than only jargon (level 2) or none (level 1).

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Multiple 'Not for X — use Y' carve-outs (email-sequence-designer, preference-frequency-manager, consent-registry, email-quality-auditor) carve a clear niche unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill, beyond the level-2 'could still overlap' anchor.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Validation

81%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 35 suspicious

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Repository
aaron-he-zhu/aaron-marketing-skills
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.