CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

sales-enablement-kit

Use when the user asks to "build battle cards", "prep the sales team for launch", or "write the internal launch FAQ"; produces the internal enablement kit for a sales-led launch — battle cards vs each named alternative (where we win / where they win / trap questions, every fact traceable), a sales talk track derived from the PR-FAQ spine, an objection-handling table (objection → response → evidence), internal FAQ + CS macros, and an internal launch announcement with embargo discipline. Not for the external message house — use message-house-builder; not for competitor tracking itself — use competitor-tracker or competitor-analysis; not for outbound sequences — use cold-outbound-sequencer. 销售赋能/battle card/销售叙事/异议处理/内部FAQ

71

Quality

90%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

81%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

A well-structured, actionable instruction-only skill body with a clear sequenced workflow and explicit validation/checklist discipline. The main weaknesses are mild redundancy (repeated scope-guard and adjudication caveats) and the absence of literal output templates for the battle cards and objection table.

Suggestions

Collapse the duplicate 'Scope guard' block (it appears both after the intro and at the end of Instructions) into one location to remove redundancy and tighten conciseness.

Add lightweight fill-in templates (e.g., a battle-card skeleton with where-we-win / where-they-win / trap-questions headers, and an objection-table row schema) so the output structure is copy-paste ready rather than only described.

Consolidate the repeated 'this skill does not adjudicate claims / derives, never adds' caveats into a single stated-once rule referenced where needed.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and assumes Claude's competence (no basic-concept padding), but repeats itself: the scope guard appears twice (top and end of Instructions), and 'this skill does not adjudicate claims' / 'derives, never adds' is restated several times — minor trimmable redundancy.

4 / 5

Actionability

Gives concrete, specific guidance — named file paths (memory/launch/sales-enablement-kit/, memory/events/claims.ndjson), operation: propose routing, and explicit output structures (battle card's three sections, objection → response → evidence) — but provides no literal fill-in templates/skeletons for the cards or table, leaving a small gap.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Eight clearly sequenced steps with explicit validation checkpoints: a 'Done when' completeness checklist, blocked-and-route feedback for unsourced claims ([needs source] → registry-events.py), conditional N/A marking for non-sales-led launches, and ask-before-writing discipline for memory writes.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized into clearly signaled sections with a dedicated Reference Materials list annotating one-level-deep references (ramp-benchmark.md, sibling skills, CONNECTORS.md, SECURITY.md); the instructional bulk is inline rather than split into bundled files, which is appropriate but leaves structure slightly below the top anchor.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

A strong, concrete description with explicit trigger phrases, a clear what-and-when structure, and explicit boundary clauses against sibling skills. It is somewhat long and carries a bilingual keyword tail, but nearly every token earns its place on the rubric.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete deliverables — battle cards vs each named alternative (where we win / where they win / trap questions), a talk track derived from the PR-FAQ spine, an objection-handling table (objection → response → evidence), internal FAQ + CS macros, and an embargo-keyed launch announcement — comprehensive coverage of the kit's actions.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (the enablement kit components) and 'when' (an explicit 'Use when the user asks to...' clause with concrete trigger phrases), matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Quotes natural trigger phrases users would actually say ("build battle cards", "prep the sales team for launch", "write the internal launch FAQ") plus domain synonyms and the bilingual keyword tail, giving comprehensive natural-term coverage.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (internal sales enablement) and adds explicit 'Not for...' boundary clauses naming sibling skills (message-house-builder, competitor-tracker/competitor-analysis, cold-outbound-sequencer), minimizing conflict risk.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

75%

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

Validation12 / 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: 30 suspicious

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing, 1 deeper-than-1-level

Warning

Total

12

/

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.