CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

sales-engineer

Analyzes RFP/RFI responses for coverage gaps, builds competitive feature comparison matrices, and plans proof-of-concept (POC) engagements for pre-sales engineering. Use when responding to RFPs, bids, or proposal requests; comparing product features against competitors; planning or scoring a customer POC or sales demo; preparing a technical proposal; or performing win/loss competitor analysis. Handles tasks described as 'RFP response', 'bid response', 'proposal response', 'competitor comparison', 'feature matrix', 'POC planning', 'sales demo prep', or 'pre-sales engineering'.

70

Quality

86%

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

The canonical home for this skill is sales-engineer in alirezarezvani/claude-skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%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.

The body is a well-structured, actionable five-phase workflow with strong validation checkpoints and feedback loops. Its main defect is that it references 11 bundle files (scripts, assets, references) that do not actually exist, breaking the progressive-disclosure promise and undermining the otherwise concrete commands.

Suggestions

Add the missing bundle files referenced in the body — at minimum the three scripts (rfp_response_analyzer.py, competitive_matrix_builder.py, poc_planner.py) and the data/template assets they depend on — or remove the references and inline the essential logic.

Tighten the per-phase checklists by removing self-evident steps (e.g. 'Conduct technical discovery calls with stakeholders') and keeping only non-obvious guidance, to improve token efficiency.

Verify the integration-point paths (marketing-skill/, product-team/, c-level-advisor/, ../customer-success-manager/) are real, since they are referenced as cross-skill handoffs but their existence is unconfirmed.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient — commands, thresholds, and bid/no-bid logic earn their tokens — but the per-phase checklists restate fairly obvious steps ('Conduct technical discovery calls', 'Map customer's current architecture') that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, copy-paste-ready commands with flags (e.g. 'python scripts/rfp_response_analyzer.py assets/sample_rfp_data.json --format json') and inline validation one-liners; not a 5 because the invoked scripts and assets are referenced but not actually present in the bundle.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Five phases are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints using concrete thresholds ('Coverage score must be >50%', 'scorecard score >60%') and a real feedback loop ('If score <60%... loop back to Phase 2 for solution redesign'), plus checklists per phase.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The SKILL.md signals references well via organized tables ('## Reference Knowledge Bases', '## Asset Templates'), but the referenced bundle is entirely absent — none of the 11 files across references/, scripts/, and assets/ exist, so the one-level-deep disclosure chain is broken and navigation leads nowhere.

3 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

96%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, well-constructed description that concretely states capabilities and provides rich, natural trigger phrases answering both what and when. The only weakness is minor overlap risk between competitive-analysis triggers and adjacent skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'Analyzes RFP/RFI responses for coverage gaps, builds competitive feature comparison matrices, and plans proof-of-concept (POC) engagements' — covering the domain comprehensively rather than with vague language.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' ('Analyzes... builds... plans...') and 'when' ('Use when responding to RFPs, bids, or proposal requests...') with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural-term coverage including synonyms and exact task phrasings: 'RFPs, bids, or proposal requests', 'competitor comparison', 'feature matrix', 'POC planning', 'sales demo prep', 'pre-sales engineering'.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Mostly a clear pre-sales/RFP niche with distinct triggers, but terms like 'competitor comparison', 'feature matrix', and 'win/loss competitor analysis' carry minor overlap risk with a marketing-skill (which the body itself flags as an integration point).

4 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 30 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
alirezarezvani/claude-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.