When the user wants to create or optimize an email sequence, drip campaign, automated email flow, or lifecycle email program. Also use when the user mentions "email sequence," "drip campaign," "nurture sequence," "onboarding emails," "welcome sequence," "re-engagement emails," "email automation," "lifecycle emails," "trigger-based emails," "email funnel," "email workflow," "what emails should I send," "welcome series," or "email cadence." Use this for any multi-email automated flow. For cold outreach emails, see cold-email. For in-app onboarding, see onboarding-cro.
79
73%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/email-sequence/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong skill description with excellent trigger term coverage and completeness. The explicit cross-references to related skills (cold-email, onboarding-cro) are a notable strength for reducing conflict risk. The main weakness is that the 'what' portion could be more specific about the concrete actions the skill performs beyond 'create or optimize.'
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions to the 'what' portion, e.g., 'Designs email sequence structure, writes email copy, defines timing and triggers, sets segmentation rules, and recommends subject lines for automated email flows.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description mentions 'create or optimize an email sequence, drip campaign, automated email flow, or lifecycle email program' which names the domain and some actions (create, optimize), but doesn't list multiple specific concrete actions like 'write subject lines, set timing delays, define segmentation rules, create A/B test variants.' | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | The description clearly answers both 'what' (create or optimize email sequences, drip campaigns, automated email flows, lifecycle email programs) and 'when' with an explicit and extensive list of trigger phrases. It also helpfully disambiguates from related skills (cold-email, onboarding-cro). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms including 'email sequence,' 'drip campaign,' 'nurture sequence,' 'onboarding emails,' 'welcome sequence,' 're-engagement emails,' 'email automation,' 'lifecycle emails,' 'trigger-based emails,' 'email funnel,' 'email workflow,' 'welcome series,' 'email cadence,' and the conversational 'what emails should I send.' These are terms users would naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description explicitly differentiates from cold-email and onboarding-cro skills, and the trigger terms are specific to multi-email automated flows. The cross-references ('For cold outreach emails, see cold-email') actively reduce conflict risk. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured email sequence design skill with good progressive disclosure and useful sequence frameworks. Its main weaknesses are the lack of concrete, filled-in examples (actual email copy demonstrating the principles) and some verbose sections covering general knowledge Claude already possesses. The workflow could benefit from explicit validation/review checkpoints before implementation.
Suggestions
Add at least one fully worked example showing a complete 3-email mini-sequence with actual subject lines, preview text, and body copy—not just empty templates.
Trim the 'Email Copy Guidelines' section significantly—Claude already knows about short paragraphs, active voice, and conversational tone. Keep only project-specific conventions.
Add a validation step in the workflow, such as 'Review the full sequence for: consistent voice, escalating value, no duplicate CTAs, proper exit conditions' before handing off for implementation.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably well-organized but includes some content Claude already knows (email formatting basics, tone advice like 'read it out loud,' general copy structure). The sequence type overviews and timing guidelines add genuine value, but sections like 'Email Copy Guidelines' are largely general knowledge that could be trimmed significantly. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides structured templates and specific timing recommendations, which is helpful. However, it lacks concrete, executable examples—no actual email copy examples, no sample sequences with real subject lines and body text. The output format templates are useful but are empty scaffolding rather than filled-in examples that demonstrate quality. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The initial assessment section provides a clear discovery workflow, and the sequence types give ordered email progressions with timing. However, there are no validation checkpoints—no guidance on reviewing sequence logic before implementation, no feedback loops for testing/iterating, and no explicit steps for actually building the sequence in a tool. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill effectively uses progressive disclosure with clear references to separate files: sequence-templates.md, email-types.md, copy-guidelines.md, and tool integration guides. References are one level deep, well-signaled with descriptive labels, and the main file serves as a navigable overview. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
1bcff9f
Table of Contents
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.