CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

paywalls

When the user wants to create or improve in-app paywalls and upgrade moments, or asks when or how hard to ask free users to pay (after they've seen value): upgrade screens, upsell modals, feature gates, limit-reached and trial-expired screens, mobile subscription paywalls. For public pricing pages, see cro. For pricing decisions, see pricing.

Quality

84%

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

72%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 advisory skill: lean bullet-based overview, concrete templates and copy formulas for the common paywall types, and clean offloading of experiment ideas and mobile-specific mechanics to two real, clearly signaled reference files. The main gap is workflow clarity — the assessment phase is sequenced but the recommendation and testing phases lack explicit checkpoints or decision gates.

Suggestions

Add an explicit end-to-end workflow (e.g., 1. read product-marketing context, 2. ask the unanswered assessment questions, 3. select paywall type and trigger, 4. draft screen from the template, 5. propose experiments and metrics) so the sequence from assessment to recommendation to testing is explicit rather than implicit.

Include one worked example with real copy (not just [Feature]/[Benefit] placeholders) so the templates double as concrete quality benchmarks.

Add a short validation checkpoint before recommending (e.g., confirm current conversion rate and trigger inventory against the Task-Specific Questions) so recommendations are gated on confirmed inputs.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is written in terse bullets with compact ASCII wireframes and no padding or explanations of concepts Claude already knows. A few generic platitudes ("Minimize steps," "Immediate access to features") could be trimmed, keeping it just below the lean anchor 5 but clearly above anchor 3's over-explanation.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, actionable guidance throughout for an instruction-only skill: copy formulas ("Unlock [Feature] to [Benefit]"), three wireframe templates, specific numbers ("Early warnings (7, 3, 1 day)," "Cool-down after dismiss (days, not hours)"), and named metrics. It stays below 5 because the templates use placeholders rather than worked examples and offer no measurement implementation detail.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Initial Assessment is well sequenced (check the product-marketing context file, ask only uncovered questions, then understand context/product model/journey), but the recommend-then-test flow that follows has no explicit checkpoints or decision gates — the overall sequence is implicit. It fits anchor 3 (sequence present, checkpoints missing/implicit) better than anchor 4, which requires most checkpoints to be present; the destructive/batch cap does not apply to this advisory skill.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a well-organized overview and both bundle files (references/experiments.md and references/mobile-subscription-paywalls.md) exist, are one level deep with no nested references, and are clearly signaled with descriptive link text explaining when each applies. This matches the anchor-5 pattern of a clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

87%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 description: third-person voice, explicit when-clause with concrete triggers, a specific list of paywall artifact types, and explicit boundary routing to adjacent skills. The only weakness is that the verb coverage is limited to generic "create or improve" and a few natural synonyms are absent.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists several concrete artifacts ("upgrade screens, upsell modals, feature gates, limit-reached and trial-expired screens, mobile subscription paywalls") tied to the actions "create or improve". It is not 5 because the actions themselves are generic rather than a comprehensive set of distinct capabilities, and not 3 because coverage clearly exceeds 1-2 actions.

4 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: what ("create or improve in-app paywalls and upgrade moments" with a concrete artifact list) and when ("When the user wants to create or improve in-app paywalls... or asks when or how hard to ask free users to pay"). Both are concrete with explicit trigger phrasing, matching the anchor-5 pattern.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say such as "paywalls," "upgrade screens," "trial-expired," and "how hard to ask free users to pay." A few natural synonyms (e.g., "monetization," "convert free users," "premium") are missing, keeping it below the comprehensive anchor 5 but well above anchor 3.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves out a clear niche (in-app upgrade moments after value is seen) and explicitly disambiguates neighboring skills ("For public pricing pages, see cro. For pricing decisions, see pricing."), giving minimal conflict risk. This is a better fit than anchor 4, which still allows minor overlap.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

coreyhaines31/marketingskills

Path

skills/paywalls/SKILL.md

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.