churn-risk-detector

Scan support tickets, Slack channels, NPS scores, and usage patterns to flag accounts showing early churn indicators. Produces a weekly risk scorecard with severity tiers, root cause hypotheses, and suggested save plays per account. Designed for seed/Series A teams where the founder or a single CSM manages all accounts manually.

Quality

70%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/research/composites/churn-risk-detector/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

72%

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

The content is highly actionable with concrete signal definitions, a precise scoring model, and ready-to-use output templates, and it is well-organized as a standalone skill. Its main gaps are mild redundancy across trigger/usage sections and the absence of validation checkpoints in the batch scoring workflow.

Suggestions

Add explicit validation checkpoints between phases, e.g., confirm signal data completeness and verify each root-cause hypothesis against cited evidence before scoring.

Consolidate the 'When to Use' and 'Trigger Phrases' sections to remove redundancy and tighten token usage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient and assumes competence (it does not explain churn, NPS, or Slack), but the duplicated 'When to Use' and 'Trigger Phrases' sections plus the 'Built for' preamble add redundancy that could be tightened.	2 / 3
Actionability	Guidance is concrete and copy-paste ready: specific signal thresholds ('>2x their average in last 30 days', 'Open tickets older than 7 days'), a precise point-based scoring model, tier cutoffs, and a full save-play template with talk track.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The Phase 0–4 sequence is clearly laid out, but batch account processing and risk scoring have no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops; per the rubric this caps workflow clarity at 2.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	It is a single self-contained skill with no external bundle files and is organized into clearly labeled phases and tables; per the simple-skills note, well-organized sections alone warrant a 3 when no external references are needed.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

67%

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 specific and distinct, naming concrete actions and a clear target audience, but it omits an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause and only partially covers natural user phrasings. Adding explicit usage triggers and broader trigger terms would raise completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause (e.g., 'Use when assessing account churn risk or producing a weekly customer health report') to satisfy the completeness anchor.

Broaden trigger terms with natural phrasings users actually say, such as 'customer health', 'at-risk accounts', and 'who hasn't been heard from'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions across sources — "Scan support tickets, Slack channels, NPS scores, and usage patterns" and "Produces a weekly risk scorecard with severity tiers, root cause hypotheses, and suggested save plays per account" — matching the anchor for multiple specific concrete actions.	3 / 3
Completeness	It clearly states what the skill does and for whom, but there is no explicit "Use when..." trigger clause; per the rubric, missing explicit trigger guidance caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant keywords like "churn", "risk", "support tickets", and "NPS scores" appear, but it lacks common natural variations a user would say (e.g., "customer health", "which customers are at risk"), so coverage is partial rather than complete.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	It carves a clear niche — churn detection for seed/Series A teams without a CS platform — with distinct triggers ("churn", "save plays", "risk scorecard") unlikely to overlap with unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: gooseworks-ai/goose-skills
Path: skills/research/composites/churn-risk-detector/SKILL.md
Commit: 8866b2a

Reviewed: 1 day ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.