inbound-lead-qualification

Qualifies inbound leads against full ICP criteria — company size, industry, use case fit, role/seniority of the person. Checks CRM and existing customer base for duplicates and existing relationships. Outputs a scored CSV with qualification status, reasoning, and pipeline overlap flags. Tool-agnostic — works with any CRM, enrichment tool, or data source.

Quality

76%

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/lead-generation/composites/inbound-lead-qualification/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

77%

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 thorough, highly actionable 7-step workflow with strong validation checkpoints, but it is monolithic — all detail lives in SKILL.md with no progressive disclosure to reference files, and some prose could be tightened.

Suggestions

Move the stable reference material — the Step 0 config schema, the Step 6 scoring table, and the Step 7 CSV column catalog — into a reference file (e.g. references/scoring.md) and link to it one level deep, keeping SKILL.md a lean overview.

Tighten the discursive rationale asides in 'Handling Overlaps' and 'Borderline calls' to one line each so every token earns its place.

Optionally extract the edge-case rules into a short checklist section to preserve the guidance without the surrounding prose.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient and free of basic-concept padding Claude already knows, but at ~440 lines it includes discursive asides ("People change their minds. Note the prior context.", "they came to YOU. The intent signal tips borderline cases") that could be tightened, matching the 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' anchor rather than the lean 3.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides concrete executable guidance — full config JSON, output schema blocks per step, an explicit weighted scoring table (e.g. 'Industry 20% match=100, adjacent=60'), and a complete CSV column spec — fully actionable even without code, satisfying the instruction-only allowance.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Clear Steps 0-7 sequence with an architecture diagram, explicit validation checkpoints (Step 1 Human Checkpoint at >50% missing fields, 'insufficient_data' when >3 dimensions unknown), borderline-review routing, and edge-case handling — meeting the highest anchor for batch operations.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized sections, but everything is inline in a single ~440-line SKILL.md with no bundle files or one-level-deep references; the detailed config schema, scoring tables, and CSV column catalog are content that could be split into reference files, matching the 'content that should be separate is inline' anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

75%

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 uses natural trigger terms, but it lacks an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause and sits within a family of overlapping inbound-lead skills, capping completeness and distinctiveness at 2.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with concrete triggers, e.g. 'Use when the user says qualify these inbound leads, check ICP fit, or score a batch of leads — for fast triage use inbound-lead-triage instead.'

Sharpen distinctiveness by naming what this skill is NOT (triage/enrichment) directly in the description, so it does not fire for the wrong sibling skill.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names multiple concrete actions — "Qualifies inbound leads against full ICP criteria — company size, industry, use case fit, role/seniority", "Checks CRM and existing customer base for duplicates", "Outputs a scored CSV with qualification status, reasoning, and pipeline overlap flags" — matching the highest anchor.	3 / 3
Completeness	Clearly answers "what" (qualifies leads, checks CRM, outputs scored CSV) but has no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the guidelines caps completeness at 2; it is not a 1 because the what is comprehensive.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Contains natural terms a user would say — "qualifies inbound leads", "ICP criteria", "scored CSV", "CRM" — with good coverage rather than jargon or generic phrasing.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The ICP-qualification-plus-scored-CSV niche is specific, but it could still overlap with sibling skills referenced in the body ("inbound-lead-triage", "inbound-lead-enrichment"), matching the "somewhat specific but could overlap" anchor rather than the fully-distinct 3.	2 / 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/lead-generation/composites/inbound-lead-qualification/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.