qualify-meeting

Use when deciding whether supplied account and conversation evidence makes a sales meeting appropriate.

Quality

74%

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/qualify-meeting/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

86%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 lean, well-structured, and highly actionable with explicit decision rules and output formats, supported by guardrails and a quality checklist; its only soft spot is the minimal worked example.

Suggestions

Add one fully worked example showing the criteria table with MET/PARTIAL/UNKNOWN assignments and the resulting decision, to make actionability unambiguous.

Consider an explicit self-check mapping each Quality check bullet back to the workflow step it validates, strengthening the validation checkpointing.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~49-line body is lean and directive with no concept over-explanation; every section (Purpose, Required inputs, Workflow, Output format, Guardrails, Quality check) earns its tokens and assumes Claude's competence.	5 / 5
Actionability	It supplies an exact decision taxonomy (APPROPRIATE / NOT YET variants), per-criterion labels (MET/PARTIAL/NOT MET/UNKNOWN), and a full output-format spec, but the single-line example invocation does not demonstrate a complete worked criteria table, leaving a minor gap.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Six numbered steps are clearly sequenced with an explicit hard-gate checkpoint first (step 2) and a final Quality check checklist, but as a read-only assessment it has no validate-fix-retry feedback loop, which the 5 anchor emphasizes.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, needs no external references, and is organized into clear labeled sections, satisfying the simple-skill exception for progressive disclosure.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Description

62%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.

The description is specific and clearly niche with an explicit trigger clause, but it covers a single action and trigger scenario rather than offering comprehensive action and keyword coverage.

Suggestions

Add 1-2 more concrete actions (e.g., "audit eligibility and consent evidence, return a decision") to lift specificity toward a 5.

Expand the "Use when" clause with plural natural triggers such as "qualify a sales meeting", "check meeting readiness", or "decide whether to book a meeting".

Include common synonyms or file/format-adjacent terms users actually say (e.g., "lead qualification", "meeting consent") to improve trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The phrase "deciding whether supplied account and conversation evidence makes a sales meeting appropriate" names the domain and one concrete action (assessing meeting appropriateness), but does not enumerate multiple specific actions, matching the 1-2 concrete-actions anchor.	3 / 5
Completeness	It has an explicit "Use when..." trigger and a clear "what" (deciding meeting appropriateness from evidence), but the trigger is a single scenario rather than the rich plural trigger phrases that define a 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"sales meeting" is a natural user term, but common variations like "qualify a lead", "book a meeting", or "meeting readiness" are absent, leaving only partial keyword coverage.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Sales-meeting appropriateness qualification is a clear, specific niche with minimal conflict risk, though minor overlap with general lead-qualification or meeting-booking skills keeps it just below 5.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: llaskin/AI-SDR-Skill-Pack
Path: skills/qualify-meeting/SKILL.md
Commit: 56ebfd3

Reviewed: ~23 hours 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.