CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

gtm-engineering

When the user wants to build GTM automation with code, design workflow architectures, use AI agents for GTM tasks, or implement the 'architecture over tools' principle. Also use when the user mentions 'GTM engineering,' 'GTM automation,' 'n8n,' 'Make,' 'Zapier,' 'workflow automation,' 'Clay API,' 'instruction stacks,' 'AI agents for GTM,' or 'revenue automation.' This skill covers technical GTM infrastructure from workflow design through agent orchestration. Do NOT use for technical implementation, code review, or software architecture.

Quality

80%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./packages/skills-catalog/skills/(gtm)/gtm-engineering/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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, information-dense body with genuinely actionable thresholds, decision frameworks, and clean one-level-deep references. Its main cost is token weight: persona framing and a background section on the GTM Engineer role add length without adding task-relevant instruction.

Suggestions

Cut the persona paragraph and move the 'GTM Engineer Role' section (job-posting stats, career trajectory) into a reference file, keeping only the role-vs-adjacent-roles table if it aids user conversation.

Move time-sensitive pricing rows (price at 10K/100K ops, integration counts, job-posting figures) into the quick-reference bundle with a dated note, since they will go stale in the main skill.

Fold the 'Before Starting' questions, platform decision tree, and troubleshooting into one explicit numbered workflow (gather context -> select platform -> design instruction stack -> define feedback loops and alerts) so the sequence has explicit checkpoints.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body spends significant tokens on background Claude does not need for the task: the persona paragraph ('You are an expert in...') and the entire 'GTM Engineer Role' section with job-posting counts and career trajectory. Time-sensitive pricing rows ('~$20-50 at 10K ops/month') are also likely to go stale. More than minor trimming is needed, so this sits at anchor 3 rather than 4.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance throughout: confidence thresholds (0.85 accept / 0.50 flag / <0.50 reject), SLAs (hot lead <1 hr, warm <4 hr), alert thresholds (95% success, 5% bounce), scoring weight formulas, and a platform-selection decision tree. Some sections (role comparison tables, career trajectory) are descriptive rather than instructive, keeping it below a 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 'Before Starting' discovery checklist establishes clear entry steps, the decision tree sequences platform choice, and the troubleshooting section pairs causes with fixes. No explicit validation checkpoints exist, but this is an advisory/design skill without destructive or batch operations, so the workflow cap does not apply.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Both referenced bundle files exist and are one level deep, each pointed to with a clear description of its contents ('For API-first stack design, data pipelines... read references/implementation-guide.md'). Minor gap: ~40 lines of role/career background and persona framing are inlined in SKILL.md where they could live in a reference.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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 that explicitly covers what, when, and when-not with natural trigger terms. Its main weaknesses are the self-contradictory exclusion of 'technical implementation' and a few missing trigger synonyms.

Suggestions

Resolve the contradiction between 'build GTM automation with code' and 'Do NOT use for technical implementation' by narrowing the exclusion, e.g. 'Do NOT use for general software engineering, code review, or product architecture unrelated to revenue workflows'.

Add missing natural trigger synonyms such as 'Integromat', 'Clay', 'RevOps automation', and 'sales automation' to broaden when-to-use matching.

Replace the vague closing scope sentence ('covers technical GTM infrastructure from workflow design through agent orchestration') with concrete deliverables like 'designs instruction stacks, platform architectures, and agent orchestration for revenue pipelines'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions ('build GTM automation with code', 'design workflow architectures', 'use AI agents for GTM tasks') but closes with the loose span 'covers technical GTM infrastructure from workflow design through agent orchestration', leaving minor gaps in concrete coverage rather than the comprehensive action list of a 5.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers 'what' (build GTM automation, design workflow architectures, orchestrate AI agents) and 'when' ('Also use when the user mentions: GTM engineering, n8n, Zapier...') with concrete trigger phrases, and adds negative scope ('Do NOT use for technical implementation, code review, or software architecture').

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage users would actually say ('GTM automation', 'n8n', 'Make', 'Zapier', 'workflow automation', 'revenue automation'), but misses common synonyms and variations such as 'Integromat', 'Clay' alone, 'RevOps automation', or 'sales automation'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear GTM niche with distinct tool triggers, but the exclusion clause 'Do NOT use for technical implementation' contradicts the stated capability 'build GTM automation with code', creating ambiguity against general software-architecture requests and closely related sibling GTM skills.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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

tech-leads-club/agent-skills

Path

packages/skills-catalog/skills/(gtm)/gtm-engineering/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.