Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add liqiongyu/lenny_skills_plus --skill sales-qualificationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/liqiongyu/lenny_skills_plusWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/liqiongyu/lenny_skills_plus/sales-qualification)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/liqiongyu/lenny_skills_plus/sales-qualification"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/liqiongyu/lenny_skills_plus/sales-qualification/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/liqiongyu/lenny_skills_plus/sales-qualification"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/liqiongyu/lenny_skills_plus/sales-qualification.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00022 | $0.02261 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00011 | $0.01130 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00452 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00226 |
Grade A, and why
sales-qualification scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 9d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 134 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Sales Qualification
Scope
Covers
- Defining what “qualified” means for your business (fit + need + access + urgency)
- Writing explicit disqualification rules to avoid time sinks
- Creating a qualification scorecard that produces consistent decisions across reps
- Designing a discovery/qualification call script that surfaces deal reality quickly
- Setting stage exit criteria + “no next step, no stage” pipeline hygiene rules
- Implementing a lightweight rollout + measurement plan for adoption
When to use
- “Our pipeline is full but nothing closes—help us qualify better.”
- “Create a lead qualification scorecard and disqualification criteria.”
- “Write a discovery/qualification script for SDRs/AEs.”
- “Define stage exit criteria so deals don’t rot in CRM.”
- “We’re spending time on bad-fit leads—create rules to stop it.”
When NOT to use
- You don’t have an ICP hypothesis or you’re still pre-problem/solution fit (start with
founder-salesorproblem-definition) - You need a full sales org design (roles, hiring, enablement system) rather than qualification (use
building-sales-team) - You need to navigate a complex multi-stakeholder enterprise deal already in flight (use
enterprise-sales) - You need to design OTE, quotas, or commission mechanics for reps (use
sales-compensation) - You need pricing/packaging strategy, contracting, or legal/security review
- You want lead scraping/spammy outreach or anything deceptive
Inputs
Minimum required
- Product + target customer (1 sentence each)
- ICP hypothesis (industry, size, buyer titles, “not for” exclusions)
- Sales motion (inbound/outbound/PLG→sales/enterprise) + current stages (if any)
- Typical deal profile (ACV range, cycle length, required stakeholders)
- Current pain: what “bad leads” look like (examples of 3–5 recent losses or stalls)
- Constraints: rep capacity, required response times, tooling (CRM), and handoff (SDR→AE)
Missing-info strategy
- Ask up to 5 questions from references/INTAKE.md (max 3–5 at a time).
- If data is missing, proceed with explicit assumptions and ship two variants if needed: (A) “Simple SMB motion” vs (B) “Complex/enterprise motion”.
What ships with it
13 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
- eval/eval_config.json 759 B
- eval/SHOWCASE.md 4.6 KB
- eval/with_skill.md 34 KB
- eval/without_skill.md 17 KB
- README.md 1.6 KB
- references/CHECKLISTS.md 1.9 KB
- references/EXAMPLES.md 1.6 KB
- references/INTAKE.md 1.9 KB
- references/RUBRIC.md 4.3 KB
- references/SOURCE_SUMMARY.md 1.3 KB
- references/TEMPLATES.md 5.9 KB
- references/WORKFLOW.md 3.1 KB
- skillpack.json 374 B
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 9d ago First seen · 134 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A af401e4b633c
sales-qualification is a skill published in the GitHub repository liqiongyu/lenny_skills_plus (52 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 2,261 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
exec-weekly-agenda-generator
Synthesize the past week across meetings, chat, email, and calendar to generate a ranked list of 5-10 topics for the weekly leadership team meeting. Use when the user asks to prep for their leadership meeting, generate meeting topics, build the agenda, or says "prep me for Monday.".
persona-event-coordinator
Plan and manage events — scheduling, invitations, and logistics.
persona-project-manager
Coordinate projects — track tasks, schedule meetings, and share docs.
persona-team-lead
Lead a team — run standups, coordinate tasks, and communicate.
recipe-plan-weekly-schedule
Review your Google Calendar week, identify gaps, and add events to fill them.
recipe-review-overdue-tasks
Find Google Tasks that are past due and need attention.