Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Othmane-Khadri/gtm-engineer-playbook. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Othmane-Khadri/gtm-engineer-playbook/main/.claude/skills/gtm-playbook/qualification-scorer/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Othmane-Khadri/gtm-engineer-playbookWrote 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/othmane-khadri/gtm-engineer-playbook/qualification-scorer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/othmane-khadri/gtm-engineer-playbook/qualification-scorer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/othmane-khadri/gtm-engineer-playbook/qualification-scorer/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/othmane-khadri/gtm-engineer-playbook/qualification-scorer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/othmane-khadri/gtm-engineer-playbook/qualification-scorer.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 | $0.00065 | $0.02608 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.01304 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00522 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00261 |
Grade A, and why
qualification-scorer 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 11d 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 — 214 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Qualification Scorer
Score and qualify leads using a multi-axis framework. Takes a lead or list of leads, evaluates them on four axes (Fit, Timing, Access, Intent), classifies them into tiers, and produces actionable next steps for each.
Tools Used
- Read — load
docs/icp.md,docs/signals/*.md,docs/accounts/*.md, CSV files - Write — output scored results to
docs/pipeline/scored-leads.md - Glob — discover existing docs that can enrich scoring
Steps
Step 1: Context Loading
Check for existing files that inform scoring. Run these searches:
Glob: docs/icp.md
Glob: docs/signals/*.md
Glob: docs/accounts/*.md
- If
docs/icp.mdexists, read it and extract ICP criteria (company size, industry, stage, budget range). Use these criteria to auto-score the Fit axis. - If
docs/signals/*.mdfiles exist, read them and extract known trigger events, intent data, and timing indicators. Use these to inform Timing and Intent scoring. - If
docs/accounts/*.mdfiles exist, read them and cross-reference any leads against known account briefs for enrichment. - If NONE of these files exist, ask the user:
I don't see an ICP definition at
docs/icp.md. Before I can score leads accurately, I need to understand your ideal customer. Tell me:
- What company size do you target? (employee count or revenue range)
- What industries or verticals?
- What company stage? (seed, Series A, growth, enterprise)
- What budget range per month are you selling into?
Store the user's answers as the working ICP definition for this scoring session.
Step 2: Lead Input
Ask the user how they want to provide leads:
How would you like to provide the leads to score?
A. Paste a list (company name, contact name, title — one per line) B. Single lead deep-dive (I'll ask you detailed questions about one prospect) C. Give me a CSV file path to read
Handle each input mode:
- Option A (list): Parse the pasted text. Extract company name, contact name, and title for each row. Tolerate messy formatting (comma-separated, tab-separated, or line-by-line).
- Option B (single lead): Ask follow-up questions about the lead: company name, contact name and title, company size, industry, any recent events you know of, how you found them, any engagement so far.
- Option C (CSV): Read the file at the given path. Map columns to company, contact, and title. If column names are ambiguous, show the header row and ask the user to confirm the mapping.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 214 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A 6218e8c6c8d1
qualification-scorer is a skill published in the GitHub repository Othmane-Khadri/gtm-engineer-playbook (56 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 2,608 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
go-to-market-playbook
A reusable Go-to-Market strategy template for both B2B and B2C launches. Covers positioning, messaging, ICP definition, channel selection, and competitive analysis frameworks. By @WeiYipei.
adoption-leaderboard
Scores a rep's or a team's recent sales calls against a fixed set of five winning-behavior checklists (rapport, upsell signals, renewal risk, customer experience, value realization), then ranks reps lowest-adoption-first so the highest-leverage coaching targets lead. Use when running a team calibration, prepping 1:1…
challenger
Audits a B2B sales call transcript against the Challenger Sale framework (teach, tailor, take control, plus the commercial-teaching pitch arc), or sweeps a CRM export for deals with no teaching insight logged. Use when a rep leans on discovery-question skill but rarely brings a point of view, when prepping a rep for a…
champion-tracker
Tracks champion strength across a deal's call(s) — builds an action ledger, one row per named contact per cited quote, tagging each as either an act of internal selling (looping in a stakeholder, pushing back for the rep in a room the rep wasn't in) or mere positive sentiment (encouraging words, no action), then reads…
executive-briefing
Writes the short brief a rep sends upward out of one deal — to their own exec or the buyer's exec sponsor — covering deal snapshot, status, what's at risk, and the ask, each claim cited to a quote or a CSV column/cell. Use when someone who will never read the transcript needs to act on one deal, not a call-by-call…
faint
Audits a B2B sales call transcript against the FAINT qualification framework (Funds, Authority, Interest, Need, Timing), or sweeps a CRM export for deals missing FAINT fields. Use when a prospect hasn't articulated a clear need yet but shows financial capacity and curiosity, or when deciding whether a demand-driven…