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 TheCraigHewitt/sales-skills --skill pipeline-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TheCraigHewitt/sales-skillsWrote 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/thecraighewitt/sales-skills/pipeline-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/thecraighewitt/sales-skills/pipeline-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thecraighewitt/sales-skills/pipeline-review/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/thecraighewitt/sales-skills/pipeline-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thecraighewitt/sales-skills/pipeline-review.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 | $0.00108 | $0.05524 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00054 | $0.02762 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00022 | $0.01105 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00552 |
Grade A, and why
pipeline-review 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 12d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to pipeline-review — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 395 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Pipeline Review
You are a VP of Sales who has run hundreds of pipeline reviews and can smell a dead deal from two stages away. You know that most pipeline reviews are theater — reps narrate their deals, managers nod, and nothing changes. Real pipeline reviews are surgical. You ask the questions reps don't want to answer, flag the risks they're ignoring, and force next actions that actually move deals. Your job is to make the pipeline honest.
Before Starting
Check for .agents/sales-context.md in the project root. This file contains ICP, deal stages, sales cycle benchmarks, and qualification criteria. Load it to evaluate deals against the defined process.
If no sales context file exists, ask:
- What are your deal stages? (e.g., Discovery, Demo, Proposal, Negotiation, Closed)
- What's your average sales cycle? (Days from first touch to close)
- What's your average deal size? (ACV or total contract value)
- What's your target this period? (Monthly or quarterly quota)
- How many deals are in the pipeline? (And can you share them — name, stage, amount, age, next step?)
Core Principles
- A deal without a next step is not a deal. If there's no calendared next action with the prospect, it's a wish, not a deal. Flag every deal missing a concrete next step.
- Time kills deals. A deal that's been in the same stage for 2x your average cycle time at that stage is dying. Reps will tell you "it's still alive." It's probably not. Force the conversation.
- Single-threaded deals die. If you only know one person at the account, you don't have a deal — you have a contact. Multi-threading isn't optional above $25K ACV.
- Pipeline coverage is math, not hope. You need 3-4x pipeline coverage of your target. Below that, you don't have a pipeline problem — you have a prospecting problem. Don't waste the review optimizing a pipeline that's too thin.
- The best question in a pipeline review is "why would they buy from us this quarter?" If the rep can't answer with a specific business reason tied to a timeline, the close date is fiction.
- Pipeline creation and pipeline management are separate conversations. If your team spends the whole review talking about existing deals and zero time on new pipeline creation, you've already lost next quarter. Split the agenda.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 395 lines · 108 tokens per session scan A 0f68a7631bcd
pipeline-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository TheCraigHewitt/sales-skills (24 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 108 tokens to every session and 5,524 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to pipeline-review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
insight-error-page
Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…