Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

inbound-lead-enrichment(入境铅富集)

inbound-lead-enrichment 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

inbound-lead-enrichment 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 69,971。

总安装 214周安装 9GitHub Stars 607下载 75核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:inbound-lead-enrichment(入境铅富集)
来源仓库:https://github.com/athina-ai/goose-skills
仓库路径:skills/inbound-lead-enrichment
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/athina-ai/goose-skills --skill inbound-lead-enrichment
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/athina-ai/goose-skills --skill inbound-lead-enrichment

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

将不完整的潜在客户信息补全为完整画像,包括公司背景、职位角色、关联联系人及 CRM 关系。适合处理仅含邮箱等基础数据的线索,提升销售团队对潜在客户的理解深度。自动识别缺失字段并调用外部资源进行检索,输出结构化报告供后续跟进使用。使用前需确保 API 密钥和环境变量正确设置,注意数据隐私与合规性要求。

inbound-lead-enrichment 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/inbound-lead-enrichment

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/athina-ai/goose-skills --skill inbound-lead-en…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

inbound-lead-enrichment 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/athina-ai/goose-skills --skill inbound-lead-enrichment。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

inbound-lead-enrichment 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

inbound-lead-enrichment 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

inbound-lead-enrichment 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

inbound-lead-enrichment 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 214 次,近一周安装 9 次,下载 75 次,GitHub 607 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

inbound-lead-enrichment 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
inbound-lead-enrichment

入境铅富集 · 本页

214607需要联网未明确有提醒

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Inbound Lead Enrichment

Takes inbound leads with incomplete data and fills in the gaps. Researches the company, identifies the person's role, finds other stakeholders at the company, and checks for existing relationships in CRM. Turns a bare email address into a full lead profile.

When to Auto-Load

Load this composite when:

  • User says "enrich these leads", "fill in the missing data", "research these inbound leads"
  • inbound-lead-qualification flags leads as insufficient_data
  • inbound-lead-triage detects leads with missing company/title fields
  • User has a list of emails or partial lead data and needs complete profiles

Architecture

[Raw Leads] → Step 1: Assess Gaps → Step 2: Company Research → Step 3: Person Research → Step 4: Stakeholder Discovery → Step 5: Relationship Check → Step 6: Compile & Output
                   ↓                      ↓                         ↓                          ↓                             ↓                          ↓
            Gap inventory        Company profiles         Person profiles            Buying committee          CRM/pipeline matches       Enriched lead records

Step 0: Configuration (Once Per Client)

On first run, establish enrichment tool preferences. Save to clients/<client-name>/config/lead-enrichment.json.

{
  "enrichment_tools": {
    "company_research": {
      "primary": "web-search | Apollo | Crunchbase | none",
      "secondary": "web-search"
    },
    "person_research": {
      "primary": "Apollo | LinkedIn scraper (Apify) | web-search | none",
      "secondary": "web-search"
    },
    "stakeholder_finding": {
      "primary": "Apollo | LinkedIn Sales Nav export | company-contact-finder | none",
      "secondary": "web-search"
    }
  },
  "crm_source": {
    "tool": "Supabase | HubSpot | Salesforce | CSV | none",
    "access_method": ""
  },
  "buyer_personas": [],
  "enrichment_depth": {
    "tier_1_leads": "deep",
    "tier_2_leads": "deep",
    "tier_3_leads": "standard",
    "tier_4_leads": "minimal",
    "untiered_leads": "standard"
  },
  "cost_controls": {
    "max_apify_credits_per_run": null,
    "max_apollo_credits_per_run": null,
    "skip_paid_enrichment_for_tier_4": true
  }
}

On subsequent runs: Load config silently.


Step 1: Assess Data Gaps

Process

For each lead, inventory what's known vs. unknown:

Required fields (must fill):

  • company_name — What company do they work for?
  • company_domain — Company website domain
  • person_name — Full name
  • person_title — Current job title
  • person_email — Contact email (usually already have this from inbound)

Valuable fields (fill if possible):

  • company_size — Employee count or range
  • company_industry — Industry classification
  • company_stage — Funding stage or maturity
  • company_hq — Headquarters location
  • company_description — One sentence about what they do
  • person_seniority — IC, Manager, Director, VP, C-Level, Founder
  • person_department — Engineering, Sales, Marketing, etc.
  • person_linkedin — LinkedIn profile URL
  • person_tenure — How long at current company

Bonus fields (nice to have):

  • company_tech_stack — Known technologies used
  • company_recent_news — Any recent events (funding, launches, hires)
  • person_background — Previous companies, education
  • person_social_activity — Recent posts or engagement topics

Gap Classification

For each lead, classify the enrichment effort needed:

Gap LevelMissingEnrichment NeededCost
Minimal1-2 valuable fieldsQuick web searchFree
StandardCompany or title missingWeb search + possible API lookupLow
DeepMultiple required fields missingMulti-source researchMedium
Email-onlyOnly have an email addressFull research from scratchHigh

Output

  • Gap inventory table showing each lead and what's missing
  • Recommended enrichment depth per lead (based on gap level AND urgency tier if available)
  • Cost estimate if paid tools will be used

Human Checkpoint

"Here's what's missing across your leads. [X] need deep enrichment, [Y] need standard, [Z] just need a quick lookup. Estimated cost: [amount]. Proceed?"


Step 2: Company Research

Process

For each unique company in the lead list (deduplicate — don't research the same company twice for multiple leads):

From email domain (if company name is missing):

  1. Extract domain from email (e.g., jane@acme.com → acme.com)
  2. Skip personal email domains (gmail, yahoo, hotmail, outlook, etc.)
  3. Look up the domain → company name, description

Company profile research:

FieldPrimary SourceFallback Source
Company nameDomain lookupWeb search
DescriptionCompany website (homepage, about page)Crunchbase, LinkedIn company page
Employee countApollo, LinkedIn company pageCrunchbase, web search
IndustryLinkedIn company page, CrunchbaseInfer from website content
Stage/FundingCrunchbase, news articlesApollo, web search
HQ LocationLinkedIn company page, websiteCrunchbase
Tech stackJob postings, BuiltWithWeb search
Recent newsWeb search (last 90 days)Twitter/social mentions

Research depth by config:

  • Deep: All fields, multiple sources, verify across sources
  • Standard: Required + valuable fields, primary source only
  • Minimal: Company name + description + size only

Output

Each company gets a company_profile block:

{
  "company_name": "",
  "company_domain": "",
  "company_description": "",
  "employee_count": "",
  "employee_range": "",
  "industry": "",
  "sub_industry": "",
  "stage": "",
  "last_funding": "",
  "hq_location": "",
  "tech_stack": [],
  "recent_news": [],
  "research_sources": [],
  "confidence": "high | medium | low"
}

Handling Personal Email Domains

If the lead used a personal email (gmail, etc.):

  1. Check if name + any other available data can identify the company (e.g., form field, chat message)
  2. If company is mentioned in their form submission or chat, use that
  3. If truly unknown, flag as company_unidentified — still proceed with person research if name is available

Step 3: Person Research

Process

For each lead, build a person profile:

From name + company (if title is missing):

  1. Search LinkedIn for person at company (via configured tool or web search)
  2. Cross-reference with Apollo or other contact databases
  3. If multiple matches, use email domain to disambiguate

Person profile research:

FieldPrimary SourceFallback Source
Full nameInput dataLinkedIn profile
Current titleLinkedIn profile, ApolloWeb search
Seniority levelInfer from titleLinkedIn profile
DepartmentInfer from titleLinkedIn profile
Tenure at companyLinkedIn profileApollo
Previous companiesLinkedIn profileWeb search
EducationLinkedIn profileSkip
LinkedIn URLApollo, web searchSkip
LinkedIn headlineLinkedIn profileSkip
Recent activityLinkedIn posts (if scraper configured)Skip

Seniority inference rules:

  • Titles containing: Intern, Associate, Coordinator, Specialist → IC_junior
  • Titles containing: Analyst, Engineer, Designer, Developer (no "Senior/Lead/Staff") → IC_mid
  • Titles containing: Senior, Lead, Staff, Principal → IC_senior
  • Titles containing: Manager, Team Lead → Manager
  • Titles containing: Director, Head of → Director
  • Titles containing: VP, Vice President, SVP, EVP → VP
  • Titles containing: Chief, C-level abbreviations (CTO, CMO, CRO, CFO), President → C_Level
  • Titles containing: Founder, Co-founder, Owner → Founder

Adjust for company size:

  • At companies <20 employees: inflate seniority one level (a "Manager" has Director-level scope)
  • At companies >5000 employees: deflate seniority one level (a "Director" may have Manager-level autonomy)

Output

Each lead gets a person_profile block:

{
  "full_name": "",
  "current_title": "",
  "seniority_level": "",
  "department": "",
  "tenure_months": null,
  "previous_companies": [],
  "education": "",
  "linkedin_url": "",
  "linkedin_headline": "",
  "recent_activity_summary": "",
  "research_sources": [],
  "confidence": "high | medium | low"
}

Step 4: Stakeholder Discovery

Process

For each company in the lead list, identify other relevant people — the buying committee.

Why this matters:

  • Inbound leads are rarely the sole decision-maker
  • Finding the rest of the buying committee early accelerates the deal
  • Multi-threading (engaging multiple people at a company) dramatically improves win rates

Who to find (based on buyer personas from config):

  1. Economic buyer — Person who signs the check. Usually VP+ or C-level in the relevant department.
  2. Champion — Person most likely to push for adoption internally. Usually a senior IC or Director who feels the pain.
  3. Technical evaluator — Person who will assess the product's technical fit. Usually engineering or ops.
  4. End user — Person who will use the product daily. Their buy-in prevents post-sale churn.

Process per company:

  1. Using the buyer personas, determine which roles to search for
  2. Search via configured tool (Apollo, LinkedIn, company-contact-finder)
  3. For each stakeholder found, capture: name, title, seniority, LinkedIn URL, email (if available)
  4. Note the relationship to the inbound lead: same team? Same department? Different function?

Depth control:

  • Deep enrichment (Tier 1-2 leads): Find all 4 stakeholder types. Research each.
  • Standard enrichment (Tier 3 leads): Find economic buyer + champion only.
  • Minimal enrichment (Tier 4 / untiered): Skip stakeholder discovery.

Output

Each company gets a stakeholder_map:

{
  "company": "",
  "inbound_lead": {
    "name": "",
    "title": "",
    "role_in_deal": "economic_buyer | champion | evaluator | user | unknown"
  },
  "stakeholders_found": [
    {
      "name": "",
      "title": "",
      "seniority": "",
      "linkedin_url": "",
      "email": "",
      "role_in_deal": "",
      "relationship_to_lead": "",
      "confidence": "high | medium | low"
    }
  ],
  "buying_committee_completeness": "full | partial | minimal",
  "recommended_multi_thread": ""
}

Stakeholder Prioritization

If the inbound lead IS the economic buyer → stakeholders are supporting context If the inbound lead is a user/evaluator → finding the economic buyer is critical If the inbound lead is unknown → identifying their role determines the multi-threading strategy


Step 5: Relationship Check

Process

For each lead AND each discovered stakeholder, check existing systems for prior relationships:

Check 1 — CRM / Supabase people table:

  • Does this person already exist in our system?
  • If yes: what's their current status? (active lead, contacted, nurture, customer, churned)
  • If yes: who owns the relationship?

Check 2 — Outreach history (outreach_log):

  • Have we emailed/messaged this person before?
  • If yes: when, what channel, what was the outcome?
  • Critical: prevent the "we cold-emailed you last week and you ignored us, now you came inbound" collision

Check 3 — Company-level pipeline (companies table or CRM):

  • Is there an active deal with this company?
  • If yes: at what stage? Who's the deal owner?
  • An inbound lead at a company with an active deal is a HUGE signal — flag it prominently

Check 4 — Signal history (signals table):

  • Has this company appeared in any signal scans?
  • If yes: which signals? Were they acted on?

Check 5 — Mutual connections (if data available):

  • Does anyone on our team know someone at this company?
  • If yes: note the warm intro path

Output

Each lead gets a relationship_context block:

{
  "person_in_crm": true/false,
  "person_crm_status": "",
  "person_outreach_history": [
    {
      "date": "",
      "channel": "",
      "campaign": "",
      "outcome": ""
    }
  ],
  "company_in_pipeline": true/false,
  "company_deal_stage": "",
  "company_deal_owner": "",
  "company_signal_history": [],
  "mutual_connections": [],
  "relationship_summary": ""
}

Step 6: Compile & Output

Enriched Lead Record

Merge all research into a single enriched record per lead:

{
  "original_data": {},
  "company_profile": {},
  "person_profile": {},
  "stakeholder_map": {},
  "relationship_context": {},
  "enrichment_metadata": {
    "enrichment_depth": "deep | standard | minimal",
    "fields_filled": X,
    "fields_still_missing": [],
    "sources_used": [],
    "confidence_overall": "high | medium | low",
    "enrichment_date": "",
    "cost_incurred": ""
  }
}

Output Formats

Primary: Enriched CSV

Produce a CSV that extends the original lead data with all enriched fields:

Original Fields+ Company Fields+ Person Fields+ Stakeholder Fields+ Relationship Fields+ Metadata
All input columnscompany_description, employee_count, industry, stage, hq, tech_stack, recent_newscurrent_title, seniority, department, tenure, linkedin_url, headlinestakeholder_1_name, stakeholder_1_title, stakeholder_1_role,... (up to 4)in_crm, crm_status, in_pipeline, deal_stage, outreach_history_summaryenrichment_depth, confidence, fields_missing, sources_used

Save to: clients/<client-name>/leads/inbound-enriched-[date].csv

Secondary: Enrichment Report

## Lead Enrichment Report: [Date]

### Summary
- **Total leads enriched:** X
- **Deep enrichment:** X leads (Tier 1-2)
- **Standard enrichment:** X leads (Tier 3)
- **Minimal enrichment:** X leads (Tier 4)

### Data Quality
- **Fully enriched** (all required + valuable fields): X leads
- **Mostly enriched** (all required, some valuable): X leads
- **Partially enriched** (some required fields still missing): X leads
- **Could not enrich** (insufficient starting data): X leads

### Company Research
- **Unique companies researched:** X
- **Companies already in CRM:** X
- **Companies with active deals:** X (flag for deal owner)
- **Companies with signal history:** X

### Stakeholder Discovery
- **Total stakeholders found:** X across Y companies
- **Economic buyers identified:** X
- **Champions identified:** X
- **Full buying committees mapped:** X companies

### Relationship Flags
- **Leads already in CRM:** X (update status, don't create duplicates)
- **Previously contacted leads:** X (check outreach history before re-engaging)
- **Companies with active deals:** X (coordinate with deal owner)
- **Warm intro paths found:** X

### Cost
- **Enrichment tool credits used:** [breakdown by tool]
- **Cost per lead:** [average]

### CSV saved to: [path]

Handling Edge Cases

Lead with only an email, nothing else:

  1. Extract domain → look up company
  2. Search "[name] [company]" on LinkedIn/web
  3. If still can't identify: flag as enrichment_failed with reason, recommend manual lookup
  4. Don't waste paid API credits on truly unidentifiable leads — web search first

Same company appears multiple times (multiple inbound leads):

  • Research the company ONCE, apply to all leads
  • Stakeholder discovery runs once per company, not per lead
  • Note the multi-lead signal: "3 people from [Company] came inbound — buying committee forming?"

Lead claims a title that doesn't match LinkedIn:

  • Trust LinkedIn over self-reported form data (people sometimes inflate titles on forms)
  • Note the discrepancy: "Form says 'VP of Engineering', LinkedIn says 'Senior Engineer'"
  • Use the LinkedIn title for qualification purposes

Company recently renamed, merged, or was acquired:

  • If the company domain redirects, follow the redirect
  • Note the corporate action: "[Company] was acquired by [Parent] in [date]"
  • Qualify against the current entity, not the historical one

Person left the company since filling the form:

  • If LinkedIn shows a different company than the form submission, flag it
  • Note: "Lead submitted via [Company] but now at [New Company] as of [date]"
  • Qualify both companies if both are potentially relevant

Enrichment tool rate limits or failures:

  • If primary tool fails, fall back to secondary (web search is always available)
  • If both fail for a specific lead, mark as enrichment_partial and move on
  • Never block the entire batch because one lead failed

Very high volume (100+ leads):

  • Batch company research first (deduplicate companies)
  • Parallelize person research via Task agents (15-20 leads per batch)
  • Skip stakeholder discovery for Tier 4 and untiered leads
  • Provide cost estimate before running paid enrichment tools

Personal email domains:

  • If form had a company field: use it even though email is personal
  • If no company info: attempt LinkedIn search by name
  • Last resort: flag as company_unidentified, enrich person only

Update Protocol

After enrichment is complete, update the source systems:

  1. If CRM is configured: Create/update lead records with enriched data. Don't overwrite existing data — append or fill gaps only.
  2. If Supabase is the data store: Upsert into people and companies tables.
  3. Flag duplicates: If enrichment reveals a lead already exists in CRM under a different email, flag the duplicate rather than creating a second record.

Tools Required

  • Web search — primary fallback for all research
  • Apollo — company + person lookup (optional, enhances depth)
  • LinkedIn scraper (Apify) — person profile enrichment (optional)
  • Company-contact-finder — stakeholder discovery
  • CRM access — relationship checks (HubSpot, Salesforce, Supabase)
  • Supabase client — pipeline, outreach history, signal lookups
  • Read/Write — CSV I/O and config management
  • Task tool — for parallelizing enrichment across large lead batches

平台分布

Codex

37.83%
按下载量换算28

Claude

31.01%
按下载量换算23

Cursor

17.81%
按下载量换算13

Gemini CLI

10.04%
按下载量换算8

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

可疑

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills