Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

lead-scoring(领先得分)

lead-scoring 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。

lead-scoring 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,第三方扫描有未通过项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 36,404。

总安装 1,929周安装 82GitHub Stars 136下载 676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:lead-scoring(领先得分)
来源仓库:https://github.com/absolutelyskilled/absolutelyskilled
仓库路径:skills/lead-scoring
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/absolutelyskilled/absolutelyskilled --skill lead-scoring
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/absolutelyskilled/absolutelyskilled --skill lead-scoring

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。

用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,支持基于关键词或任务场景定位结果。适用于快速获取候选信息,提升 Agent 在复杂查询中的效率。可通过来源仓库和 README 进一步核验具体用法和功能边界。安装前建议确认权限范围及是否触发联网或文件读写操作。

lead-scoring 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/lead-scoring

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/absolutelyskilled/absolutelyskilled --skill le…;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

lead-scoring 怎么安装?

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

lead-scoring 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。

lead-scoring 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。

lead-scoring 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。

lead-scoring 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,929 次,近一周安装 82 次,下载 676 次,GitHub 136 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。

lead-scoring 安全吗?

第三方扫描有未通过项,风险较高。除非你确认过源码,否则不建议直接安装到常用环境。

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
lead-scoring

领先得分 · 本页

1,929136需要联网未明确未通过

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

When this skill is activated, always start your first response with the 🧢 emoji.

Lead Scoring

Lead scoring is the discipline of quantifying how likely a prospect is to become a paying customer so sales teams spend time on the right people. A good scoring model combines profile fit (does the company match your ICP?) with behavioral intent (are they actively signaling purchase readiness?). This skill equips an agent to define ICPs, build point-based or predictive scoring models, weight intent signals, set MQL/SQL thresholds, implement score decay, and create a shared sales-marketing framework that drives consistent, measurable pipeline qualification.


When to use this skill

Trigger this skill when the user:

  • Needs to define or refine an Ideal Customer Profile (ICP)
  • Wants to build or overhaul a lead scoring model with point values
  • Asks how to identify, classify, or weight intent signals (first-party or third-party)
  • Needs to set MQL, SQL, or PQL thresholds and handoff criteria
  • Wants to implement score decay for aging or disengaged leads
  • Asks about BANT, MEDDIC, CHAMP, or any qualification framework
  • Needs to validate whether a scoring model is actually predicting conversions
  • Wants to align sales and marketing on lead definitions and SLA terms

Do NOT trigger this skill for:

  • CRM technical implementation or integration wiring - use a CRM/engineering skill
  • General demand generation strategy unrelated to lead qualification

Key principles

  1. Fit + intent = score - Profile fit answers "should we ever sell to this company?" Intent answers "should we reach out right now?" Neither alone is sufficient. A perfect-fit company with zero intent is a nurture candidate. High intent from a poor-fit company wastes sales cycles. Weight both dimensions and require minimum thresholds on each, not just a combined total.
  2. Decay scores over time - A lead who downloaded a whitepaper six months ago and has not engaged since is not still a hot prospect. Apply time-based decay to behavioral scores so inactivity reduces urgency. Fit scores (firmographic, technographic) typically do not decay; behavioral scores should decay 10-25% per month of inactivity.
  3. Align sales and marketing on definitions - "Marketing Qualified Lead" means nothing if sales uses a different threshold to decide whether to work it. Define MQL, SQL, and PQL in a shared document, tie them to specific score thresholds, and measure SLA compliance. Misalignment here is the single largest source of pipeline leakage.
  4. Start simple, iterate often - Begin with a manual point model covering 8-12 attributes. Get sales and marketing to validate it on historical closed-won data before layering in predictive ML. Complexity that has not been validated destroys trust faster than simplicity.
  5. Validate with closed-won data - Build the model, then score your last 100 closed-won deals and 100 lost/no-decision deals. If the model does not clearly separate the two populations, the attribute weights are wrong. Recalibrate before deploying to live pipeline.

Core concepts

Demographic vs. behavioral scoring are the two axes of every lead score. Demographic (also called profile or fit) scoring assigns points based on static attributes: company size, industry, job title, tech stack, geography, funding stage. These attributes describe who the prospect is. Behavioral scoring assigns points based on actions: page visits, content downloads, email opens, webinar attendance, free trial sign-ups. These attributes describe what the prospect is doing right now. Most models maintain separate fit and behavioral sub-scores and require a minimum threshold on each before routing to sales.

MQL / SQL / PQL definitions are the thresholds that gate handoffs between teams. A Marketing Qualified Lead (MQL) has crossed a score threshold indicating marketing believes it warrants sales attention. A Sales Qualified Lead (SQL) is an MQL that sales has accepted as worthy of active pursuit, typically after a discovery call confirms fit, budget, and timeline. A Product Qualified Lead (PQL) is specific to PLG motions - it is a user (not just a lead) who has reached a product activation milestone that predicts conversion, such as inviting a second user, creating three projects, or integrating with a key tool.

Intent signals taxonomy classifies signals by source and strength. First-party signals come from your own properties (website visits, docs engagement, trial usage, email clicks) and are the highest-confidence because you own the data. Second-party signals come from partner ecosystems (co-marketing events, integration marketplace installs, referral partner activity). Third-party intent signals come from vendors like Bombora, G2, TechTarget, or 6sense - they aggregate content consumption across publisher networks to surface companies researching your category. Rank signals from strongest (pricing page visit, free trial start) to weakest (single blog visit, newsletter open).

Score decay is the mechanism that reduces a lead's behavioral score over time without fresh engagement. Without decay, a lead's score only ever increases, making old engagement permanently inflate priority. Implement decay as a scheduled job (daily or weekly) that multiplies behavioral sub-scores by a decay factor (e.g., 0.9 per week of inactivity). Reset the decay clock when a new qualifying action occurs. Fit scores are not decayed because firmographic attributes do not change frequently.


Common tasks

Define an Ideal Customer Profile (ICP)

An ICP is a description of the company type (not individual) most likely to buy, retain, and expand. Build it from closed-won analysis, not intuition.

Firmographic criteria:

Industry verticals:      e.g., FinTech, HealthTech, B2B SaaS
Company size (employees): e.g., 50-500
ARR / Revenue range:     e.g., $5M-$50M ARR
Geography:               e.g., North America, EMEA
Funding stage:           e.g., Series A - Series C

Technographic criteria:

Tech stack signals:      e.g., uses Salesforce + Slack (integrates well)
Competitor usage:        e.g., currently on legacy tool X (displacement motion)
Infrastructure:          e.g., AWS/GCP (cloud-native, not on-prem only)

Negative ICP (disqualifiers): Explicitly list company types to reject: e.g., solo-founder, pre-revenue, regulated industries you cannot serve, or geographies you do not support. These should auto-fail leads regardless of behavioral score.

Pull your last 50 closed-won deals and cluster them by firmographic attributes. The cluster with the shortest sales cycle and highest NRR is your ICP. Do not define ICP by who you want to sell to - define it by who actually bought and stayed.

Build a scoring model - point system template

A point-based model assigns values to attributes. Sum the points to produce a score from 0 to 100. Divide into a fit sub-score (0-50) and a behavioral sub-score (0-50).

Fit scoring template:

Attribute                    | Match             | Points
-----------------------------|-------------------|-------
Industry match               | Exact ICP         | +15
                             | Adjacent          | +8
                             | Outside ICP       | 0
Company size                 | ICP range         | +12
                             | One tier off      | +6
Job title / seniority        | Economic buyer    | +10
                             | Champion / user   | +7
                             | Unrelated         | 0
Technographic signal         | Key tech match    | +8
Funding stage                | ICP stage         | +5
Geography                    | Target region     | +0 (neutral)
                             | Excluded region   | -20 (hard block)

Behavioral scoring template:

Action                       | Points | Decay
-----------------------------|--------|------
Pricing page visit           | +20    | -3/week
Free trial sign-up           | +25    | none (reset point)
Demo request                 | +30    | none (route immediately)
Webinar attendance           | +10    | -2/week
Content download (gated)     | +8     | -2/week
Email click (3 in 7 days)    | +5     | -1/week
Blog visit (single)          | +2     | -1/week
Unsubscribe                  | -15    | permanent
Competitor domain email      | -10    | permanent
MQL threshold: Fit >= 25 AND Behavioral >= 20 (total >= 45) SQL threshold: MQL accepted by sales after discovery (BANT/MEDDIC confirmed)

Identify and weight intent signals

Group signals into tiers before assigning point values:

Tier 1 - Purchase intent (highest weight, route to sales immediately if fit >= 25):

  • Demo or pricing request (first-party)
  • Free trial activation (first-party)
  • ROI calculator completion (first-party)
  • Third-party intent surge (Bombora/G2) for your exact category

Tier 2 - Solution awareness (medium weight, enroll in fast-track nurture):

  • Multiple product page visits in 7 days
  • Case study or comparison guide download
  • Webinar registration and attendance
  • Integration marketplace browse or install

Tier 3 - Early research (low weight, standard nurture):

  • Single blog post visit
  • Newsletter subscription
  • Podcast listen or video view
  • Social media follow or engagement
Third-party intent signals should boost a score but never alone qualify a lead. They confirm category interest, not vendor selection. Combine with first-party engagement before routing to sales.

Set MQL and SQL thresholds

Thresholds must be agreed by both sales and marketing before launch.

Threshold-setting process:

  1. Score your last 100 closed-won deals with the proposed model
  2. Score your last 100 lost/no-decision deals
  3. Find the score that best separates the two populations (ROC curve / F1 score)
  4. Set the MQL threshold at the point with acceptable false-positive rate for sales
  5. Document the threshold in a shared definition document
  6. Review and recalibrate quarterly

Recommended SLA after MQL:

MQL created     → Sales accepts or rejects within 24 business hours
SQL created     → First meaningful outreach within 4 business hours
Demo completed  → Follow-up sent within 2 business hours
If sales rejects more than 25% of MQLs, the threshold is too low or the fit criteria are wrong. Track MQL rejection reasons - they are the most actionable feedback for recalibrating the model.

Implement score decay

Score decay prevents stale behavioral scores from inflating lead priority.

Decay implementation:

-- Pseudocode for weekly decay job
FOR EACH lead WHERE last_behavioral_action > 7 days ago:
  behavioral_score = behavioral_score * 0.85   -- 15% weekly decay
  IF behavioral_score < 5:
    behavioral_score = 0                        -- floor to avoid ghost scores
  total_score = fit_score + behavioral_score
  UPDATE lead record

Decay rate guidance:

Signal type          | Decay rate      | Rationale
---------------------|-----------------|----------------------------------
Single content click | -20%/week       | Low-intent, fades fast
Webinar attendance   | -10%/week       | Higher effort, slower decay
Trial inactivity     | -15%/week       | Active usage is what matters
Demo no-show         | -30% immediate  | Strong disqualification signal
No engagement 90d    | Reset to fit    | Behavioral slate wiped clean

Validate scoring model against outcomes

Before going live, back-test the model against historical data.

Validation checklist:

  1. Score last 6 months of closed-won deals - average score should be >60
  2. Score same period of closed-lost deals - average score should be <40
  3. Calculate separation ratio: (avg won score - avg lost score) / std dev
  4. Run precision and recall: what % of deals above MQL threshold actually closed?
  5. Identify attributes that are over- or under-weighted by inspecting outliers
  6. Validate with sales: show them the top 20 scored leads, ask if they agree

Healthy model signals:

Metric                         | Target
-------------------------------|------------------
Avg closed-won score           | > 65
Avg closed-lost score          | < 35
MQL-to-SQL conversion          | > 60%
SQL-to-opportunity conversion  | > 40%
MQL rejection rate by sales    | < 20%

Align sales and marketing on lead handoff SLA

Misalignment on definitions and handoff procedures is the most common reason lead scoring fails to improve pipeline. Build a shared definition document covering:

Shared definition document structure:

1. ICP definition (firmographic + technographic criteria)
2. Negative ICP / auto-disqualify criteria
3. Lead lifecycle stages: Raw → Engaged → MQL → SAL → SQL → Opportunity
4. Score thresholds for each stage transition
5. Handoff SLA: who does what and within how long
6. Rejection protocol: how sales rejects an MQL and what reason codes to use
7. Recycling protocol: how rejected/lost leads re-enter nurture
8. Review cadence: monthly score review, quarterly model recalibration

Anti-patterns

Anti-patternWhy it's wrongWhat to do instead
Scoring only behavioral signalsA highly engaged person at a wrong-fit company wastes sales timeRequire minimum fit sub-score before behavioral score can trigger MQL
Never decaying scoresOld engagement permanently inflates score; leads from 6 months ago stay "hot"Apply weekly behavioral decay; reset to fit-only score after 90 days of inactivity
Setting thresholds without dataArbitrary thresholds (e.g., "score > 50") produce MQL lists sales ignoresBack-test on closed-won vs. closed-lost before launching; set threshold at the empirical separation point
Treating all page visits equallyA pricing page visit is 10x stronger than a blog visitTier signals by purchase intent; assign points proportionally
Defining MQL without sales buy-inMarketing routes leads sales won't work; both teams disengageCo-define MQL criteria with sales leadership; make sales sign off on thresholds
Ignoring negative signalsLeads who unsubscribe or use competitor emails stay "qualified"Apply score penalties or hard blocks for disqualifying actions
Building a complex ML model firstBlack-box models are hard to debug and lose sales trustStart with a transparent point model; add ML only after validating the manual model

Gotchas

  1. Combined score threshold hides bad fits - A lead with a perfect behavioral score (50/50) but a zero fit score (wrong industry, wrong company size) can still hit the MQL threshold if you only gate on the total. Always require a minimum sub-score on both fit AND behavioral independently, not just the combined total.
  2. Score decay runs on stale data when jobs fail silently - Decay jobs that error without alerting leave behavioral scores frozen at their peak indefinitely. The symptom is sales complaining that the pipeline is full of "ghost" hot leads who never respond. Add failure alerting and a last-ran timestamp check to your decay job.
  3. Technographic signals are often stale - Data from providers like Clearbit or ZoomInfo can be 6-18 months out of date. A company that "uses Salesforce" in the data may have migrated off it. Treat technographic data as a weak fit signal, not a strong one, and never make it the sole reason for a high fit score.
  4. PQL thresholds need per-product calibration - A "product qualified lead" in a tool with a 5-minute time-to-value (e.g., Loom) needs a completely different activation milestone than one with a 30-day ramp (e.g., a data platform). Copying PQL definitions from other companies' case studies without calibrating against your own activation data produces high MQL-rejection rates.
  5. Sales rejection reasons are unstructured by default - Most CRMs let reps type free text when rejecting an MQL. Without a fixed reason code dropdown ("wrong company size", "no budget", "competitor", "timing"), you cannot aggregate feedback to recalibrate the model. Enforce a picklist from day one.

References

For detailed content on specific sub-domains, read the relevant file from references/:

  • references/scoring-models.md - Example scoring models for SaaS B2B, PLG, and enterprise motions with full attribute tables and threshold recommendations. Load when building or comparing scoring model templates for a specific GTM motion.

Only load a references file if the current task requires deep detail on that topic.


Companion check

On first activation of this skill in a conversation: check which companion skills are installed by running ls ~/.claude/skills/ ~/.agent/skills/ ~/.agents/skills/.claude/skills/.agent/skills/.agents/skills/ 2>/dev/null. Compare the results against the recommended_skills field in this file's frontmatter. For any that are missing, mention them once and offer to install: `` npx skills add AbsolutelySkilled/AbsolutelySkilled --skill <name> ` Skip entirely if recommended_skills` is empty or all companions are already installed.

平台分布

Codex

37.48%
按下载量换算253

Claude

28.33%
按下载量换算192

Cursor

18.79%
按下载量换算127

Gemini CLI

8.47%
按下载量换算57

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

可疑

Snyk

未通过

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