The GTM Guide to Claude: 6 Buyer Types, 10 Chapters, 100+ Skills From First Touch to Expansion

Six buyer types. A founder-led business does not behave like a RevOps team. Procurement-gated enterprise, PE-backed portfolio, an agency reselling you, and a functional head with a budget but no authority are four more answers again.

A sequence written for one reads wrong to the other five.

This chapter decides whether the other nine were worth opening.

Why the category is the whole thing

Most people never settle which type they are selling to before they start. They open a tool, type an industry and a company size, and six weeks later they are following up with a blend of companies that could never have bought, wondering whether the message is the problem.

The message is usually not the problem.

The six types differ on the things that actually govern a deal: who signs, how long it takes, what kills it, and what they need to see before they will take a call. A message that ignores those is not personalised by adding their first name.

Six weeks of writing to the wrong population costs more than every other mistake in this guide combined, and it happens before you send a single message.

The six types

Type	Who signs	Cycle	What kills it
1. Founder-led	The founder, alone	Days	Price, or they build it themselves
2. Functional head	Them, with a nod upward	3 to 6 weeks	They cannot sell it internally
3. Ops or RevOps	Them, after a process review	6 to 12 weeks	It does not fit the existing stack
4. Procurement-gated	A committee you will not meet	3 to 9 months	Security review, or no budget line
5. PE-backed portfolio	The operating partner, effectively	Fast, then political	It is not on the 100-day plan
6. Agency or reseller	The founder or delivery lead	2 to 4 weeks	Margin maths does not work

Read the last column twice. Those are five completely different objections, and a single objection-handling document cannot answer all of them credibly.

What changes per type

1. Founder-led. Sell the outcome and the speed. They have no process to protect and no committee to satisfy. Price is the only real objection and they will ask it in message two. The risk is churn: they buy fast and they leave fast.

2. Functional head. They have budget but they have to defend the choice. So the deliverable is not a demo, it is something they can forward. Write the one-pager they will paste into Slack, because that document is doing the actual selling.

3. Ops or RevOps. They buy process, not outcomes. The question that decides it is how it fits what they already run. They are slow to buy and they almost never leave, which makes them the best economics in the list if you can survive the cycle.

4. Procurement-gated. Nothing happens without a budget line and a security review. If you cannot answer both, this type is not a slow deal, it is a no with a longer runway. The honest move is to disqualify early rather than forecast it.

5. PE-backed portfolio. Fast if it is on the 100-day plan, invisible if it is not. The question is not whether they want it. It is whether the operating partner has already decided this is a priority this quarter.

6. Agency or reseller. Different economics entirely. They are not buying for themselves, they are buying to mark up. Lead with the margin maths, not the features, and be ready to talk about who owns the client relationship.

The skill

---
name: buyer-type-selector
description: Decide which of the six buyer types you are selling to,
  from evidence. Run before anything else. Highest effort.
---

Pull closed-won deals, last 12 months. Also pull closed-lost.

CLASSIFY each into one of the six:
founder-led / functional-head / ops / procurement-gated /
pe-backed / reseller

THEN CALCULATE per type:
- Win rate
- Average days to close
- Average deal size
- Churn or renewal rate where known
- How many deals, in absolute numbers

OUTPUT
1. The type with the best win rate and the evidence
2. The type with the best economics, which is often not the same
3. The type you have been targeting, from your own outbound history
4. The gap between 3 and 1

FAIL CLOSED with fewer than 10 closed deals across all types.
Report the count and say the answer is not yet in the data. Do not
derive a category from three customers.

IF ONE TYPE IS OVER 70% OF CLOSED-WON, name it and stop. That is
the answer, and diversifying before you have saturated it is the
second most common mistake in this guide.

OUTPUT THE DECISION as one line: "We sell to [type], and we are
not currently selling to the other five."

Everything downstream reads that line.

The honest version of the answer

Most early companies are selling to type 1 or type 2 and telling themselves they are selling to type 4.

The tell is the pipeline. Lots of names, long cycles, polite interest, nothing signed. That is what selling to procurement-gated enterprise looks like when you do not have the security posture, the budget line or the reference customers to survive it.

There is nothing wrong with type 1. It funds the company that eventually earns type 4.

What costs you is pretending. A deck written for an enterprise committee, sent to a founder who decides in a week, wastes both.

The second trap, and it costs months on its own.

Searching the obvious title returns the wrong person. "Head of Growth" returns someone who owns acquisition channels. "Head of RevOps" returns the person who can actually take you to a decision.

Then the list, and verifying it before you send anything.

Chapter 2: The title trap

The title you search is almost never the title that signs.

What you search, and what it actually returns:

You search	You get	You wanted
Head of Marketing	Brand, content, events	Demand gen or growth
Head of Sales	A quota carrier's manager	The person who owns the process
Operations Manager	Logistics, facilities, admin	RevOps or BizOps
Founder	Everyone, including 2-person shops	Founders at your size band
VP Growth	Mostly US, mostly funded	Depends entirely on geography

---
name: title-mapper
description: Find the titles that actually sign, per buyer type. Run
  after buyer-type-selector, before list building.
---

Read the buyer type decision.

FROM CLOSED-WON DEALS, pull the exact job title of the person who
signed. Not the person you first contacted. The signer.

OUTPUT
1. The five exact title strings that actually signed, verbatim
2. The titles you have been targeting, from outbound history
3. The overlap, as a percentage
4. Title variants by geography, where your deals span markets
5. The titles that look right and never signed

POINT 5 is the output that saves the most time. Every category has
two or three titles that read perfectly and buy nothing.

BUILD the search string from point 1 only. Never from point 2.

If fewer than five closed deals have a recorded signer title, say
so. Guessing here compounds into every list you build afterwards.

One thing worth knowing before you build any search: title conventions differ by market. A "Commercial Director" in the UK and a "VP Sales" in the US are frequently the same seat, and a search string built for one returns almost nothing in the other.

Chapter 3: The list

---
name: list-builder
description: Build a raw list from the buyer type and the signer
  titles.
---

SOURCES, highest intent first:
1. Commenters and likers on a post about the problem you solve
2. Attendees of a relevant event
3. Members of a relevant community
4. Search on the signer titles from chapter 2
5. Job boards, for companies hiring the role your offer supports

SOURCE 1 FIRST, always. Someone who commented on a post about the
exact problem has done something. Someone matching a search filter
has done nothing.

SOURCE 5 is the strongest budget signal available. A company hiring
for the role your offer supports has money allocated and an unmet
need at the same time.

Capture: name, headline, company, size, location, LinkedIn URL,
source, and the buyer type you believe they are.

The last column is the one people skip. Without it you cannot
measure which type converts, which is the whole point of chapter 1.

Write to output/prospects.csv with a linkedin_url column. That
header is required by the import later.

Enrich nothing yet.

Chapter 4: Verify before you send

Seats turn over quietly. An empty row is worth more than a stale one, because a stale row costs you a send and a first impression.

---
name: list-verifier
description: Verify and grade a list before it enters a campaign.
  The gate. Nothing sends below B.
---

PER ROW, check:
- Is the person still in that seat? Last activity date, current
  headline, any role change post in the last 90 days
- Does the company still exist and still fit the size band
- Is this the signer title, or the title you wish were the signer
- Duplicate, within the list and against past campaigns

MARK STALE rather than guessing. A row you cannot verify is a row
you do not send to.

THEN GRADE, eight dimensions, 1 to 10:
buyer type fit, signer title accuracy, affordability, data
completeness, deduplication, recency of activity, reachability,
signal strength.

A 9.0+  B 7.5+  C 6.0+  D 4.5+  F below

FAIL CLOSED below B. Name the two lowest dimensions and the fix.

SIGNAL STRENGTH predicts reply rate better than any other dimension.
A B-grade list where most rows carry a dated trigger beats an
A-grade list with none.

REACHABILITY changes the campaign shape rather than the quality.
Mostly first degree can be messaged directly. Mostly cold needs
connection requests first, which is a different daily budget.

One practical note on reachability, since it governs everything in chapters 5 to 7. Recommended limits are around 20 connection requests a day and 100 messages a week, and they are account-wide rather than per campaign. A 400-row list is five weeks of your entire budget, which is why the order you work it in decides the quarter.

Prosp imports commenters and likers straight from any post URL including future reactions, which is why source 1 sits at the top of chapter 3. Importing costs nothing; sending is the capped resource.

Chapter 5: The signal

---
name: signal-finder
description: Find a dated, verifiable reason to contact each row now
  rather than later.
---

ONE signal per row, ranked by proximity to a budget decision.

TIER 1, budget is already moving
- Hiring for the role your offer supports
- Raised in the last 90 days
- New leader in post, last 60 days
- Publicly named the exact problem, last 30 days

TIER 2, the problem is visible
- Site or content shows the gap
- Commented on a competitor's post
- Expanding into a new market

TIER 3, fit only

Every signal verifiable and DATED. Record the date and the URL,
because it appears in the first message and they will check it.

No signal means write NONE.

Never stretch an attribute into a trigger. "Works at a SaaS
company" is fit, not intent, and using it as intent is the clearest
tell that a message was generated rather than written.

TIER 1 VARIES BY BUYER TYPE. A funding round moves a PE-backed
portfolio company and means nothing to a founder-led business that
has never raised. Check the signal against the type before ranking.

The sequence, the warm paths, and the proof a buyer actually asks for.

All three change per buyer type. A sequence written for a founder who decides in a week does not survive contact with a committee.

Chapter 6: The sequence

---
name: sequence-builder
description: Build the sequence spec, shaped by buyer type.
---
Output a node list, not prose. Per node: action, delay, exact copy,
exit condition.

THE SHAPE
1  Import from source
2  Condition: lead is 1st level
3  YES branch: message
4  NO branch: connection request, then message on acceptance
5  Wait, follow-up on a different angle, then add tag

RULES
- Four touches maximum. After that the answer is no.
- Reply stops the sequence, always.
- A connection request auto-detects acceptance over two weeks, so
  NO WAIT NODE after one. The most common unnecessary node.
- Every touch a different angle. Never "just following up".
- Any voice note pairs with a written message.

DELAYS BY BUYER TYPE
Founder-led        2, 3, 4 days. They decide fast or not at all.
Functional head    3, 5, 7. They need time to think internally.
Ops or RevOps      4, 7, 10. Nothing moves in their week.
Procurement-gated  5, 10, 14. And expect it to go quiet anyway.
PE-backed          2, 4, 7. Fast, if it is on the plan.
Reseller           3, 5, 7.

FAIL CLOSED if the requested volume exceeds the daily ceiling.
State the ceiling and the split rather than writing the sequence.

The opener rules, which do not change by type:

Under 300 characters. One ask, answerable in ten words.
Line one references the signal SPECIFICALLY, not its category.
Never mention the product in message one.
No compliments. No em dashes.

BANNED, burnt:
"I came across your profile"
"I help [vertical] with [service]"
"Are you open to a quick chat"

Chapter 7: The warm paths

The route nobody builds, because it is slower to start and it compounds.

---
name: warm-path-finder
description: Find the route in that is not a cold message.
---
PER TARGET ACCOUNT, look for, in order of strength:

1. A mutual connection who has worked with both of you
2. A customer of yours who knows them
3. An investor or advisor in common
4. A community or event you both attend
5. Their content, which you can engage with before messaging
6. Someone who left their company and now works somewhere friendly

ROUTE 6 is the most underused. A former employee will tell you who
actually decides, what the last vendor got wrong, and whether the
budget is real. That conversation is worth more than the
introduction.

FOR ROUTES 1 AND 2, write the forwardable ask. Three lines the
connector can send without editing. Never ask someone to "make an
introduction" and leave them to write it.

FOR ROUTE 5, two weeks of substantive comments before any message.
Then reference the exchange, never the profile.

OUTPUT the warmest available route per account, and the exact ask.

If there is no warm path, say so. Cold is fine. Pretending a
tenuous link is warm reads worse than a clean cold message.

Chapter 8: The proof room

What a buyer asks for before committing, and it differs completely by type.

---
name: proof-room-builder
description: Build the proof set the buyer type actually asks for.
---
BY TYPE, what they need to see:

FOUNDER-LED
  One comparable customer, named, with a number and a timeframe.
  Nothing else. A deck slows this type down.

FUNCTIONAL HEAD
  A one-pager they can forward. This document does the selling in
  rooms you are not in, so write it for the person who did not
  meet you.

OPS OR REVOPS
  Integration detail, data handling, and what happens when it
  breaks. Not benefits. They are assessing risk to a system they
  own.

PROCUREMENT-GATED
  Security questionnaire answers, insurance, DPA, SLA, references
  at their size. If you do not have these, you are not selling to
  this type yet. Say so internally.

PE-BACKED
  Time to value, in weeks. The operating partner is measured on a
  clock and so is this deal.

RESELLER
  Margin, who owns the client relationship, and what happens at
  renewal. Features are the last thing they ask about.

RULES
- Every number needs a timeframe and a source.
- Every named customer needs written permission. Keep a permission
  column with YES, ANONYMISED and NO as the only values.
- Never build the full set before you know the type. Five of the
  six are wasted effort.

FAIL CLOSED: if a required proof item does not exist, name the gap
rather than filling it.

The procurement-gated row is worth reading twice. If you cannot answer a security questionnaire, that type is not a slow pipeline, it is a no with a longer runway. Disqualifying early returns weeks.

Chapter 9: The replies

---
name: reply-router
description: Classify every inbound reply and route it. Cheapest
  model, runs continuously.
---
Exactly one category:

INTERESTED       Wants more, asks about the offer
TIMING           Interested, not now. Capture the date named.
OBJECTION        Price, fit, incumbent, capacity
WRONG_PERSON     Not their remit. Ask who owns it.
NOT_INTERESTED   Clear no. Thank them, stop, never pitch again.
AUTO_REPLY       Out of office. Reschedule to their return.
ESCALATE         Anything below 8 confidence

Per reply: category, confidence 1 to 10, the sentence that decided
it, and the next action.

Below 8 confidence, always ESCALATE. Sarcasm, brevity and
politeness all read the same in text.

WRONG_PERSON is the most valuable category in this guide and the
most commonly discarded. Ask who owns it. That answer corrects your
title mapping from chapter 2, and one corrected title is worth more
than the deal you lost.

Never auto-send to NOT_INTERESTED.

FOR INTERESTED, decide IF before HOW. Ask for the call when they
have named a problem, asked about price or timeline, or two
substantive messages have gone each way. On a one-line reply, ask
one more question instead.

THE ASK: name the length and the agenda. Offer the link AND two
concrete times. Never "let me know what works".

After sending, tag the lead so the sequence stops.

Chapter 10: The weekly read

Which of the six types is moving, and which is politely not.

---
name: pipeline-read
description: The weekly diagnostic, segmented by buyer type.
---
Pull: sent, accepted, replied, meetings booked, closed.
SEGMENT ALL OF IT BY BUYER TYPE. Aggregate numbers hide the answer.

Work the chain IN ORDER. Stop at the first failure.

1 ACCEPTANCE BELOW 15%
  The note, or the list is off-type. Not the sequence.
2 ACCEPTANCE FINE, REPLIES BELOW 10%
  The first message. Is the signal specific and dated?
3 REPLIES FINE, MEETINGS LOW
  The ask is mistimed, or the proof room is wrong for the type.
4 MEETINGS FINE, NOTHING CLOSING
  Not an outreach problem. Price, or the wrong buyer type entirely.
5 ALL FINE, VOLUME LOW
  The daily cap split.

ONE change per week. Change three and a lift tells you nothing.

THE MONTHLY QUESTION, and the only one that matters:
Which buyer type produced the closed deals, and is it the type you
are targeting?

If those two answers differ, go back to chapter 1. Everything else
in this guide is downstream of that.

A TYPE THAT REPLIES WELL AND NEVER CLOSES is the most expensive
pattern in outbound. It feels like progress for a full quarter.
Stage 4 is where you catch it.

Stages 1 to 3 need figures no CRM holds. Prosp supplies them per campaign and per account: requests sent and accepted, messages sent, replies received, pushed natively to HubSpot or out through webhooks and a REST API. Tag by buyer type at import and the segmentation in this chapter happens automatically rather than by hand.

The order, and the one that matters

ONCE      Chapter 1. The buyer type. Then chapter 2, the titles.
PER RUN   Chapters 3 to 5. List, verify, signal.
PER RUN   Chapters 6 to 8. Sequence, warm paths, proof room.
DAILY     Chapter 9. Replies.
WEEKLY    Chapter 10. One change.
QUARTERLY Chapter 1 again, against last quarter's closed-won.

Chapter 1 decides whether the other nine were worth opening.

Six weeks of writing to the wrong population costs more than every other mistake in this guide combined, and it happens before you send a single message.

Ten chapters build it. Prosp runs the half that reaches people 💜

↳ Start a 14 Day Free Trial 💜 ↳ Watch Full Tutorial ▶️

Most of this guide is already written. Six of the ten chapters run on skills from the existing library, unchanged.

Four are new, and they are the four this guide exists for.

Where every skill comes from

Chapter	Skill	Where it already exists
1. Buyer type	buyer-type-selector	NEW. Built on the derived-ICP method from the Lead Generation Guide, but the six-type classification is new.
2. Titles	title-mapper	NEW. Closest existing is icp-from-closed-won, which derives titles but does not separate signer from first contact.
3. The list	list-builder	LinkedIn Skill Library, category 2. Unchanged.
4. Verification	list-quality-scorecard	LinkedIn Skill Library, category 3. Plus the staleness checks from contact-hygiene-check.
5. The signal	signal-finder	The LinkedIn Machine, stage 2. Unchanged, with one addition: tier 1 varies by buyer type.
6. The sequence	sequence-builder	Agency LinkedIn Skills. The delay table by buyer type is the new part.
7. Warm paths	warm-path-finder	NEW. Route 6, the former employee, is not in any existing magnet.
8. The proof room	proof-room-builder	NEW. Built on the proof-library rules from the Marketing Department, split six ways.
9. Replies	reply-router	LinkedIn Skill Library, category 6. Unchanged.
10. The weekly read	pipeline-read	campaign-diagnostic from the LinkedIn Machine, segmented by buyer type.

The other six are the same skills you already have. If you have installed the LinkedIn Skill Library or the agency repo, chapters 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 and 10 are already on your machine.

If you already have the library

# You already have these
list-builder
list-quality-scorecard
signal-finder
sequence-builder
reply-router
campaign-diagnostic

# Add these four
mkdir -p .claude/skills/buyer-type-selector
mkdir -p .claude/skills/title-mapper
mkdir -p .claude/skills/warm-path-finder
mkdir -p .claude/skills/proof-room-builder

Then add one line to your context file, because every existing skill now reads it:

## Buyer type
We sell to [founder-led / functional-head / ops / procurement-gated
/ pe-backed / reseller].
We are not currently selling to the other five.

That single line is what changes the behaviour of the six skills you already had. signal-finder ranks differently, sequence-builder sets different delays, and pipeline-read segments rather than aggregating.

If you are starting from nothing

The six existing skills all live in one public repo, MIT licensed.

git clone https://github.com/JackJProsp/agency-linkedin-skills
cd agency-linkedin-skills
./install.sh

That covers chapters 3 to 6, 9 and 10. Then add the four new folders above and paste in the skill files from chapters 1, 2, 7 and 8.

Build the context file before running anything. Every skill reads it, and ten minutes there is worth more than any prompt.

Lead generation used to be a volume problem. More contacts, more sends, more pipeline.

That arithmetic broke, and it broke for a specific reason worth understanding before any of the ten stages make sense.

What actually changed

Writing became free. Sending did not.

Anyone can now produce a thousand personalised-looking messages in an afternoon. So the differentiator moved from whether you can write at volume to whether you can reach anyone at all.

The platform limits did not move with the tooling. Recommended LinkedIn limits are still 20 connection requests a day, roughly 100 messages a week, and those are account-wide rather than per campaign. Email deliverability thresholds tightened rather than loosened: bounce under 2%, spam complaints under 0.10%, and 95%+ delivery with SPF, DKIM, DMARC and RFC 8058 configured.

So the constraint is no longer production. It is send capacity, and everything below is organised around that.

The three things that follow from it

1. Ordering beats volume. A list of 400 is five weeks of your entire connection budget. Which 20 you contact on Monday decides the quarter, not how many you built.

2. Filtering moved before enrichment. Enrichment is per-lookup pricing. Enriching 1,000 rows to discover 600 were never going to buy is the most common way this gets expensive, and it is entirely avoidable.

3. Personalisation is now table stakes, not a differentiator. Everyone's first line references a recent post. What still works is a dated, verifiable signal the prospect can check, because that cannot be generated from a profile alone.

The ten stages

#	Stage	Skills	What leaves it
1	ICP and buyer persona	4	A derived ICP and a voice-of-customer file
2	List building and prioritisation	5	A graded, ordered list
3	Personalisation at scale	4	Copy that varies on real detail
4	Qualification and sales intelligence	4	A scored opportunity or a clean disqualification
5	Buying signals and intent	4	Dated, verifiable triggers
6	Discovery prep and objections	4	A one-page brief and the answers
7	Pipeline and conversion	4	One change per week, evidenced
8	CRM hygiene and follow-up	4	Attribution that survives to reporting
9	The send layer	4	Messages that actually reach people
10	Templates and checklists	3	The recurring documents, fixed

Stage 4 producing a clean disqualification is a success. Most pipeline problems are stage 4 problems that surfaced at stage 7.

The context file every skill reads

Build .agents/leadgen-context.md first. Forty skills reading one file behave like a system. Forty reading nothing behave like forty tools.

# Lead Generation Context

## What we sell
One line, in the words a customer would use:
What a meeting is actually for:
Price band:

## Derived ICP, from closed-won
Exact job titles that actually signed:
Size band with the highest win rate:
Three attributes correlating with fast closes:
Three correlating with long or lost deals:
Who this is NOT for:

## Qualification framework
Which one we use: [MEDDIC / MEDDPICC / BANT / SPIN]
Our disqualification triggers:

## Objections we hear weekly
The five to ten real ones, with our best current response:

## Proof, with permission
Numbers we can stand behind publicly:
Named clients we may reference:

## Send budget
Connected accounts:
Daily connection requests available, account-wide:
Other campaigns running on these accounts:

## Banned
<never_use_these>
Claims we cannot evidence:
Numbers nobody approved:
Phrases we would never say:
</never_use_these>

The objections section pays back fastest. Every team hears the same five to ten weekly, and encoding the best answer once means all forty skills answer consistently rather than improvising.

Install all 40

mkdir -p .agents output

# 1. ICP and persona
mkdir -p .claude/skills/{icp-from-closed-won,persona-builder,voice-of-customer,disqualifier-writer}

# 2. List and prioritisation
mkdir -p .claude/skills/{list-builder,icp-filter-pass,list-quality-scorecard,account-tiering,engager-scorer}

# 3. Personalisation
mkdir -p .claude/skills/{opener-writer,merge-prompt-writer,voice-note-scripter,message-self-check}

# 4. Qualification
mkdir -p .claude/skills/{methodology-implementer,call-prep,disqualification-check,committee-mapper}

# 5. Signals and intent
mkdir -p .claude/skills/{signal-finder,job-post-trigger,funding-trigger,intent-scorer}

# 6. Discovery and objections
mkdir -p .claude/skills/{question-designer,pain-quantifier,objection-handler,next-step-closer}

# 7. Pipeline and conversion
mkdir -p .claude/skills/{pipeline-diagnostic,acceptance-diagnostic,reply-diagnostic,win-loss-analysis}

# 8. CRM and follow-up
mkdir -p .claude/skills/{crm-hygiene,lead-source-tagger,follow-up-sequencer,warm-signal-tracker}

# 9. Send layer
mkdir -p .claude/skills/{send-budget-splitter,sequence-builder,reply-classifier,account-health-check}

# 10. Templates
mkdir -p .claude/skills/{icp-template,sequence-template,weekly-report-template}

Effort routing

Effort	Skills	Why
Low	icp-filter-pass, reply-classifier, engager-scorer, crm-hygiene, lead-source-tagger	Classification across volume. One right answer per row.
Medium	opener-writer, merge-prompt-writer, voice-note-scripter, call-prep, follow-up-sequencer	Known artefact from known inputs
High	icp-from-closed-won, signal-finder, sequence-builder, pain-quantifier, pipeline-diagnostic, win-loss-analysis	Judgement, planning, diagnosis

icp-filter-pass on the cheapest model is the single biggest saving in the chain, because it touches every row and has the least reasoning in it.

sequence-builder at low effort is the most expensive mistake. A bad sequence design costs more in wasted sends than the tokens ever saved.

13 skills. Stages 1 and 2 produce the only thing that matters at this point: a graded, ordered list.

The order is the cost control. Build raw, filter cheap, grade, then enrich only what survived.

ICP and persona: 4 skills

---
name: icp-from-closed-won
description: Derive an ICP from closed-won deals rather than a
  workshop. Use before any list building.
---
Pull closed-won deals, last 12 months. Per deal: company size,
industry, tech stack if visible, buyer job title, deal size, days to
close, and the trigger that started it.

OUTPUT:
1. Three attributes correlating with fast closes
2. Three correlating with long or lost deals
3. Exact job titles that actually signed, not the ones we target
4. Size band with the highest win rate
5. A searchable filter string
6. The gap between the stated ICP and the actual one

Write back into leadgen-context.md.

Fewer than 10 closed-won deals means say so. Do not derive a pattern
from three customers and present it as one.

POINT 6 is the deliverable people remember. Telling a team their
real buyer is a different title from the one on their website is
worth the whole exercise.

---
name: persona-builder
description: Build the buyer persona from evidence, not imagination.
---
FOR EACH of the top two job titles from the derived ICP:
- What they are measured on, quarterly
- What they are trying to do, in their words
- What they have already tried that failed
- Who else has to approve their decisions
- Where they actually spend attention online
- What makes them ignore an outbound message

EVERY field needs a source: a post, a job description, a review, a
call transcript. Mark anything unsourced as UNKNOWN.

A persona with no sources is a creative writing exercise, and every
message built on it inherits the fiction.

Write to context/persona-[title].md.

---
name: voice-of-customer
description: Capture how the buyer describes the problem in their own
  words. Use before writing any copy.
---
SOURCES in priority order:
1. Their own posts and comments
2. Comments under competitor posts
3. Relevant subreddits and forums
4. Review sites for competing products
5. Your own call transcripts

OUTPUT:
- Twelve verbatim phrases, quoted exactly
- Five words they use that we currently do not
- Three objections they raise unprompted
- What they say they already tried
- What they say did not work about it

NEVER paraphrase into marketing language. If they said "I can't tell
what any of it is doing", record that, not "attribution challenges".

The highest-leverage file in the whole guide. Copy written from
twelve real phrases beats copy written from a persona every time.

---
name: disqualifier-writer
description: Write the explicit list of who this is not for.
---
OUTPUT to context/disqualifiers.md. Each entry: the attribute, and
one line on why it fails.

Cover at minimum: too small to afford the price, wrong buyer
seniority, competitor, agency when we sell to in-house, sector we
cannot serve, geography we cannot serve.

This file is what icp-filter-pass reads to produce DROP verdicts, so
vagueness here becomes a bad list two weeks later.

An offer for everyone converts nobody. Naming who it repels raises
close rate on everyone else.

List building and prioritisation: 5 skills

---
name: list-builder
description: Build a raw prospect list from any source. Use after the
  ICP exists.
---
SOURCES, highest intent first:
1. Commenters and likers on a relevant post, yours or a competitor's
2. Attendees of a relevant event
3. Members of a relevant group
4. Search matching the ICP filter string
5. Job boards, for companies hiring the role your offer supports

Capture: full name, headline, company, size, location, LinkedIn URL,
and the source.

Write to output/prospects.csv with a linkedin_url column. That header
is required by the import later, so do not rename it.

Enrich nothing. Look up no emails. Most of this is discarded next.

---
name: icp-filter-pass
description: Filter the raw list before any enrichment. Cheapest
  model, lowest effort.
---
Read the derived ICP and disqualifiers.md.

Per row: KEEP, DROP or UNSURE with a 12-word reason.

KEEP    Matches the title band and the size band
DROP    Fails either, or hits a disqualifier
UNSURE  Ambiguous headline. Do not guess.

KEEP and UNSURE to output/filtered.csv.
DROP to output/dropped.csv so the filter is auditable when someone
asks why a company was excluded.

Report the drop rate. Below 40% usually means the search was too
narrow rather than the list being unusually good.

This touches every row, so it is the highest-volume call in the
chain and has the least reasoning in it. Run it cheap.

---
name: list-quality-scorecard
description: Grade a list A to F before it enters a campaign. The
  gate. Nothing sends below B.
---
Eight dimensions, 1 to 10:
1 ICP fit
2 Title accuracy: decision makers or influencers
3 Affordability against the stated price
4 Data completeness
5 Deduplication, within the list and against past campaigns
6 Recency of activity
7 Reachability: how many are already 1st degree
8 Signal strength: how many carry a tier 1 or 2 trigger

A 9.0+ send today   B 7.5+ send   C 6.0+ fix the two lowest
D 4.5+ rebuild the list   F below rebuild the ICP, not the list

Below B, stop. Name the two lowest dimensions and the fix for each.

DIMENSION 7 changes the campaign shape rather than the quality.
Mostly 1st degree can be messaged directly. Mostly cold needs
connection requests first, which is a different daily budget.

DIMENSION 8 predicts reply rate better than any other. A B-grade
list where most rows carry a signal beats an A-grade list with none.

---
name: account-tiering
description: Split the graded list into tiers with different
  treatment. Use before any outreach.
---
TIER 1  Exact ICP match, high deal potential, observable trigger.
        One-to-one: custom research, personalised first touch,
        multi-threaded from the start.
TIER 2  ICP match, no current trigger. One-to-few: segment-level
        personalisation, standard sequence.
TIER 3  Adjacent fit. One-to-many: no research, template sequence,
        contact only when capacity allows.

Output the count per tier and the effort budget per tier.

If tier 1 is more than 20% of the list, the criteria are too loose.
Tier 1 should be small enough to research each account by hand.

---
name: engager-scorer
description: Score people who engaged with a post, so the send budget
  goes in the right order.
---
DEPTH x FIT, each 1 to 3, multiplied. Maximum 9.

DEPTH  1 reaction / 2 short comment / 3 substantive or repeat
FIT    1 adjacent / 2 right role wrong company / 3 exact match

6 to 9  Contact this week
3 to 5  Hold for a second signal
1 to 2  No outreach. Keep in the list, spend no send on it.

Sort descending before the sequence starts.

At 20 connection requests a day account-wide, a 400-row list is five
weeks of the entire budget. The ORDER decides the quarter.

The reason source 1 sits at the top of list-builder: Prosp imports commenters and likers directly from any post URL, including future reactions as they arrive. A post that keeps performing keeps feeding the list without anyone touching it.

And the reason engager-scorer exists at all is that importing is free while sending is capped. Import everyone, then use add tag nodes and a check data in column condition to route only the high scorers into the sending branch. The rest stay in the workspace for when you have an offer that fits them.

Signals and intent: 4 skills

---
name: signal-finder
description: Find a dated, verifiable reason to contact each lead now
  rather than later.
---
ONE signal per lead, ranked by proximity to a budget decision.

TIER 1, budget is already moving
- Hiring for the role your offer replaces or supports
- Raised in the last 90 days
- New leader in post, last 60 days
- Publicly named the exact problem, last 30 days

TIER 2, the problem is visible
- Site or content shows the specific gap
- Commented on a competitor's post
- Expanding into a new market or location
- Competitor of an existing customer

TIER 3, fit only, no observable trigger

Every signal verifiable and DATED. Record the date and the URL,
because it appears in the first message and they will check it.

No signal means write NONE. Never stretch an attribute into a
trigger. "Works at a SaaS company" is fit, not intent.

---
name: job-post-trigger
description: Build a list from companies hiring the role your offer
  replaces or supports. The strongest budget signal available.
---
Search job boards within the ICP filter.

Per company capture: the role, the posting date, the seniority, the
named hiring manager where visible, and the exact line in the post
that reveals the need.

WHY THIS IS TIER 1: a company posting for the role has budget
allocated and an unmet need at the same time. Those two rarely
coincide this visibly.

The quoted line goes in the opener verbatim. Paraphrasing it loses
the whole effect, because the point is that you read their posting.

Postings older than 45 days are stale. Either it is filled or the
budget moved. Mark them tier 3.

---
name: funding-trigger
description: Build a list from recent funding events.
---
Capture: round, amount, date, lead investor, and what they said they
would spend it on.

THE LAST FIELD is the one people skip and it is the useful one.
Funding is not a signal on its own; funding plus a stated intention
to hire, expand or build is.

WINDOW: 30 to 90 days post-announcement. Before 30 days they are
still fielding congratulations. After 90 the budget is allocated.

Never reference the amount in the opener. It reads as opportunism.
Reference what they said they would do with it.

---
name: intent-scorer
description: Combine signals into one intent score so the list can be
  ordered.
---
SCORE each lead:
Signal tier          1 to 3
Engagement depth     1 to 3
ICP fit              1 to 3
Recency of signal    1 to 3 (30 days = 3, 90 days = 1)

Sum, maximum 12.

10 to 12  Contact this week, tier 1 treatment
7 to 9    This month, standard sequence
4 to 6    Hold, watch for a second signal
Below 4   No outreach

RECENCY is weighted equally with fit deliberately. A perfect-fit
lead with a 90-day-old signal converts worse than an adjacent-fit
lead who posted about the problem last week.

Re-score weekly. Intent decays.

12 skills. Personalisation, qualification, and the discovery call.

The distinction that matters in stage 3: Claude writes the structure and the logic. The per-lead variation happens at send time, against live profile data.

Personalisation at scale: 4 skills

---
name: opener-writer
description: Write the first message from a signal.
---
RULES
- Under 300 characters. Longer reads as a template.
- Line one references the signal SPECIFICALLY. Not "saw your post"
  but the actual thing the post said.
- One ask, answerable in under ten words.
- Never mention the product in message one.
- No compliments. No "hope this finds you well".
- No em dashes.

STRUCTURE
Line 1  the signal, dated and specific
Line 2  the inference you drew from it
Line 3  the question

ONE PER TIER
Tier 1  lead with the signal. It is recent and they know it.
Tier 2  lead with the observable problem. There is no event.
Tier 3  lead with the segment-level pattern. Claim no
        personalisation you cannot back.

BANNED, burnt:
"I came across your profile"
"I help [vertical] with [service]"
"Are you open to a quick chat"
"Quick question for you"

---
name: merge-prompt-writer
description: Convert message copy into prompts that personalise per
  lead at send time. This is how personalisation scales.
---
SYNTAX, keep the two distinct:
  {{double curly}}   the platform's own profile data
  [square brackets]  instructions to the AI

Variables available: first name, last name, headline, biography, job
title, company, last post. Plus any custom variable imported from
the CSV, so the signal column from stage 6 is usable here.

RULES
- ONLY the opening line varies. Keep the ask identical across leads
  so results are comparable and you can diagnose what failed.
- State length explicitly, in characters.
- Say what to do when a variable is empty. Never allow "Hi ,".
- Ban the burnt openers inside the prompt itself.
- One instruction per bracket. Compound instructions get
  half-followed.

SHAPE
  Hi {{first name}},
  [One sentence referencing {{signal}}. Be specific about the actual
  detail, not the category. Under 90 characters. If {{signal}} is
  empty use {{headline}}. Never open with "I came across".]
  [Then this line unchanged:] Worth a quick look at how [X] handle
  this?

---
name: voice-note-scripter
description: Script a voice note. The format almost nobody uses.
---
Under 20 seconds. Roughly 50 words. Count them.

STRUCTURE
- Their name
- The ONE thing everyone on this list shares, because one recording
  goes to the whole segment
- The reason for reaching out, one sentence
- The ask, phrased so a yes is easy

WRITE FOR SPEECH
- Contractions throughout
- Sentences that run out of breath naturally
- One filler word. Real speech has them. Two sounds like acting.
- No lists. Nobody says "three things" out loud.

NEVER send alone. Always a written message immediately before or
after it.

Output the script, the word count, and the estimated seconds.

---
name: message-self-check
description: Check a drafted message before it sends. The last gate.
---
SEVEN CHECKS, five must pass:

[ ] Under 300 characters
[ ] One question only
[ ] References something specific and dated, not a category
[ ] No banned opener
[ ] No claim absent from the proof list
[ ] Register matches theirs in length and formality
[ ] No em dashes

Report pass or fail per check WITH the evidence. Do not summarise as
"looks good".

If fewer than five pass, rewrite rather than send. A message failing
three checks will not be rescued by the follow-up.

The merge prompts run inside Prosp, which is where the per-lead variation actually happens. Preview before sending: it runs sample outputs against real contacts in the campaign, which catches the prompt that reads fine on lead one and produces something odd on lead five.

On voice notes: across 1000+ campaigns they average around a 47% reply rate against roughly 8% for written messages, largely because under 1% of LinkedIn outreach uses them. Cloning needs a 30 second minimum recording, ideally of the actual script you will send.

Qualification and sales intelligence: 4 skills

---
name: methodology-implementer
description: Apply the team's chosen framework consistently to every
  opportunity.
---
Read which framework leadgen-context specifies. Do not substitute.

MEDDIC     Metrics, Economic buyer, Decision criteria, Decision
           process, Identify pain, Champion
MEDDPICC   The above plus Paper process and Competition
BANT       Budget, Authority, Need, Timeline
SPIN       Situation, Problem, Implication, Need-payoff

PER ELEMENT: what we know, the evidence, and confidence 1 to 10.
Anything below 6 is a gap, not a fact.

Then the two gaps that most change the forecast, and the question
that closes each.

NEVER fill an element by inference. "They probably have budget
because they are a Series B" is not a budget answer. Write UNKNOWN.

A deal with four UNKNOWNs is not a late-stage deal regardless of how
long it has been open.

---
name: disqualification-check
description: Actively look for reasons to kill a deal. Run at
  qualification and again before any proposal.
---
This skill exists because nobody else in the process is incentivised
to do it. A rep with thin pipeline will not disqualify.

CHECK
- Do they hit any disqualifier in context
- Is there an economic buyer identified, or only a champion
- Is there a compelling event with a date, or only interest
- Can they afford the entry price
- Is there an incumbent with a contract nobody has checked
- Has anything moved in the last 14 days

RETURN exactly one:
QUALIFIED    All checks pass. State the compelling event.
AT RISK      Named gaps, with the question that resolves each.
DISQUALIFY   The specific reason, and the honest message to send.

A clean DISQUALIFY is a SUCCESS. It returns send capacity, calendar
time and forecast accuracy.

Never soften a DISQUALIFY into AT RISK because the pipeline looks
thin. That is how a quarter gets missed twice.

---
name: committee-mapper
description: Map everyone who can say no. Use as soon as a second
  person appears in the thread.
---
FOUR ROLES. Every deal has all four whether you have found them or
not.

ECONOMIC BUYER      Owns the budget. Can say yes alone.
CHAMPION            Feels the problem daily. Cannot say yes alone.
BLOCKER             Whose remit the change touches. Can say no alone.
TECHNICAL EVALUATOR If the offer needs validation.

PER PERSON: name, title, LinkedIn URL, the role they play, current
relationship, and confidence in the role assignment.

UNKNOWN is a valid and important answer. A deal with an unidentified
economic buyer is single-threaded regardless of how many people are
on the thread.

THE BLOCKER is the role most often missed, because they are not in
the conversation until they kill it.

---
name: call-prep
description: Prepare a discovery call brief. Run the morning of, not
  the night before.
---
PULL: the signal, the thread, the CRM record, any enrichment.

ONE PAGE:

WHAT WE KNOW
Per framework element, what the record already contains, with the
source.

WHAT WE DO NOT KNOW, RANKED
The five gaps that would most change the recommendation. Ranked by
how much they change it. These become the questions.

THE FIVE QUESTIONS
One per gap. Open, short, answerable without preparation.
Never ask something the record already answers.

WHO ELSE
What to ask to surface other decision makers without making it
obvious you are asking.

LIKELY OBJECTIONS
Two, from the objections list in context. With the honest answer,
not a rebuttal.

DISQUALIFIERS
What would make this a bad deal. If you hear these, say so on the
call rather than progressing it.

Under one page. A brief you cannot read in three minutes will not be
read.

Discovery and objections: 4 skills

---
name: question-designer
description: Build discovery questions for a specific deal size and
  complexity. Before the call, not during.
---
Organise by TOPIC, never as a script. A script gets read; topics get
asked.

FOUR TOPICS:
1. Current state. What happens today, step by step.
2. The problem. What breaks, how often, who notices.
3. Implication. What it costs, and what happens if nothing changes.
4. Desired state. What good looks like, in their words.

RULES
- Open questions only. Anything answerable yes or no belongs in
  qualification, not discovery.
- One question at a time. Two gets you an answer to the easier one.
- Never ask something the research already answered.
- Never ask a question whose answer you would not act on.

STOP RULE
If you cannot state their problem in their own words at the end of
the call, discovery is not finished, regardless of how long it ran.

Output 12 to 15 questions across the four topics, and the three that
must get answered.

---
name: pain-quantifier
description: Attach a number to the problem, using their arithmetic.
---
A problem without a cost is a preference. A cost they calculated
themselves is a business case.

WALK IT THROUGH WITH THEM
1. How often does this happen? Per week, per month.
2. How many people are involved each time?
3. How long does it take them?
4. What is that in loaded cost, or in delayed revenue?
5. What does that annualise to?

Use THEIR numbers at every step. If they do not know one, ask for
their estimate and label it as an estimate in the output.

OUTPUT the arithmetic, shown, with the source of each input and
whether it was measured or estimated.

NEVER supply a number they did not. Never use an industry benchmark
in place of their figure. A business case built on your assumptions
collapses the first time their finance team checks it.

If the quantified cost is smaller than your price, SAY SO. Finding
out now is worth more than finding out at proposal.

---
name: objection-handler
description: Draft a response to a named objection.
---
Read the objections list in context first. If it is there, use the
agreed response rather than inventing one.

NAME IT PRECISELY before answering. "Not interested" is not an
objection, it is an absence of one. Ask what is behind it.

THREE MOVES
1. Agree with the part that is true. There always is one.
2. Add the thing they do not know. One fact, not three.
3. Ask a question that moves it forward or closes it out.

RULES
- One objection per message. Pick the real one.
- Never answer a price objection with features. Ask what it is
  being compared against.
- "We already use [competitor]" is information, not rejection. Ask
  what it does not do.
- If they say no twice, stop. Thank them and leave the door open.

Never invent a number, customer or comparison to answer an
objection. If the honest answer is "we are not a fit for that", say
it. That reply gets referrals.

---
name: next-step-closer
description: Decide whether to ask for the meeting, then draft it.
---
Decide IF before HOW.

ASK NOW WHEN
- They asked something needing more than 400 characters to answer
- They named a problem we solve
- They asked about price, timeline or implementation
- Two substantive messages have gone each way

DO NOT ASK YET WHEN
- They replied with one line
- They have not named a problem
- It is still the first exchange
Ask one more question that gets them to name the problem.

HOW
- Name the length and the agenda. "15 minutes, three questions, no
  deck."
- Offer the link AND two concrete times. Some book, some reply.
- Say what happens on the call, one line.
- Never "let me know what works". Decision fatigue kills bookings.

Under 350 characters including the link.

After sending, TAG the lead so the sequence does not follow up on
someone who already booked. That is the most avoidable bad
impression in the whole system.

15 skills. Pipeline diagnosis, CRM hygiene, the send layer, and the templates.

This is where the guide stops producing documents and starts reaching people.

Pipeline and conversion: 4 skills

---
name: pipeline-diagnostic
description: Diagnose which stage is broken. Weekly. Stops at the
  first failure rather than reporting everything.
---
Pull: requests sent, accepted, messages sent, replied, meetings
booked, deals closed.

Work the chain IN ORDER. Stop at the first failure.

1 ACCEPTANCE BELOW 15%
  The connection note, or the list is off-ICP. NOT the sequence.
  Do not touch the sequence.
2 ACCEPTANCE FINE, REPLIES BELOW 10%
  The list is fine. The first message is the problem.
3 REPLIES FINE, MEETINGS LOW
  The ask is mistimed, or the offer is wrong.
4 MEETINGS FINE, NOTHING CLOSING
  Not a lead gen problem. Price or offer fit.
5 ALL FINE, VOLUME LOW
  Not quality. Check the daily cap split across campaigns.

Output the failing stage, the evidence, and ONE change.

Never more than one change per week. Change three and a lift tells
you nothing about which one worked.

If figures are incomplete, name which stage cannot be assessed. A
diagnosis on partial data points at the wrong stage.

---
name: acceptance-diagnostic
description: Diagnose a low connection acceptance rate specifically.
  Use when pipeline-diagnostic stops at stage 1.
---
Below 15% is a problem. 30%+ is healthy.

Check in order, stop at the first hit:
1. Is a note attached at all? Sales Navigator is required to send
   one. Without it, requests go bare.
2. Does the note reference something specific and dated, or a
   category?
3. Does the note contain an ask? A request is not the place for one.
4. Is the list actually the ICP? Sample 20 rows by hand.
5. Is the profile optimised? Every request drives a profile visit,
   and a weak headline loses the accept there rather than in the
   note.

CHECK 5 is the one people miss, because the problem is not in the
message at all.

---
name: reply-diagnostic
description: Diagnose a low reply rate. Use when pipeline-diagnostic
  stops at stage 2.
---
Sample 20 sent messages and check each:
- Is the signal in line one specific, or a category?
- Is it dated?
- Is there exactly one question?
- Is it under 300 characters?
- Does it mention the product? It should not.
- Is the opener on the burnt list?

Report the count failing each check.

The most common failure by a distance is a signal that is really a
fit attribute. "I saw you work in SaaS" is not a signal and it reads
as a mail merge.

Second most common: two questions. Two gets you an answer to the
easier one and often neither.

---
name: win-loss-analysis
description: Run on both. The losses are worth more.
---
PER CLOSED DEAL, won or lost:
- The original signal and its tier
- Days from first touch to close
- Which objections came up
- What they chose instead, if lost
- Why, in their words

THE QUESTION for a loss is what they chose instead and why, not
whether price was a factor. Price is the reason people give when
they do not want to give the real one.

OUTPUT MONTHLY:
- Which signal tier produced the closed deals
- Which objection killed the most
- The gap between where deals were forecast to land and where they
  landed

The first line is the one that changes next month's targeting.

CRM hygiene and follow-up: 4 skills

---
name: crm-hygiene
description: Keep the record usable. Run weekly. Cheapest model.
---
CHECK AND FIX:
- Incomplete records: which required fields are empty, per record
- Field normalisation: job titles, company names, country codes
- Duplicates, within the CRM and against active campaigns
- Stale records: no activity in 90 days, flagged not deleted
- Orphaned contacts with no account
- Records with no lead source

OUTPUT the counts, the fixes applied, and anything needing a human
decision.

NEVER delete. Flag and report. A deleted record with history is a
loss you cannot undo, and stale is not the same as wrong.

---
name: lead-source-tagger
description: Set lead source so attribution survives to reporting.
---
THE RULE: lead source names the CAMPAIGN, never the channel.

"LinkedIn" tells you nothing in three months. "q3-saas-founders-
job-post-trigger" tells you which signal type produced the revenue.

SET, per lead:
- lead_source: the campaign name, in convention
- signal_type: which tier 1 or 2 trigger brought them in
- source_post: the post URL, where applicable
- first_touch_date
- tier: 1, 2 or 3 from account-tiering

THE SIGNAL_TYPE FIELD is what lets win-loss-analysis answer which
trigger produced closed deals. Without it, that question is
unanswerable and you keep running signals that do not convert.

---
name: follow-up-sequencer
description: Build the follow-up after a reply goes quiet.
---
Establish three things before writing:
1. The trigger that enrols someone
2. The EXIT event that removes them
3. The one action the sequence exists to cause

No exit event, no sequence. A sequence that keeps chasing someone
who already booked is worse than no sequence at all.

SHAPE
Day 3   One line. "Any questions on X?" No new information.
Day 7   One thing that was not in the last message. A reason to be
        in the inbox.
Day 14  The close-out. "Assuming this isn't a priority right now,
        which is fine. Want me to check back in Q[X]?"
Day 21  Mark cold. Stop.

THE DAY 14 MESSAGE outperforms the other two combined, because
permission to say no removes the pressure that was stopping them
replying.

Read the real event names from the platform. Never guess one.

---
name: warm-signal-tracker
description: Catch leads who re-engage after going quiet. The cheapest
  pipeline available.
---
SCAN weekly for anyone marked Contacted or Cold who has since:
- Viewed your profile
- Engaged with a post
- Changed job
- Appeared in a funding or hiring announcement

A job change is the strongest of these. They arrive with ninety days
to show a change and no loyalty to the incumbent, and you already
have a relationship.

OUTPUT the re-entry list with the new signal and its date.

Most sequences miss these entirely because the lead is already
marked Contacted and never re-enters. Route them into a fresh
sequence referencing the NEW signal, never the old thread.

The send layer: 4 skills

---
name: send-budget-splitter
description: Split the daily send budget across campaigns. Run before
  launching anything new.
---
RECOMMENDED LIMITS, account-wide not per campaign:
  Connection requests   20/day or 100/week
  Direct messages       ~100/week free, ~150 premium
  Profile views         80/day free, 150 premium
  Comments              60/day
  InMail                50/month on Sales Navigator

THE MISTAKE: three campaigns set to 20 each means the account
attempts 60 a day. That is how accounts get restricted, and it is
almost always the cause.

OUTPUT the split per campaign, weighted by tier. Tier 1 gets the
majority. Example: 10 + 5 + 5.

Connection request limits and message limits are SEPARATE buckets,
so both run at full allocation simultaneously.

Builder defaults are higher than the recommendations. Lower them
rather than accepting them.

---
name: sequence-builder
description: Turn copy into a node-by-node sequence spec ready to
  build.
---
Output a node list, not prose. Per node: action, delay before it,
exact copy, exit condition.

STANDARD SHAPE
1  Import from source
2  Condition: lead is 1st level
3  YES branch: message
4  NO branch: connection request, then message on acceptance
5  Wait 3 days, follow-up, different angle
6  Add tag by source and signal tier

RULES
- Four touches maximum. After that the answer is no.
- Reply stops the sequence for that lead, always.
- A connection request auto-detects acceptance over two weeks, so no
  wait node after one. This is the most common unnecessary node.
- Any voice note pairs with a written message, never alone.
- State the daily split against the ceiling.

FAIL CLOSED if the requested volume exceeds the ceiling. State the
ceiling and the required split rather than writing the sequence.

---
name: reply-classifier
description: Classify every inbound reply and route it. Cheapest
  model.
---
Exactly one category:

INTERESTED       Wants more, asks about the offer
TIMING           Interested, not now. Capture the date named.
OBJECTION        Price, fit, incumbent, capacity
WRONG_PERSON     Not their remit. Ask who owns it.
NOT_INTERESTED   Clear no. Thank them, stop, never pitch again.
AUTO_REPLY       Out of office. Reschedule to their return date.
ESCALATE         Anything below 8 confidence

Per reply: category, confidence 1 to 10, the sentence that decided
it, and the recommended next action.

Below 8 confidence, always ESCALATE. Do not guess at tone. Sarcasm,
brevity and politeness all read the same in text.

Never auto-send to NOT_INTERESTED. A human closes that loop.

---
name: account-health-check
description: Check the sending account weekly, before it breaks.
---
SEVEN CHECKS:
[ ] Account active, not parked. Idle 7+ days gets parked
    automatically and sends nothing.
[ ] Sends last week against the weekly allocation
[ ] Acceptance rate. Below 15% means fix the note before sending
    more.
[ ] Any restriction notice
[ ] 2FA still enabled
[ ] No manual use of the same profile in the extension browser
[ ] Duplicate leads across campaigns: should be zero

When LinkedIn caps an account, only connection requests pause.
Messages, profile visits and voice notes keep running, and it resets
in 2 to 3 days. Do not panic-pause everything.

This stage is the one that cannot run inside Claude. Prosp is the send layer: cloud-based so nothing depends on a session staying open, a free dedicated residential proxy per connected account, and activity paced under the platform's thresholds. Five minutes to set up, free trial, no card.

The sequence spec maps node for node. Actions available: connection request, message, voice note, InMail, message to open profile, comment on last post, reply comment, like last post, visit profile, wait X days, add tag. Conditions: has LinkedIn URL, lead is 1st level, opened message, lead is open profile, check data in column.

Lead states feed warm-signal-tracker directly: Not Contacted, In Campaign, Contacted, Not Accepted after 14 days with auto-withdraw, Replied which stops the campaign, Duplicate, Blacklist, Failed.

And the numbers pipeline-diagnostic needs come out of it natively: requests sent and accepted, messages sent, replies received, per campaign and per account, pushed to HubSpot or out through 12 webhook events and a REST API at prosp.ai/api/v1/leads.

Templates and checklists: 3 skills

icp-template.md — the six sections from icp-from-closed-won, with a field for the source of every attribute and an explicit UNKNOWN for anything unevidenced.

sequence-template.md — the node list shape: action, delay, exact copy, exit condition, per node. Plus the daily split and the ceiling it was checked against.

weekly-report-template.md — the diagnostic chain result stopping at the first failure, one metric per stage with its action, and exactly one recommended change. Banned: impressions as a headline, percentages without absolutes, any metric with no action attached.

The weekly loop

MONDAY    pipeline-diagnostic. One change, no more.
MONDAY    account-health-check, every sending account
MONDAY    warm-signal-tracker, re-entry list
TUESDAY   list-builder, then icp-filter-pass, then scorecard
TUESDAY   Below B, rebuild. Above B, signal-finder and intent-scorer
WEDNESDAY send-budget-splitter, then launch or top up
DAILY     reply-classifier over the inbox
DAILY     objection-handler and next-step-closer on what it routes
FRIDAY    crm-hygiene and lead-source-tagger
MONTHLY   win-loss-analysis
QUARTERLY icp-from-closed-won, re-derived

Three things to remember

1. Writing is free, sending is capped. Which 20 people you contact on Monday decides the quarter, not how many rows you built.
2. Filter before you enrich. Enriching a thousand rows to find six hundred were never going to buy is the most common way this gets expensive.
3. A clean disqualification is a success. It returns send capacity, calendar time and forecast accuracy, and nobody else in the process is incentivised to produce one.

40 skills build the pipeline. Prosp is the half that reaches people 💜

↳ Start a 14 Day Free Trial 💜 ↳ Watch Full Tutorial ▶️

15 skills across two stages. Stage 1 produces a tiered account list. Stage 2 turns it into booked meetings.

All fifteen read .agents/sales-context.md first.

Stage 1: ICP and Targeting, 7 skills

---
name: icp-from-closed-won
description: Derive an ICP from closed-won deals rather than
  assumption. Use before any targeting or list building.
---

Pull closed-won deals, last 12 months. Per deal: company size,
industry, tech stack if visible, buyer job title, deal size, days to
close, and the trigger that started it.

Output:
1. Three attributes correlating with fast closes
2. Three correlating with long or lost deals
3. Exact job titles that actually signed, not the ones we target
4. Size band with the highest win rate
5. The searchable filter string
6. The gap between the stated ICP and the actual one

Write back into .agents/sales-context.md.

Fewer than 10 closed-won deals means say so. Do not derive a pattern
from three customers and present it as one.

---
name: account-tiering
description: Split a target list into tiers with different treatment.
  Use after the ICP exists, before any outreach.
---

Three tiers, and the treatment differs per tier:

TIER 1  Exact ICP match, high deal size potential, observable
        trigger. One-to-one treatment: custom research, personalised
        first touch, multi-threaded from the start.
TIER 2  ICP match, no current trigger. One-to-few: segment-level
        personalisation, standard sequence.
TIER 3  Adjacent fit. One-to-many: no research, template sequence,
        contact only when capacity allows.

Output the count per tier and the effort budget per tier.

If tier 1 is more than 20% of the list, the criteria are too loose.
Tier 1 should be small enough to research each account by hand.

---
name: lead-scoring-model
description: Build a lead score from historical win and loss data
  rather than from opinion.
---

Read closed-won and closed-lost from the CRM.

For each candidate attribute, calculate the win rate of deals that
had it against deals that did not. Keep only attributes where the
difference is meaningful across at least 10 deals each side.

Output:
- The scoring attributes, with weights derived from the win rate
  difference
- The threshold above which a lead is sales-ready
- The attributes people assume matter that the data does not support

The last line is the useful one. Most scoring models encode
assumptions rather than evidence.

If the data will not support a model, say so and recommend a simple
ICP-fit binary instead of a false score.

---
name: inbound-lead-qualifier
description: Score an inbound lead by ICP fit, intent and urgency
  within minutes of arrival.
---

Three axes, 1 to 3 each. Multiply. Maximum 27.

FIT       Against the ICP in sales-context
INTENT    What they did. Pricing page, demo request, content
          download, newsletter signup.
URGENCY   Anything time-bound in what they said or did

18+   Route to sales today
9-17  Nurture, revisit in 30 days
Below Nurture only, no sales contact

Output the score, the reasoning per axis, and the routing.

A demo request from outside the ICP is a 3 on intent and a 1 on fit.
That is a 9 at best, and routing it to sales wastes a slot.

The remaining three:

• tam-sanity-check — estimates the addressable count and does the send maths. Under four weeks of sending means the ICP is too narrow for a campaign.
• disqualifier-writer — the explicit list of who this is not for, which is what the filters filter on
• decision-maker-mapper — economic buyer, champion, blocker, technical evaluator, with confidence stated per assignment. UNKNOWN rather than the nearest title.

Stage 2: Prospecting and Outreach, 8 skills

---
name: signal-based-targeting
description: Find a dated, verifiable reason to contact each account
  now rather than later.
---

One signal per account, ranked by proximity to a budget decision.

TIER 1, budget is already moving
- Hiring for the role our offer replaces or supports
- Raised in the last 90 days
- New leader in post, last 60 days
- Publicly named the exact problem, last 30 days

TIER 2, the problem is visible
- Site or content shows the specific gap
- Commented on a competitor's post
- Expanding into a new market or location
- Competitor of an existing customer

TIER 3, fit only, no observable trigger

Every signal verifiable and dated. Record the date and the URL,
because it appears in the first message and they will check.

A new leader in post is the strongest services signal there is. They
have ninety days to show a change and no loyalty to the incumbent.

No signal means write NONE. Never stretch an attribute into a
trigger.

---
name: cold-email-sequence
description: Write a multi-touch cold email sequence from a signal.
  Use after signal-based-targeting.
---

Five touches maximum, each a different angle.

STRUCTURE per email: subject under 45 characters, body under 120
words, one ask.

SEQUENCE SHAPE
Day 1   The signal, and one question about it
Day 3   A specific observation they have not seen
Day 7   Social proof, from sales-context proof only
Day 14  Three ideas, no ask
Day 21  The close-out. "Should I close the file?"

RULES
- Plain text. No images, no HTML, no signature block with six links.
- Never mention pricing in email one.
- One ask per email, answerable in under ten words.
- Every touch references something the previous did not.
- No em dashes.

The day 21 close-out outperforms the two before it combined, because
permission to say no removes the pressure that was stopping them
replying.

BANNED, burnt:
"I hope this email finds you well"
"I'm reaching out because"
"Just following up"
"Circling back"

---
name: cold-call-opener
description: Write the first 15 seconds of a cold call, plus
  gatekeeper and voicemail variants.
---

THE OPENER, 15 seconds maximum
- Name, company, and the reason in one sentence
- Permission question: "Did I catch you at a bad time?"
- Then the signal, specific and dated

The permission question is counterintuitive and it works, because it
gives them an easy out and most people do not take it.

GATEKEEPER
Be honest about who you are and why. Ask for the person by name and
role. Never claim a prior relationship you do not have.

VOICEMAIL, under 20 seconds
- Name, one sentence on the reason, a number, and stop
- No pitch. A voicemail that pitches gets deleted at the pitch.

OBJECTION AT THE DOOR
"Not interested" before you have said anything is a reflex, not an
objection. One question, then let them go.

Output the opener, the two variants, and the three most likely
responses with a next line for each.

---
name: handoff-detection
description: Decide when an automated or AI-assisted thread needs a
  human. Use on every inbound reply in a sequenced conversation.
---

HAND OFF IMMEDIATELY WHEN
- They ask something requiring a commitment on price, scope or
  timeline
- They mention a contract, procurement, legal or security review
- They express frustration, however mildly
- They reference a previous conversation you have no record of
- They ask a direct question about a competitor
- Confidence in the classification is below 8 out of 10

CONTINUE AUTOMATED WHEN
- They asked for information that exists and is uncontroversial
- They asked for a time or a link
- They replied out of office

Output: HANDOFF or CONTINUE, the trigger, and the confidence.

Default to HANDOFF. A human reading a thread that did not need them
costs two minutes. An automated reply to a procurement question costs
the deal.

The remaining four:

• prospect-research — fans out across site, content, hiring and reviews in parallel, then synthesises one brief. Never asserts a metric about their business.
• linkedin-outreach — connection requests, InMails and DM sequences. Under 300 characters, one ask, signal in line one.
• cadence-designer — decides when to email, call, message or send something physical, and in what order per tier
• outreach-diagnostic — works the chain in order and stops at the first failure. Reply rate below 10% with healthy deliverability means the first message, not the list.

Where the LinkedIn half runs

linkedin-outreach and cadence-designer produce a spec. The spec has to run somewhere, and it should not be a browser session on your own account.

Prosp runs that layer: cloud-based so nothing depends on a machine staying awake, a free dedicated residential proxy per connected account, and activity paced under the platform's thresholds. Setup is about five minutes, free trial, no card.

The constraint to design the cadence around: 20 connection requests a day and roughly 100 messages a week, account-wide rather than per campaign. Three campaigns at 20 each means 60 attempts a day and a restricted account.

That ceiling is why account-tiering exists. Tier 1 gets the sends, tier 3 gets whatever is left, and getting that order wrong wastes a quarter.

20 skills across three stages. Qualification decides whether the deal is real. Discovery finds the problem. Demo proves the fit.

Most pipeline problems are stage 3 problems that surfaced at stage 6, which is why disqualification is treated as a success here.

Stage 3: Qualification, 7 skills

---
name: sales-methodology-implementer
description: Apply the team's chosen framework consistently. Use on
  every opportunity at qualification.
---

Read which framework sales-context specifies. Do not substitute one.

MEDDIC     Metrics, Economic buyer, Decision criteria, Decision
           process, Identify pain, Champion
MEDDPICC   The above plus Paper process and Competition
BANT       Budget, Authority, Need, Timeline
SPIN       Situation, Problem, Implication, Need-payoff
CHALLENGER Teach, Tailor, Take control

PER ELEMENT output: what we know, the evidence, and confidence 1 to
10. Anything below 6 is a gap, not a fact.

Then the two gaps that most change the forecast, and the question
that closes each.

NEVER fill an element by inference. "They probably have budget
because they are a Series B" is not a budget answer. Write UNKNOWN.

A deal with four UNKNOWNs is not a late-stage deal regardless of how
long it has been open.

---
name: meddic-call-prep
description: Generate call prep from CRM and enrichment data before a
  qualification call.
---

Pull the account record, the contact record, and any enrichment.

Output one page:

WHAT WE KNOW
Per MEDDIC element, what the record already contains, with the source.

WHAT WE DO NOT KNOW, ranked
The five gaps that would most change the recommendation. Ranked by
how much they change it. These are the questions.

THE FIVE QUESTIONS
One per gap. Open, short, answerable without preparation.
Never ask something the record already answers. That signals nobody
read it.

WHO ELSE
What to ask to surface the other decision makers without making it
obvious you are asking.

LIKELY OBJECTIONS
Two, based on their size and sector, from the objections list in
sales-context. With the honest answer, not a rebuttal.

DISQUALIFIERS
What would make this a bad deal. If you hear these, say so on the
call rather than progressing it.

Under one page. A brief you cannot read in three minutes will not be
read.

---
name: disqualification-check
description: Actively look for reasons to kill a deal. Run at
  qualification and again before any proposal.
---

This skill exists because nobody else in the process is incentivised
to do it.

CHECK
- Do they hit any disqualifier in sales-context
- Is there an economic buyer identified, or just a champion
- Is there a compelling event with a date, or only interest
- Can they afford the entry price
- Is there an incumbent with a contract that has not been checked
- Has anything moved in the last 14 days

Output one of:
QUALIFIED       All checks pass. State the compelling event.
AT RISK         Named gaps, with the question that resolves each.
DISQUALIFY      The specific reason, and the honest message to send.

A clean DISQUALIFY is a success. It returns send capacity, calendar
time and forecast accuracy.

Never soften a DISQUALIFY into AT RISK because the pipeline looks
thin. That is how a quarter gets missed twice.

---
name: buying-committee-mapper
description: Map everyone who can say no. Use as soon as a second
  person appears in the thread.
---

FOUR ROLES, and every deal has all four whether you have found them
or not:

ECONOMIC BUYER     Owns the budget line. Can say yes alone.
CHAMPION           Feels the problem daily. Cannot say yes alone.
BLOCKER            Whose remit the change touches. Can say no alone.
TECHNICAL EVALUATOR If the offer needs validation.

PER PERSON: name, title, LinkedIn URL, the role they play, our
current relationship, and confidence in the role assignment.

UNKNOWN is a valid and important answer. A deal with an unidentified
economic buyer is single-threaded regardless of how many people are
on the thread.

Output the coverage gaps and one action per gap.

The blocker is the role most often missed, because they are not in
the conversation until they kill it.

The remaining three:

• bant-qualifier — the lighter framework for shorter cycles, with the same UNKNOWN discipline
• champion-identifier — tests whether your contact is actually a champion or just friendly. A champion will take a risk for you; a friendly contact will not.
• deal-review-framework — MEDDIC or BANT assessment with a risk score, run in pipeline review rather than by the rep on their own deal

Stage 4: Discovery, 7 skills

---
name: discovery-question-designer
description: Build discovery questions for a specific deal size and
  complexity. Use before the call, not during.
---

Organise by topic, never as a script. A script gets read; topics get
asked.

FOUR TOPICS, questions per topic:
1. Current state. What happens today, step by step.
2. The problem. What breaks, how often, who notices.
3. Implication. What it costs, and what happens if nothing changes.
4. Desired state. What good looks like, in their words.

RULES
- Open questions only. Anything answerable yes or no belongs in
  qualification, not discovery.
- One question at a time. Two gets you an answer to the easier one.
- Never ask something the research already answered.
- Never ask a question whose answer you would not act on.

STOP RULE
If you cannot state their problem in their own words at the end of
the call, discovery is not finished, regardless of how long the call
ran.

Output 12 to 15 questions across the four topics, and the three you
must get answered.

---
name: pain-quantifier
description: Attach a number to the problem, using their arithmetic.
  Use during or straight after discovery.
---

A problem without a cost is a preference. A cost they calculated
themselves is a business case.

WALK IT THROUGH WITH THEM
1. How often does this happen? Per week, per month.
2. How many people are involved each time?
3. How long does it take them?
4. What is that in loaded cost, or in delayed revenue?
5. What does that annualise to?

Use THEIR numbers at every step. If they do not know one, ask for
their estimate and label it as an estimate in the output.

OUTPUT
The arithmetic, shown, with the source of each input and whether it
was measured or estimated.

NEVER supply a number they did not. Never use an industry benchmark
in place of their figure. A business case built on your assumptions
collapses the first time their CFO checks it.

If the quantified cost is smaller than your price, say so. That is
not a deal, and finding out now is worth more than finding out at
proposal.

---
name: current-vs-future-state
description: Turn discovery into a two-column picture the buyer can
  circulate internally.
---

TWO COLUMNS, same rows.

PER ROW: the process step, what happens today, what happens after.

RULES
- Today's column uses their words and their steps. If you invented a
  step they did not describe, cut it.
- The after column contains only what we can actually deliver.
- Every row carries the same unit. If today is measured in days,
  after is measured in days.
- No row where the after column is aspirational rather than
  deliverable.

This document is the one the champion forwards to the economic buyer.
Write it so it survives being read by someone who was not on the
call.

End with the one row that matters most to them, named.

The remaining four:

• asking-effective-questions — the technique layer: open versus closed, the follow-up that gets the real answer, and the silence after
• active-listening-coach — reviews a transcript for talk ratio, interruptions, and questions asked versus statements made
• call-notes-extractor — pulls decisions, action items, open questions and quoted problems from a transcript. The verbatim quotes matter most, since every later document reads better with them.
• discovery-gap-check — run before booking the demo. If you cannot state their problem in their words, the demo will be a feature tour.

Stage 5: Demo and Evaluation, 6 skills

---
name: demo-personalizer
description: Build a demo around the buyer's stated problem rather
  than the product tour. Use after discovery, never before.
---

Read the discovery notes and the quantified pain.

STRUCTURE
1. Restate their problem in their words. Get agreement before
   showing anything.
2. Show the one thing that addresses it. Nothing else yet.
3. Pause. Ask whether that solves the thing they described.
4. Then the two adjacent capabilities that matter to their case.
5. Stop. Everything else is a follow-up call.

RULES
- Never demo a feature they did not raise a need for.
- Never demo in the order the product menu is in.
- Three capabilities maximum. A four-feature demo is a tour.
- If discovery did not produce a stated problem, do not demo. Book
  another discovery call instead.

Output the flow, the exact restatement line, and the two questions to
ask mid-demo.

A demo that shows everything proves nothing.

---
name: competitor-battlecard
description: Build a battlecard using the FIA framework. Use per
  named competitor, refreshed quarterly.
---

FIA, per competitor:

FACT     Something verifiable and dated about them. Not opinion.
IMPACT   What that means for this buyer specifically.
ACT      What we say, and when in the conversation to say it.

COVER
- Where they genuinely win. Name it honestly.
- Where we win, with the evidence
- The trap question that surfaces the difference without naming them
- What to say when the buyer raises them unprompted
- What never to say

RULES
- Every FACT needs a source and a date. A stale battlecard loses
  deals faster than no battlecard.
- Never characterise their team, their pricing motive or their
  roadmap.
- The "where they win" section is mandatory. A battlecard we win on
  every row reads as marketing and gets discounted entirely.

Output one card per competitor, and the single strongest
differentiator across all of them.

The remaining four:

• demo-script-builder — the reusable base script, with talking points mapped to buyer role rather than to feature
• technical-validation — gap analysis, feature matrix, and the honest list of what we do not do
• poc-scoper — success criteria agreed in writing before the POC starts, with a date. A POC with no exit criteria never ends.
• competitor-alternatives — handles "we are also looking at X" and "we already use X" as two different conversations, because they are

15 skills across two stages. Stage 6 closes or documents the loss. Stage 7 is where the revenue actually compounds and where most teams have nobody.

Stage 6: Proposal and Close, 8 skills

---
name: proposal-writer
description: Write a proposal from call notes. Same day as the call,
  always.
---

ASK, in one message, for anything missing:
1. The problem in their words. Quote them literally.
2. What they have already tried, and why it failed
3. Deliverables agreed on the call
4. Price to quote
5. Budget signal: named a figure / gave a range / dodged it / no
   budget yet
6. Anything that would kill this deal

FOUR SECTIONS

1 DIAGNOSIS
  Their problem in their own phrasing, not a paraphrase. Then the
  underlying cause using why the last attempt failed. Then the cost
  of leaving it, from pain-quantifier.

2 APPROACH
  Phased. Per phase: what we do, what they receive as an object,
  roughly when. Phase one addresses why the last attempt failed.
  One line naming what we do NOT do.

3 SCOPE AND INVESTMENT
  Branch on the budget signal:
  named a figure -> ONE option at that price. Three tiers signals
                    you were not listening.
  gave a range   -> TWO options, the quote and a 70% reduced scope.
                    Name what comes out.
  dodged it      -> THREE tiers at roughly 70%, 100%, 140%. The
                    tiers do the qualifying.
  no budget yet  -> ONE option plus a paid discovery at ~15%.
  State what the price excludes, payment terms, notice period.

4 WHAT COULD GO WRONG
  Two or three real risks, starting with the deal-killer they named.
  Each with what we do about it. "This takes time" is a disclaimer,
  not a risk.

RULES
- Timeline in week ranges, never dates. Dates go stale if it is not
  signed that week.
- Never invent a number, client name or result.
- Never discount unprompted.
- No em dashes.

FAIL CLOSED IF the problem was not captured verbatim, or no budget
signal was recorded. The section 3 branch cannot be chosen without it.

---
name: zopa-mapper
description: Map the zone of possible agreement before a negotiation.
  Use before the call, never during.
---

FOUR NUMBERS, established before you speak to them:

OUR WALK-AWAY   The point below which we decline. Set it now, in
                writing, before any pressure exists.
OUR TARGET      What we open at and why that is defensible.
THEIR CEILING   Estimated, with the evidence. Budget signals,
                comparable spend, what they said.
THEIR WALK-AWAY What they lose by not doing this, from
                pain-quantifier.

The ZOPA is between our walk-away and their ceiling. If those do not
overlap, there is no deal and the negotiation is theatre.

THEN, per concession we might make:
- What it costs us
- What we ask for in return. Never concede unilaterally.
- Whether it is reversible

TRADE LIST, ranked by what costs us least and reads as most valuable
to them: timeline, payment terms, scope, term length, support tier,
logo rights, case study participation.

Price is the last thing to move, and only for term length or
prepayment.

---
name: objection-handler
description: Draft a response to a specific objection. Use when the
  objection is named, not when the deal is quiet.
---

Read the objections list in sales-context first. If it is on the
list, use the agreed response rather than inventing one.

NAME IT PRECISELY before answering. "Not interested" is not an
objection, it is an absence of one. Ask what is behind it.

THREE MOVES
1. Agree with the part that is true. There always is one.
2. Add the thing they do not know. One fact, not three.
3. Ask a question that moves it forward or closes it out.

RULES
- One objection per message. Pick the real one.
- Never answer a price objection with features. Ask what it is being
  compared against.
- "We already use [competitor]" is information, not rejection. Ask
  what it does not do.
- If they say no twice, stop. Thank them and leave the door open.

Never invent a number, customer or comparison to answer an objection.
If the honest answer is "we are not a fit for that", say it. That
reply gets referrals; a stretched one gets a bad implementation.

---
name: multi-threading-planner
description: Build relationships beyond the champion. Use as soon as
  the deal passes qualification.
---

A single-threaded deal dies when one person changes job, and roughly
one in five will during a long cycle.

PER ROLE from buying-committee-mapper, output:
- Current relationship: none, aware, engaged, advocate
- The specific reason to contact them that serves them, not us
- The route in: champion introduction, direct, event, content
- What they need to hear that the champion does not

RULES
- Never go around the champion without telling them. Ask them to
  introduce you.
- Each thread needs its own reason to exist. "Touching base" burns
  the relationship you just opened.
- The economic buyer gets the business case, not the demo.
- The blocker gets the risk mitigation, not the benefits.

Output the coverage map and the next action per uncovered role.

A deal with three engaged threads forecasts differently from one with
one, and should be scored differently.

The remaining four:

• pricing-negotiation — the tactical layer on top of zopa-mapper. Never the first concession, never a discount without a trade.
• closing-plan — the mutual action plan with dates, working backwards from their compelling event. Shared with the buyer, not kept internal.
• deal-momentum-analyzer — scores velocity from engagement patterns. Days since last inbound contact is the single best stall predictor.
• win-loss-analysis — run on both. The losses are worth more, and the question is what they chose instead and why, not whether price was a factor.

Stage 7: Onboarding and Expansion, 7 skills

The stage most teams have nobody on, and the one where the revenue actually is.

---
name: onboarding-plan
description: Build the first 30 days from the promises made in the
  sale. Use the day the contract is signed.
---

Read the proposal and the discovery notes. The plan must deliver what
was sold, not what is easy to deliver.

STRUCTURE
Week 1  Access, data, and the single first outcome. Name it.
Week 2  The first real use by a real user, not a demo account
Week 3  The second use case from the proposal
Week 4  Review against the proposal's phase one, in writing

PER WEEK: what we do, what they do, and the named owner on each side.
A plan with no owner on their side does not happen.

DEFINE FIRST VALUE explicitly. One sentence: the moment they get
something they could not get before. Everything in week 1 serves it.

FLAG any promise in the proposal that onboarding cannot deliver in
phase one. Raise it now, internally, rather than at the week 4
review.

---
name: health-score-model
description: Build an account health score from signals that actually
  predict churn, not from activity.
---

Start from churned accounts, not from opinion. For each, look back 90
days before they left and find what was observably different.

CANDIDATE SIGNALS
- Usage trend, not usage level. A declining heavy user is at more
  risk than a stable light one.
- Number of active users versus licensed
- Champion still in post
- Support ticket sentiment, not volume
- Days since last inbound contact from them
- Whether the original use case is still being used

Keep only signals where churned and retained accounts differed
meaningfully across at least 10 accounts each side.

Output the score, the threshold for intervention, and the signals
people assume matter that the data does not support.

Champion departure is usually the strongest single predictor and the
one least often tracked.

---
name: expansion-revenue-finder
description: Find upsell and cross-sell in existing accounts. Run
  monthly across the book.
---

FOUR ROUTES, in order of how easy they are to close:

1 SEAT EXPANSION
  Licensed versus active users. A team at 100% utilisation is at
  capacity, not fully served.
2 USE CASE EXPANSION
  The second problem from the original discovery notes that never
  got addressed. It is already documented and already agreed.
3 DEPARTMENT EXPANSION
  An adjacent team with the same problem. The champion is the route.
4 TIER UPGRADE
  Only where they are hitting a real limit. Never pitch a tier for
  features they have not asked for.

PER OPPORTUNITY: the route, the evidence, the champion, and the
reason it serves them rather than us.

RULES
- Never pitch expansion to an account below the health threshold.
  Fix retention first.
- Route 2 is the highest-converting and the least used, because it
  requires reading the original discovery notes.
- An expansion conversation in month two is premature regardless of
  the opportunity.

The remaining four:

• first-value-tracker — measures time to first value against the definition set in onboarding. The single best leading indicator of renewal.
• qbr-builder — the review that reports against the proposal's promises rather than against activity. Every metric pairs with a decision.
• renewal-predictor — renewal likelihood from health signals, run 120 days out so there is time to act
• referral-request — asked at first value, not at renewal. The moment they get the outcome is the moment they will introduce you.

The two stages that decide the year

Stage 3 and stage 7, and both are underweighted in most teams.

Stage 3. disqualification-check exists because nobody else in the process is incentivised to kill a deal. A rep with a thin pipeline will not disqualify, and a manager reviewing 40 deals cannot. The skill is the only impartial party.

Stage 7. expansion-revenue-finder route 2 is the cheapest revenue available anywhere in the cycle: the second problem from the original discovery notes, already documented, already agreed, and nobody ever goes back for it.

If you install only ten of the fifty, take: icp-from-closed-won, signal-based-targeting, sales-methodology-implementer, disqualification-check, discovery-question-designer, pain-quantifier, demo-personalizer, proposal-writer, zopa-mapper, expansion-revenue-finder.

Feeding the top of the cycle

Fifty skills produce documents. None of them contacts anyone.

Stage 2's linkedin-outreach and cadence-designer output a spec, and Prosp runs it. Cloud-based so nothing depends on a session staying open, a free dedicated residential proxy per connected account, and activity paced under the platform's thresholds. Free trial, no card, about five minutes to set up.

The ceiling that should shape account-tiering: 20 connection requests a day and roughly 100 messages a week, account-wide rather than per campaign. That is what makes tier 1 needing to be small a maths problem rather than a preference.

For the reporting side, stages 2 and 6 both need data LinkedIn does not export usefully. Prosp pushes to HubSpot natively, plus 12 webhook events including Message Replied and Connection Accepted, and a REST API at prosp.ai/api/v1/leads, so outreach-diagnostic and deal-momentum-analyzer run on real figures.

50 skills run the cycle. Prosp fills the top of it 💜

↳ Start a 14 Day Free Trial 💜 ↳ Watch Full Tutorial ▶️