Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索需要联网github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

commercial-qualification商业资质

Agent Skill

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

总安装

235

周安装

10

GitHub Stars

1

下载量

82
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

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

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

命令行安装

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

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/piperubio/ai-agents --skill commercial-qualification

简介

commercial-qualification 使用 BANTTD 框架系统化筛选咨询商机,防止资源浪费在低潜力项目上。

  • 适用于销售管道管理,结合 PUDTF 预筛与六维度打分机制输出可量化的资格判定。
  • 支持专业级 discontinue(优雅淘汰),维护客户关系同时保障团队精力合理分配。
  • 打分结果仅供参考,最终决策需结合战略考量与高层意向,避免纯数据驱动误判真实需求。
  • 适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

SKILL.md

Commercial Qualification

Purpose

  • Systematically qualify consulting opportunities to ensure the pipeline contains real deals worth pursuing.
  • Prevent the team from wasting time on unwinnable or unprofitable deals.
  • Produce a defensible, data-backed qualification verdict using the BANTTD framework.
  • Execute graceful disqualifications (Professional Cut) to preserve relationships and pipeline hygiene.

Scope

  • This skill WILL:

- Run the P.U.D.T.F pre-filter to screen opportunities before full BANTTD scoring - Score opportunities across six dimensions (Budget, Authority, Need, Timeline, Tech-fit, Decision Date) - Produce a qualification scorecard with verdict and confidence level - Identify key risks, information gaps, and recommended next actions - Update pipeline state with qualification results - Flag deals below minimum engagement thresholds - Trigger re-qualification for stale opportunities (30+ days) - Execute the Professional Cut protocol for disqualified opportunities

  • This skill WILL NOT:

- Design solutions or estimate effort (that is solution-design) - Conduct discovery meetings (that is commercial-discovery) - Make final go/no-go business decisions — it provides the data for humans to decide

Inputs

  • qualification-meeting-notes.md — notes from the qualification meeting (primary evidence source for P.U.D.T.F and BANTTD scoring).
  • discovery-notes.md — from commercial-discovery (supplementary evidence when available).
  • prospect-profile.md — from commercial-prospecting (company and stakeholder context).
  • commercial-state.md — current pipeline context (stage, history, capacity).
  • user_input — additional intel, override context, or competitive intelligence.

Notes:

  • Meeting notes may be incomplete. Score conservatively and flag gaps.
  • Tolerate ambiguity — never invent evidence to fill scoring gaps.

Reference

  • qualification-meeting-guide.md — Full meeting script (30-40 min), P.U.D.T.F operational guide, budget calibration techniques, decision date extraction scripts, Professional Cut protocol, red/green flags, and Branch B transition script.

Step 1 — P.U.D.T.F Pre-Filter

Before running the full BANTTD scoring, apply the P.U.D.T.F pre-filter. This is a rapid in-meeting or post-meeting screen (5 dimensions, 1-5 each, total /30). It maps directionally to BANTTD dimensions and provides an early signal.

P.U.D.T.FMaps to BANTTDKey Question
P — ProblemaNeedIs there a specific, real, acknowledged problem?
U — UrgenciaTimelineIs there urgency or a compelling event driving action?
D — DecisorAuthorityAre we talking to someone with decision-making power or a clear path to it?
T — TicketBudgetIs there budget allocated or a realistic path to it?
F — FechaDecision DateIs there a defined decision date or timeline to act?

Pre-filter verdict:

P.U.D.T.F TotalSignalAction
22-30Pass — proceed to full BANTTD scoringSchedule Discovery meeting
16-21Borderline — gaps existIdentify which dimension(s) are weak. Determine if gaps can be closed before full scoring. Consider requesting a follow-up call to address specific gaps.
< 16Fail — execute Professional CutDo not invest further resources. Follow the Professional Cut protocol in the meeting guide.
Single-dimension hard block: A score of 1 on any P.U.D.T.F dimension (no problem, no decision maker access, no budget signal, no urgency, no timeline) is a hard red flag regardless of total score. Escalate to human judgment before proceeding.

For detailed scoring guides per dimension (1-5 scales with examples), see qualification-meeting-guide.md.


Step 2 — BANTTD Framework

Score each dimension 0-20. Total score range: 0-120.

B — Budget (0-20)

Is there money? Is it allocated? Is the range known and consistent with our engagement model?

A — Authority (0-20)

Do we have access to the economic buyer? Is the champion identified and actively engaged?

N — Need (0-20)

Is the pain real and urgent? Is the prospect actively looking for solutions? Is the impact quantified?

T — Timeline (0-20)

Is there a defined timeline? Is there an external deadline or event driving urgency?

T — Tech-fit (0-20)

Does our expertise match their needs? Can we deliver meaningful value without excessive subcontracting?

D — Decision Date (0-20)

Is there a specific date by which the prospect expects to make a decision? Is it tied to a business event? Is it near-term enough to drive action?

For detailed scoring rubrics with criteria at each 5-point increment, see references/scoring-models.md.


Step 3 — Verdict Logic

Total ScoreVerdictAction
84-120PursueAdvance to next step (see Pipeline Branch below). Invest full resources.
48-83NurtureDefine nurture plan with timeline. Re-qualify in 30-90 days.
0-47DisqualifyExecute Professional Cut. Archive with documented reasons.

Confidence Level: High / Medium / Low — based on information completeness across all dimensions.

Critical override: A single dimension at 0-5 should trigger concern regardless of total score (e.g., no budget = hard to pursue even if need is 20/20).


Disqualify / Nurture Flow

Disqualify — Professional Cut Protocol

When verdict is Disqualify, execute a Professional Cut within 24 hours. Do not ghost.

  1. Identify the primary disqualification reason (weak Budget, no Authority path, no real Need, no Timeline, poor Tech-fit, no Decision Date).
  2. Select the appropriate Professional Cut script from qualification-meeting-guide.md:

- Script 1: No Budget / Not the Right Time - Script 2: No Decision Maker Access - Script 3: Problem is Not Real or Not Urgent Enough - Script 4: Catch-All (multiple weak signals)

  1. Execute the cut in the final minutes of the meeting or via follow-up call (same day or next day at latest).
  2. Send the follow-up email within 24 hours using the template in the meeting guide.
  3. Archive the opportunity in commercial-state.md with stage closed_lost, documented disqualification reason, and a re-engage trigger date if applicable.

Principle: A respectful, honest disqualification preserves the relationship. The prospect may return when timing changes, or refer others. A ghosted prospect never does either.

Nurture — Holding Pattern

When verdict is Nurture:

  1. Define which dimensions need to improve and what would trigger re-qualification.
  2. Set a re-qualification date (30-60 days typical; 90 days maximum before escalating to Disqualify).
  3. Define a lightweight nurture action (1-2 touchpoints before re-qualification: article share, event invitation, check-in call).
  4. Update commercial-state.md with nurture plan, weak dimensions, and re-qualification trigger.

Pipeline Branch Recommendation

When verdict is Pursue, immediately determine which commercial branch to follow. This decision drives the next skill to invoke.

Branch A — Direct Implementation Proposal

Use when ALL of the following are true:

  • Scope can be defined with estimation accuracy +/- 20% or better.
  • Requirements are clear and bounded.
  • Client knows what they want to build (or discovery already clarified it).
  • Scope-changing assumptions are 2 or fewer.
  • Qualification confidence: High or Medium with low ambiguity.

Next step: invoke commercial-solution-designcommercial-proposal-writer.

Branch B — Discovery Service Proposal

Use when ANY of the following is true:

  • Scope cannot be reliably estimated (uncertainty > +/- 30%).
  • Client has vague requirements or multiple undecided directions.
  • Technical complexity requires investigation before architecture can be proposed.
  • Multiple systems, domains, or stakeholder groups need assessment before scoping.
  • Client has a problem but does not know what solution they need.
  • Qualification confidence: Low, or scope-changing assumptions > 3.

Next step: invoke commercial-discovery-proposal to create a paid Discovery engagement.

Note: The Discovery engagement is an independent commercial opportunity — it has its own proposal, negotiation, and close cycle. Implementation is a separate, subsequent opportunity that may or may not stay with us after Discovery closes.

For the Branch B transition script (how to explain Discovery to the prospect), see qualification-meeting-guide.md.

Branch Decision Table

SignalBranch ABranch B
Requirements clarityClear and boundedVague or multiple directions
Estimation confidence+/- 20% achievable+/- 30% or worse
Scope-changing assumptions<= 2> 3
Qualification confidenceHigh / MediumLow
Systems/domains to assess1-2, known3+, unknown
Client knows what to buildYesNo

Framework Comparison

  • BANT: Classic but misses tech-fit and decision date — both critical for consulting.
  • BANTT: Our prior framework — extended BANT with Tech-fit. Now superseded by BANTTD.
  • MEDDIC/MEDDPICC: Comprehensive but complex — BANTTD captures the essentials for consulting.
  • P.U.D.T.F: Operational in-meeting filter (1-5 scale, /30). Used as a pre-filter before BANTTD, not a replacement.
  • CHAMP: Good but less structured scoring.
  • ANUM: Budget-first approach may miss good nurture opportunities.

BANTTD extends BANTT with Decision Date to address a critical gap: a well-qualified deal with no clear decision date cannot be forecast reliably and tends to stall.


Outputs (contract)

1. New File: qualification-scorecard.md

Per opportunity, containing:

# Qualification Scorecard: {Company Name}

## Opportunity Summary
- **Opportunity ID**:
- **Company**:
- **Opportunity description**:
- **Qualification Date**: YYYY-MM-DD

## P.U.D.T.F Pre-Filter

| Dimension | Score (1-5) | Evidence |
|-----------|------------|----------|
| P — Problema   |            |          |
| U — Urgencia   |            |          |
| D — Decisor    |            |          |
| T — Ticket     |            |          |
| F — Fecha      |            |          |
| **Total**      | **/30**    |          |

**Pre-filter verdict**: Pass (>=22) | Borderline (16-21) | Fail (<16)

## Urgency Score (1-10)
- **Score**: X/10
- **Prospect's exact words**:
- **Compelling event (if any)**:

## BANTTD Scores

| Dimension | Score (0-20) | Evidence |
|-----------|-------------|----------|
| Budget        |             |          |
| Authority     |             |          |
| Need          |             |          |
| Timeline      |             |          |
| Tech-fit      |             |          |
| Decision Date |             |          |
| **Total**     | **X/120**   |          |

## Verdict: {PURSUE / NURTURE / DISQUALIFY}

**Confidence Level**: {High / Medium / Low}

### Justification
[2-3 sentences explaining the verdict based on scores and evidence]

### Key Risks
- [Risk 1]
- [Risk 2]

### Missing Information
- [What we still need to learn]

### Recommended Next Actions
- [ ] Action 1
- [ ] Action 2

## Deal Estimate
- **Size estimate**: $X - $Y
- **Probability**: X%

## Pipeline Branch
- **Recommended branch**: A (Direct Proposal) | B (Discovery Service)
- **Branch rationale**: [1-2 sentences explaining why this branch was selected]
- **Next skill to invoke**: `commercial-solution-design` | `commercial-discovery-proposal`

2. Updated: commercial-state.md

Update opportunity stage, probability, and notes based on qualification verdict.


Guardrails

  1. Always run the P.U.D.T.F pre-filter before the full BANTTD scoring.
  2. Every dimension score must include specific evidence or cite information gaps.
  3. Never default to "Pursue" without strong justification — bias toward honesty.
  4. If confidence is Low, recommend information-gathering actions before final verdict.
  5. A single dimension at 0-5 should trigger concern regardless of total score.
  6. Re-qualification should happen if opportunity has been stale for 30+ days.
  7. Compare qualification against team capacity — a qualified deal we cannot staff is still a problem.
  8. Flag deals that are qualified but below minimum engagement size.
  9. A Disqualify verdict must trigger a Professional Cut within 24 hours — never ghost.
  10. Record the prospect's exact words for urgency (1-10 scale) and decision date — these are the most reliable forecasting inputs.

Example

Scenario: Mid-market fintech (200 employees) wants to build a data platform to unify customer analytics across three product lines. Qualification meeting completed with VP Engineering.

P.U.D.T.F Pre-Filter:

DimensionScoreEvidence
P — Problema4Three siloed analytics systems causing duplicate reporting and 2-week lag on cross-product metrics.
U — Urgencia3Urgency score 7/10. "Board is asking for unified view before Q1 planning." No hard external deadline.
D — Decisor3VP Engineering is champion. CTO is economic buyer, aware and supportive but not yet engaged directly.
T — Ticket4"Low six figures approved for H2." Previous consulting spend at ~$150K confirmed.
F — Fecha3"Want something in place before Q1 planning" — soft deadline, approximately 4 months out.
Total17/30Pre-filter: Borderline — proceed with BANTTD scoring but flag Authority and Decision Date gaps.

BANTTD Scores:

DimensionScoreEvidence
Budget14/20VP mentioned "low six figures" budget approved for H2. No specific allocation yet. Previous consulting spend with a competitor at ~$150K.
Authority16/20VP Engineering is champion and budget holder. CTO (economic buyer) aware and supportive but not yet directly engaged.
Need18/20Three siloed analytics systems causing duplicate reporting, 2-week lag on cross-product metrics. Board asking for unified view. Actively evaluating solutions.
Timeline12/20"Want something in place before Q1 planning" — soft deadline, no regulatory or contractual driver.
Tech-fit15/20Data platform and analytics are core capabilities. Minor gap in their specific CDP tooling — would need 1-2 sprints of ramp-up.
Decision Date10/20"Before Q1 planning" implies ~4 months. No specific date given. No hard commitment.
Total85/120

Verdict: Pursue (85/120, Confidence: Medium)

  • Key risk: CTO not yet directly engaged — authority could stall at final approval.
  • Key risk: Decision date is soft — "before Q1 planning" could slip.
  • Missing: Specific budget figure, CTO meeting, specific decision date (day/week).
  • Next actions: Schedule CTO introduction meeting. Request specific decision date. Prepare capability deck on data platform work. Confirm budget range before solution-design.

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

34.7%
按下载量换算28

Claude

30.23%
按下载量换算25

Cursor

20.02%
按下载量换算16

Gemini CLI

9.82%
按下载量换算8

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

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

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills