BB sales-enablement
When the user wants to create sales collateral, pitch decks, one-pagers, objection handling docs, or demo scripts. Also use when the user mentions 'sales deck,' 'pitch deck,' 'one-pager,' 'leave-behind,' 'objection handling,' 'deal-specific ROI analysis,' 'demo script,' 'talk track,' 'sales playbook,' 'proposal template,' 'buyer persona card,' 'battle card,' 'battlecard,' 'competitive one-pager,' 'win-loss analysis,' 'why are we losing deals,' 'loss reasons,' 'how do I respond to this objection,' 'prospect just said,' 'help my sales team,' 'sales materials,' or 'what should I give my sales reps,' 'cold call script,' or 'voicemail script.' Use this for any document or asset that helps a sales team close deals. For public competitor comparison pages, see competitors. For running buyer interviews or churn research, see customer-research. For marketing website copy, see copywriting. For cold outreach emails, see cold-email. For the offer being sold (bonuses, guarantees, pricing structure), see offers.
When the user wants to create sales collateral, pitch decks, one-pagers, objection handling docs, or demo scripts.
As a process B 72/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, running it twice
How to improve
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/demo-scripts.md:216Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- Penetration testing cadence
Files scanned: 7. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 9): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 72/100
- 30Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 6 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 60Failures and branches. 2 branches
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4969 tokens
- 85Steps. 144 steps, 2 vague phrases
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low 17 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low No test case covers injection arriving through data
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Description length 1012: 120–800 characters recommended
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Structure: 53 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 144 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (6 of 6)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.