Systems Lab

Agent skill

lead-prioritization

Rank leads by conversion probability using weighted scoring models.

dormantSelf-containedInstructions only1,846 words

Filed under Prospecting and list building.

From kenny589/gtm-flywheel · 15 skills · 63 · pushed 2026-02-17

What it does when it runs

Rank leads by conversion probability using weighted scoring models. Stack signals, fit scores, and engagement data to build a dynamic priority queue that tells your team exactly who to contact next.

Read from the skill and the 0 files bundled beside it. A skill’s own description is written to be selected by an agent, so it describes the job and not the dependencies.

Keys and connectors you must supply
None found.
Hosts it reaches
No third-party host appears in the skill or its bundled files.
Tool permissions it declares
No allowed-tools in the frontmatter. It only issues instructions, so there is nothing to bound.
Actions present in the files
None. Instructions only.

Ask about lead-prioritization

Opens your assistant with this page's verified links already in the prompt.

Is this safe to install?ClaudeChatGPT
Adapt it to my stackClaudeChatGPT
What else do I need for it to workClaudeChatGPT
Rather ask a human? Talk to Cheetah
git clone --depth 1 --filter=blob:none --sparse https://github.com/kenny589/gtm-flywheel.git /tmp/gtm-flywheel
git -C /tmp/gtm-flywheel sparse-checkout set "signal-scoring/lead-prioritization"
mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills/lead-prioritization
cp -R "/tmp/gtm-flywheel/signal-scoring/lead-prioritization/." ~/.claude/skills/lead-prioritization/

Picked up without a restart. A project skill of the same name is shadowed by your personal one. For one repository only, swap ~/.claude/skills for .claude/skills. Claude Code docs ↗

The folder is the same in every client that implements the format — 46 of them — so if yours is not above, only the destination changes.

Reproduced in full from kenny589/gtm-flywheel/blob/ba67446418663737a00274819dc2bf68c0da2c31/signal-scoring/lead-prioritization/SKILL.md, which is licensed MIT (repository). 1,846 words, 25 headings.

Lead Prioritization

When to Use

  • Processing a new lead list and need to decide who to contact first
  • Building a priority queue for SDR teams to work through daily
  • Designing lead scoring models for CRM or marketing automation
  • Optimizing campaign ROI by focusing outreach on highest-probability prospects

Framework

Why Prioritization Matters

Without prioritization, your team works leads in the order they were imported — alphabetically, randomly, or whoever the SDR happens to click on first. This guarantees that your best prospects get the same treatment as your worst ones.

With prioritization, your team contacts the highest-probability leads first, every day. The result: same effort, 2-3x more meetings.

Without prioritization:
100 emails/day × 3% reply rate = 3 replies/day (random quality)

With prioritization (best leads first):
100 emails/day × 8% reply rate (top leads) = 8 replies/day

The Lead Priority Score

A composite score that combines three dimensions:

Priority Score = (Fit Score × 0.30) + (Intent Score × 0.45) + (Engagement Score × 0.25)

Why intent is weighted highest: A perfectly-fit company with no intent is a cold target. A moderately-fit company with strong intent is likely in-market. Intent is the strongest predictor of near-term conversion.


Dimension 1: Fit Score (30% of total)

How well does this lead match your ICP? (Derived from your ICP Matrix)

ComponentMax PointsScoring
Company size match20Tier 1 = 20, Tier 2 = 14, Tier 3 = 8
Industry match15Primary = 15, Adjacent = 10, Tangential = 5
Revenue range match15In range = 15, Near range = 10, Far = 5
Persona title match20Exact match = 20, Close variant = 14, Adjacent = 8
Geography match10Primary market = 10, Secondary = 6, Tertiary = 3
Tech stack match10Uses partners/competitors = 10, Some overlap = 5, None = 0
Growth stage match10Ideal stage = 10, Adjacent = 6, Mismatch = 2

Total Fit Score: 0-100

Fit Score Tiers

ScoreFit LevelInterpretation
80-100ExcellentPerfect ICP match. Prioritize regardless of other scores.
60-79StrongGood fit. Proceed with outreach if intent or engagement present.
40-59ModerateAcceptable fit. Only pursue if intent signals are strong.
20-39WeakMarginal fit. Test in small batches only.
0-19No FitDisqualify. Do not contact.

Dimension 2: Intent Score (45% of total)

How likely is this lead to be in-market right now?

SignalMax PointsScoringDecay Rate
Competitor evaluation (G2, reviews)20Detected = 20-5/week
Hiring for target role15Active posting = 15, Recently filled = 8-3/week
Recent funding15< 30 days = 15, 30-90 days = 10, 90-180 = 5-2/month
Website visit (pricing/product pages)15Multiple visits = 15, Single = 8-5/week
Leadership change in target dept10< 60 days = 10, 60-120 days = 5-2/month
Content consumption (your content)10Multiple pieces = 10, Single = 5-3/week
Social signals (posts about pain)10Specific post = 10, Engagement = 5-5/week
Tech stack change5Detected = 5-1/month

Total Intent Score: 0-100

Critical concept: Signal Decay. Intent signals lose value over time. A funding round from last week is urgent. A funding round from 6 months ago is a fact, not a signal. Apply decay rates to keep your scoring model honest.

Intent Score Tiers

ScoreIntent LevelInterpretation
70-100Very HighMultiple strong signals. Contact immediately.
50-69HighClear buying indicators. Contact within the week.
30-49MediumSome signals present. Include in next campaign batch.
10-29LowMinimal intent detected. Monitor for changes.
0-9NoneNo intent signals. Do not prioritize.

Dimension 3: Engagement Score (25% of total)

How has this lead interacted with your outreach and content?

ActivityMax PointsScoring
Replied positively to previous outreach30Yes = 30
Replied "not now" (timing objection)20Yes = 20
Opened multiple emails103+ opens = 10, 1-2 = 5
Clicked links in email15Yes = 15
Connected on LinkedIn10Yes = 10
Engaged with LinkedIn content (like/comment)10Yes = 10
Attended webinar or event15Live = 15, On-demand = 8
Downloaded content (guide, report)10Yes = 10
Previous conversation (met at event, warm intro)20Yes = 20

Total Engagement Score: 0-100 (capped at 100 even if multiple activities exceed)

Note: For net-new leads with zero engagement history, the engagement score is 0, and the priority is determined entirely by fit + intent. This is expected — cold outbound starts with fit and intent. Engagement builds over time.


Computing the Final Priority Score

Priority Score = (Fit × 0.30) + (Intent × 0.45) + (Engagement × 0.25)
Maximum possible: 100

Priority Tiers

Priority ScoreTierLabelActionSLA
80-100P1HotImmediate multi-channel outreachContact within 24 hours
60-79P2WarmPriority email sequenceContact within 3 days
40-59P3ActiveStandard campaign inclusionContact within 1 week
20-39P4PassiveLow-priority or nurtureMonthly check-ins
0-19P5ColdDo not contact or archiveReview quarterly

The Daily Priority Queue

Transform your scoring model into a working system:

DAILY PRIORITY QUEUE

Morning Routine (9:00 AM):
1. Pull all leads with Priority Score > 60
2. Sort by score (highest first)
3. Check for new signals on top 20 leads
4. Re-score any lead with a new signal detected

Outreach Allocation:
├── P1 (Hot): 40% of daily capacity → personalized, multi-channel
├── P2 (Warm): 35% of daily capacity → signal-based email
├── P3 (Active): 25% of daily capacity → campaign sequences
└── P4-P5: Not in daily queue (automated nurture only)

End-of-Day Review:
- Update engagement scores based on replies/opens
- Move any newly-engaged leads up in priority
- Log new signals detected during outreach

Dynamic Re-Scoring

Lead priority is not static. Re-score when:

EventRe-Score Action
New intent signal detectedAdd points to Intent Score, recalculate
Lead replies (positive or "not now")Add points to Engagement Score
Signal ages past decay thresholdSubtract points from Intent Score
Company data changes (layoffs, funding)Recalculate Fit Score
Lead moves to nurture (no response after full sequence)Reset Engagement Score, halve Intent Score
New data enrichment completesRecalculate all three dimensions

Prioritization for Different Campaign Types

Campaign TypePriority Formula AdjustmentWhy
ABM (1-50 accounts)Fit × 0.40 + Intent × 0.40 + Engagement × 0.20Fit matters more — you've already hand-picked accounts
Trigger-basedFit × 0.20 + Intent × 0.60 + Engagement × 0.20Intent IS the campaign — weight it highest
Re-engagementFit × 0.20 + Intent × 0.30 + Engagement × 0.50Previous engagement is the strongest signal for re-engagement
Scaled outboundFit × 0.35 + Intent × 0.40 + Engagement × 0.25Balance fit and intent at scale

Common Prioritization Mistakes

MistakeWhy It's WrongFix
Prioritizing by company size onlyBig companies aren't better leads without intentUse the full scoring model
Treating all signals equallyA G2 research signal is 10x more valuable than a LinkedIn likeApply proper weighting
Never re-scoringA lead that was hot 3 months ago may be cold todayApply signal decay
Ignoring engagement historyA lead who replied "not now" 6 months ago is warmer than a net-new leadTrack and score engagement
Over-prioritizing large listsA 10,000-lead list with no scoring = random outreachScore before sending anything

Templates

Lead Scoring Model Template

# Lead Scoring Model: {{Company/Product Name}}
# Version: {{version}} | Updated: {{date}}

## Fit Score Components (30% weight)
| Component | Tier 1 (pts) | Tier 2 (pts) | Tier 3 (pts) |
|-----------|-------------|-------------|-------------|
| ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ |

## Intent Score Components (45% weight)
| Signal | Points | Decay Rate | Source |
|--------|--------|------------|--------|
| ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ |

## Engagement Score Components (25% weight)
| Activity | Points |
|----------|--------|
| ___ | ___ |

## Priority Tiers
| Tier | Score Range | Action | SLA |
|------|-----------|--------|-----|
| P1 | ___ | ___ | ___ |
| P2 | ___ | ___ | ___ |
| P3 | ___ | ___ | ___ |

Tips

  • Simplicity beats complexity. A 3-factor scoring model that your team actually uses beats a 15-factor model that lives in a spreadsheet nobody opens. Start simple, add complexity only when data shows it improves outcomes.
  • The best validation for your scoring model: run a correlation analysis between lead priority scores and actual close rates. If P1 leads aren't closing at 2-3x the rate of P3 leads, your model is wrong.
  • Signal decay is the most overlooked concept in lead scoring. Without it, your "hot leads" list fills up with stale data that was hot 6 months ago. Build decay into your model from day one.
  • Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. If you don't have intent data, skip that dimension and weight fit + engagement more heavily. Some prioritization always beats no prioritization.
  • Review and adjust your weights quarterly. As your product, market, and sales motion evolve, the relative importance of fit vs. intent vs. engagement shifts.

Progressive disclosure: load CRM-specific scoring implementation guides and automation workflows only when building scoring for a specific tool.

Other skills for the same job

Different authors, same problem. Matched on the words in the skill name, across every library in the catalogue except this one.

Need help setting it up?

This page tells you what lead-prioritization does and what it needs. Cheetah builds the agent setup it runs inside: data, CRM, sequencing and the guardrails.

Book a call →

The directory stays free. There is nothing gated behind this.