t0ddc3by/claude-for-customer-success/deal-classification

Claude Code and agent skill by t0ddc3by/claude-for-customer-success

Trust tier 2
  • community
LLM review pending
Source check pending

Checking that the SKILL.md file is still in the repository.

Independently scores each open opportunity as Commit / Best Case / Pipeline using CRM activity data — without relying on rep self-reporting. Surfaces delta vs. rep's stated forecast category when classification disagrees by more than one tier. Triggers: 'deal classification', 'classify the pipeline', 'commit vs best case', 'independent forecast', 'override rep call'.

Install

npx vskill@latest install t0ddc3by/claude-for-customer-success/deal-classification

SKILL.md

[PROPOSED]

Deal Classification

Classifies open opportunities using CRM activity signals, not rep self-reporting. Disagrees with rep calls only when evidence is clear — flags the delta, doesn't override.

Reference: Confidence bands → ../../../shared/revops-domain-model.md §2 Config reads: primary_segment, avg_sales_cycle_days


Pre-flight

Read ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-customer-success/rev-ops/CLAUDE.md and ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-customer-success/company-profile.md.

If either is missing or contains [PLACEHOLDER] markers, stop and prompt for /rev-ops:cold-start-interview.

Note from config: primary_segment, avg_sales_cycle_days

G-code dependency: All G-code guardrails referenced in this skill (G1–G9) are defined in the CLAUDE.md config loaded above. If Pre-flight halts or config is missing, G-codes are undefined — do not proceed with partial config.


Use when

  • Deal needs to be classified by type (New ARR, Expansion, Renewal, Reactivation) for ARR reporting accuracy and pipeline routing
  • ARR classification is disputed or ambiguous for a specific opportunity
  • Closed-won deal classification needs verification before CS handoff

Do NOT use for

  • Deal health or risk scoring (use deal-health-scoring)
  • Revenue recognition decisions (classification is analytical input only)
  • Bulk ARR reporting (classification feeds reporting but does not produce it)

Typical Activation

"Classify this deal", "what type of ARR is [deal]", "is this new or expansion", "deal classification for [account]", "verify ARR classification"

Classification routing

Deal type determines pipeline ownership and tracking destination:

  • New ARR / Reactivation → Sales-owned pipeline; tracks to Sales new-logo forecast
  • Expansion → CS-owned pipeline; tracks to CS expansion pipeline and CS deal desk for commercial terms; routes to pipeline-coverage-analysis for CS expansion attainment
  • Renewal → CS-owned pipeline; tracks to CS renewal book of business and GRR monitoring

Classification is the routing mechanism. An Expansion or Renewal classification means CS leadership and CS ops own the downstream tracking — not Sales.


Reasoning Protocol

Before generating output, apply these primers:

  1. CLASSIFY: What type of deal classification request is this?
  • Single deal scoring (one opportunity, independent signal)
  • Portfolio classification sweep (rep / segment / all open pipeline)
  • Call validation (rep's stated category vs. model signal)
  • Closed-won verification before CS handoff
  1. CONSTRAINTS: What limits the solution space?
  2. Confirm activation — user wants independent deal scoring or call validation
  3. Check HubSpot for activity data — required for classification; declare fallback if absent
  4. Apply G5 — classification is analytical input; rep and manager own the judgment
  5. Apply G6 — surface data-as-of on all activity reads
  6. Do not present classification as override — present as independent signal
  1. EXPERT CHECK: What would a veteran RevOps analyst verify first?
  • Is HubSpot activity data fresh enough to score? Stale data produces misleading signals — declare data age before presenting classification.
  • Is the scoring model applied consistently across all deals in a sweep? Rep-specific exceptions undermine portfolio-level credibility.
  • Is the delta between rep call and model call surfaced clearly without editorializing? The analyst's job is to flag — rep and manager own the resolution.
  • Is the classification being used in a forecast context? If so, G1 forecast language qualification is required before the output leaves RevOps.
  1. ANTI-PATTERNS: Common mistakes to avoid:
  • Presenting model classification as a forecast override (G5 violation)
  • Surfacing classification output without data-as-of timestamp (G6 violation)
  • Running a portfolio sweep without declaring scope (segment, rep, date range)
  • Omitting the G1 forecast qualification when classification feeds a leadership or board view

After execution, verify:

  • G5 analytical input qualifier present on all outputs
  • G6 data-as-of label applied to all HubSpot reads
  • Delta column populated when rep call and model call diverge
  • Confidence: High when HubSpot is connected and activity data is current; Moderate when data is stale or connector is unavailable
  • Confidence: [High] when HubSpot is connected and activity data is current / [Medium] when data is stale or connector is unavailable / [Low] if all inputs are manual or unverified

Scoring Dimensions (20 points each, total 100)

DimensionCommit signalBest Case signalPipeline signal
Activity recencyContact in ≤7 daysContact in 8–21 daysNo contact >21 days
Stakeholder coverageEB + Champion + TC all engaged2 of 3 engaged1 or fewer engaged
Stage progression rateOn or ahead of historical avg0–25% behind avg>25% behind avg
Competitive signalNo active competitor / counter-play loggedCompetitor mentioned, response loggedCompetitor active, no response
Rep forecast accuracyRep's trailing commit accuracy ≥70%50–70%<50%

Classification:

  • 80–100 → Commit
  • 55–79 → Best Case
  • <55 → Pipeline

Output

DEAL CLASSIFICATION — [Rep / Segment / All]
[HubSpot ✓ live — as of YYYY-MM-DD] [Confidence: High/Moderate]
Deal ACV Rep Call Model Call Delta Primary signal
[Account A] $XXXk Commit Commit — Activity current, EB engaged
[Account B] $XXXk Commit Best Case ▼1 No EB contact in 18 days
[Account C] $XXXk Best Case Pipeline ▼1 Stage stalled 3x avg; no TC
Agreements: [N] deals (XX%)
Δ−1 (one tier down): [N] deals (XX%)
Δ−2 (two tiers down): [N] deals (XX%)
Adjusted pipeline summary (model-based):
Commit: $XXXk (vs. $XXXk rep-reported)
Best Case: $XXXk
Pipeline: $XXXk
[DRAFT — RevOps internal] [Confidence: High/Moderate]
[G5: This is an analytical input. Rep and manager own the forecast call.]

Reference Files

FilePurpose
references/reasoning-blueprint.mdProblem classification taxonomy, domain heuristics, common failure modes, and expert judgment patterns for this skill

Security & Permissions

Network access: None direct — all external data access is mediated by host-provided MCP connector tools (HubSpot, CS platform, Slack, Linear). This skill makes no direct outbound HTTP calls. Filesystem scope: None — this skill does not read or write local files. All data is provided at runtime via parameters or MCP connector responses. Subprocess execution: None. Dynamic code execution: None — pseudocode in this skill represents the logic contract and is not executed at runtime. Data sensitivity: Inputs may contain confidential deal and pipeline data. Handle with RevOps-level confidentiality.

Trust & Verification

Input trust model: All user-provided parameters are treated as untrusted at intake. Numeric inputs are validated for plausible range before use in calculations. String inputs are not evaluated as code. Output trust model: All outputs are proposals or analytical inputs — no outputs constitute approved decisions, revenue commitments, or system actions without explicit human confirmation. Connector data: Data retrieved via MCP connectors is treated as read-only observed state. Timestamps and data-as-of labels are applied to all connector-sourced values per G6. Write-tier confirmation: Any proposed write to HubSpot, Linear, or Slack is surfaced as a draft requiring explicit user confirmation before execution.

Guardrails

  • G5: Always include: "This classification is an analytical input based on CRM

signals. The rep and their manager own the forecast judgment."

  • G6: Data-as-of timestamp required
  • G1: If summary is used in a forecast context, apply forecast language qualification

Security

  • Security scanPassed, 100 of 100Pattern checks on the skill's files.
  • Model reviewNot runA model review is scheduled for the next rescan.

Quality evaluation

  • Task evaluationNot runNo evaluation yet. Run one in Skill Studio.

Source

Popularity

Repository stars
62
Repository forks
21
7-day trend score
21

Stars and forks are for the whole GitHub repository, not this skill alone. Not refreshed yet.

Works with

Any agent vskill installs to: 56 targets in all. These 39 have a page on this site.

  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • GitHub Copilot
  • Windsurf
  • Codex
  • Gemini CLI
  • Cline
  • Amp
  • Roo Code
  • Goose
  • Continue
  • Kilo Code
  • Junie
  • Trae
  • OpenHands
  • Qwen Code
  • AI Agent
  • Tabnine Chat
  • Sourcegraph Cody
  • Amazon Q
  • Firebase Genkit
  • Sweep
  • Devin
  • Phind
  • Mentat
  • Claude Desktop
  • Aider
  • GPT Pilot
  • Plandex
  • bolt.new
  • v0
  • Replit Agent
  • Anse
  • TypingMind
  • BetterChatGPT
  • LibreChat
  • Warp AI
  • Pieces
  • Fig AI
Embed badge
vskill VERIFIED badge
[![vskill VERIFIED](https://verified-skill.com/api/v1/skills/t0ddc3by/claude-for-customer-success/deal-classification/badge)](https://verified-skill.com/skills/t0ddc3by/claude-for-customer-success/deal-classification)

Something wrong with this skill or its page? Tell us.