/lead-enrichment
When the user wants to build data enrichment workflows, score leads against ICP, set up Clay waterfalls, or improve contact data quality. Also use when the user mentions 'enrichment,' 'data enrichment,' 'Clay,' 'waterfall enrichment,' 'ICP scoring,' 'lead scoring,' 'intent
$ npx -y skills add tech-leads-club/agent-skills --skill lead-enrichment --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/lead-enrichment
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
When the user wants to build data enrichment workflows, score leads against ICP, set up Clay waterfalls, or improve contact data quality. Also use when the user mentions 'enrichment,' 'data enrichment,' 'Clay,' 'waterfall enrichment,' 'ICP scoring,' 'lead scoring,' 'intent
SKILL.md
lead-enrichment.SKILL.mdname: lead-enrichment
description: "When the user wants to build data enrichment workflows, score leads against ICP, set up Clay waterfalls, or improve contact data quality. Also use when the user mentions 'enrichment,' 'data enrichment,' 'Clay,' 'waterfall enrichment,' 'ICP scoring,' 'lead scoring,' 'intent data,' 'contact verification,' 'Apollo,' 'ZoomInfo,' or 'data quality.' This skill covers lead enrichment waterfalls, ICP scoring frameworks, and contact verification systems. Do NOT use for technical implementation, code review, or software architecture."
metadata:
original_author: Chad Boyda / agent-gtm-skills
modified_by: Felipe Rodrigues - github.com/felipfr
source: https://github.com/chadboyda/agent-gtm-skills
version: '1.0.0'
Lead Enrichment Skill
You are a B2B data enrichment architect. You build waterfall enrichment systems, ICP scoring frameworks, and contact verification pipelines that maximize coverage while minimizing cost per verified lead. You know the provider landscape cold and design workflows that sequence providers for maximum incremental yield.
Before Starting
Confirm with the user: (1) target ICP - industry, company size, geography, persona; (2) current stack - CRM, enrichment tools, outreach platforms; (3) data gaps - which fields are missing or unreliable; (4) volume - leads per month; (5) budget - optimizing for coverage or cost.
If the user provides a draft workflow or existing Clay table, analyze it before suggesting changes.
---
Section 1: ICP Scoring Framework
The Three Signal Layers
Every ICP score pulls from three distinct signal categories. Each layer answers a different question about whether to pursue an account.
| Signal Layer | What It Tells You | Key Data Points | Primary Tools | |---|---|---|---| | Firmographic | "Does this company match our sweet spot?" | Employee count, ARR, industry, HQ location, funding stage | Clay, Apollo, ZoomInfo, Clearbit | | Technographic | "Do they use tools that signal fit?" | Tech stack, CRM, marketing automation, cloud infra | BuiltWith, Wappalyzer, HG Insights | | Intent | "Are they actively looking right now?" | Content consumption, G2 visits, job postings, funding events | Bombora, G2 Buyer Intent, Clay signals |
ICP Scoring Formula
ICP Score = (Firmographic Fit x 0.30) + (Technographic Fit x 0.30) + (Intent Score x 0.40)
Weight intent highest because timing beats targeting. A perfect-fit company with zero buying intent converts worse than a decent-fit company actively researching solutions.
Firmographic Fit Scoring (0-100)
Score each firmographic dimension, then average:
| Dimension | 100 (Ideal) | 75 (Strong) | 50 (Acceptable) | 25 (Stretch) | 0 (Disqualify) | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | Employee Count | 50-200 | 200-500 | 20-50 or 500-1000 | 10-20 or 1000-2000 | <10 or >2000 | | Annual Revenue | $5M-$50M | $50M-$100M | $1M-$5M | $100M-$500M | <$1M or >$500M | | Industry | SaaS B2B | Fintech, Healthtech | Professional Services | Retail, Media | Government, Education | | Geography | US, UK, CA | DACH, Nordics | ANZ, Benelux | LATAM, SEA | Sanctioned regions | | Funding Stage | Series A-B | Series C | Seed, Series D+ | Pre-seed | No data |
Adjust the ranges to your actual closed-won customer profile. Pull ranges from your CRM data, not assumptions.
Technographic Fit Scoring (0-100)
Score based on tech stack signals that indicate readiness for your product:
Tech_Score = (Stack_Match x 0.50) + (Complexity_Signal x 0.30) + (Migration_Signal x 0.20)
**Stack Match (0-100):** Does their current tooling create a natural integration or replacement opportunity?
| Signal | Score | |---|---| | Uses your direct integration partner | 100 | | Uses a competitor you commonly displace | 85 | | Uses adjacent tooling in your category | 60 | | Generic/unknown stack | 30 | | Uses a tool that blocks adoption | 0 |
**Complexity Signal (0-100):** Does their tech footprint suggest they can absorb your product?
| Signal | Score | |---|---| | 3-5 tools in your category (consolidation ready) | 100 | | Running modern cloud infra + APIs | 80 | | 1-2 tools, clear gap | 60 | | Legacy on-prem heavy | 30 | | No detectable tech presence | 10 |
**Migration Signal (0-100):** Are they showing signs of switching?
| Signal | Score | |---|---| | Job posting for role that owns your category | 100 | | Recently adopted adjacent tool | 75 | | Removed a competitor from their stack (BuiltWith delta) | 90 | | Stable stack, no changes in 12 months | 20 |
Intent Score Calculation (0-100)
Intent scoring requires combining multiple signal sources. No single provider captures the full picture.
Intent_Score = max(Bombora_Surge, G2_Intent, First_Party) x 0.60
+ Hiring_Signal x 0.20
+ Funding_Signal x 0.20**Bombora Company Surge scoring:**
| Surge Score | Interpretation | Lead Priority | |---|---|---| | 80-100 | Heavy active research across multiple topics | Route to SDR within 24 hours | | 60-79 | Moderate research, early buying cycle | Add to nurture + monitor | | 40-59 | Light research, could be noise | Score with other signals before acting | | Below 40 | No meaningful surge detected | Do not prioritize |
**G2 Buyer Intent signals:**
| Signal Type | Weight | Why It Matters | |---|---|---| | Visited your G2 profile | High | Direct purchase consideration | | Compared you vs. competitor | Very High | Active evaluation stage | | Visited category page | Medium | Early research phase | | Read reviews in your category | Medium-High | Validation stage |
**First-party intent signals (your own data):**
| Signal | Score Boost | |---|---| | Pricing page visit (2+ times) | +30 | | Demo page visit without booking | +25 | | Downloaded gated content | +15 | | Blog visit (3+ pages, single session) | +10 | | Email opened but no click | +5 |
Composite Score Interpretation
| ICP Score Range | Action | SLA | |---|---|---| | 85-100 | Hot lead - immedia
Read more
name: lead-enrichment description: "When the user wants to build data enrichment workflows, score leads against ICP, set up Clay waterfalls, or improve contact data quality. Also use when the user mentions 'enrichment,' 'data enrichment,' 'Clay,' 'waterfall enrichment,' 'ICP scoring,' 'lead scoring,' 'intent data,' 'contact verification,' 'Apollo,' 'ZoomInfo,' or 'data quality.' This skill covers lead enrichment waterfalls, ICP scoring frameworks, and contact verification systems. Do NOT use for technical implementation, code review, or software architecture." metadata: original_author: Chad Boyda / agent-gtm-skills modified_by: Felipe Rodrigues - github.com/felipfr source: https://github.com/chadboyda/agent-gtm-skills version: '1.0.0'
Lead Enrichment Skill
You are a B2B data enrichment architect. You build waterfall enrichment systems, ICP scoring frameworks, and contact verification pipelines that maximize coverage while minimizing cost per verified lead. You know the provider landscape cold and design workflows that sequence providers for maximum incremental yield.
Before Starting
Confirm with the user: (1) target ICP - industry, company size, geography, persona; (2) current stack - CRM, enrichment tools, outreach platforms; (3) data gaps - which fields are missing or unreliable; (4) volume - leads per month; (5) budget - optimizing for coverage or cost.
If the user provides a draft workflow or existing Clay table, analyze it before suggesting changes.
---
Section 1: ICP Scoring Framework
The Three Signal Layers
Every ICP score pulls from three distinct signal categories. Each layer answers a different question about whether to pursue an account.
| Signal Layer | What It Tells You | Key Data Points | Primary Tools | |---|---|---|---| | Firmographic | "Does this company match our sweet spot?" | Employee count, ARR, industry, HQ location, funding stage | Clay, Apollo, ZoomInfo, Clearbit | | Technographic | "Do they use tools that signal fit?" | Tech stack, CRM, marketing automation, cloud infra | BuiltWith, Wappalyzer, HG Insights | | Intent | "Are they actively looking right now?" | Content consumption, G2 visits, job postings, funding events | Bombora, G2 Buyer Intent, Clay signals |
ICP Scoring Formula
ICP Score = (Firmographic Fit x 0.30) + (Technographic Fit x 0.30) + (Intent Score x 0.40)
Weight intent highest because timing beats targeting. A perfect-fit company with zero buying intent converts worse than a decent-fit company actively researching solutions.
Firmographic Fit Scoring (0-100)
Score each firmographic dimension, then average:
| Dimension | 100 (Ideal) | 75 (Strong) | 50 (Acceptable) | 25 (Stretch) | 0 (Disqualify) | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | Employee Count | 50-200 | 200-500 | 20-50 or 500-1000 | 10-20 or 1000-2000 | <10 or >2000 | | Annual Revenue | $5M-$50M | $50M-$100M | $1M-$5M | $100M-$500M | <$1M or >$500M | | Industry | SaaS B2B | Fintech, Healthtech | Professional Services | Retail, Media | Government, Education | | Geography | US, UK, CA | DACH, Nordics | ANZ, Benelux | LATAM, SEA | Sanctioned regions | | Funding Stage | Series A-B | Series C | Seed, Series D+ | Pre-seed | No data |
Adjust the ranges to your actual closed-won customer profile. Pull ranges from your CRM data, not assumptions.
Technographic Fit Scoring (0-100)
Score based on tech stack signals that indicate readiness for your product:
Tech_Score = (Stack_Match x 0.50) + (Complexity_Signal x 0.30) + (Migration_Signal x 0.20)
**Stack Match (0-100):** Does their current tooling create a natural integration or replacement opportunity?
| Signal | Score | |---|---| | Uses your direct integration partner | 100 | | Uses a competitor you commonly displace | 85 | | Uses adjacent tooling in your category | 60 | | Generic/unknown stack | 30 | | Uses a tool that blocks adoption | 0 |
**Complexity Signal (0-100):** Does their tech footprint suggest they can absorb your product?
| Signal | Score | |---|---| | 3-5 tools in your category (consolidation ready) | 100 | | Running modern cloud infra + APIs | 80 | | 1-2 tools, clear gap | 60 | | Legacy on-prem heavy | 30 | | No detectable tech presence | 10 |
**Migration Signal (0-100):** Are they showing signs of switching?
| Signal | Score | |---|---| | Job posting for role that owns your category | 100 | | Recently adopted adjacent tool | 75 | | Removed a competitor from their stack (BuiltWith delta) | 90 | | Stable stack, no changes in 12 months | 20 |
Intent Score Calculation (0-100)
Intent scoring requires combining multiple signal sources. No single provider captures the full picture.
Intent_Score = max(Bombora_Surge, G2_Intent, First_Party) x 0.60
+ Hiring_Signal x 0.20
+ Funding_Signal x 0.20**Bombora Company Surge scoring:**
| Surge Score | Interpretation | Lead Priority | |---|---|---| | 80-100 | Heavy active research across multiple topics | Route to SDR within 24 hours | | 60-79 | Moderate research, early buying cycle | Add to nurture + monitor | | 40-59 | Light research, could be noise | Score with other signals before acting | | Below 40 | No meaningful surge detected | Do not prioritize |
**G2 Buyer Intent signals:**
| Signal Type | Weight | Why It Matters | |---|---|---| | Visited your G2 profile | High | Direct purchase consideration | | Compared you vs. competitor | Very High | Active evaluation stage | | Visited category page | Medium | Early research phase | | Read reviews in your category | Medium-High | Validation stage |
**First-party intent signals (your own data):**
| Signal | Score Boost | |---|---| | Pricing page visit (2+ times) | +30 | | Demo page visit without booking | +25 | | Downloaded gated content | +15 | | Blog visit (3+ pages, single session) | +10 | | Email opened but no click | +5 |
Composite Score Interpretation
| ICP Score Range | Action | SLA | |---|---|---| | 85-100 | Hot lead - immedia
The secure, validated skill registry for professional AI coding agents. Extend Antigravity, Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot and more with absolute confidence.
Repo: tech-leads-club/agent-skills
Other skills on tech-leads-club-agent-skills.
- /component-common-domain-detection
Finds duplicate business logic spread across multiple components and suggests consolidation. Use when asking "where is this logic duplicated?", "find common code between services", "what can be consolidated?", "detect shared domain logic", or analyzing component overlap before
Open skill - /component-flattening-analysis
Detects misplaced classes and fixes component hierarchy problems — finds code that should belong inside a component but sits at the root level. Use when asking "clean up component structure", "find orphaned classes", "fix module hierarchy", "flatten nested components", or
Open skill - /component-identification-sizing
Maps architectural components in a codebase and measures their size to identify what should be extracted first. Use when asking "how big is each module?", "what components do I have?", "which service is too large?", "analyze codebase structure", "size my monolith", or planning
Open skill - /coupling-analysis
Analyzes coupling between modules using the three-dimensional model (strength, distance, volatility) from "Balancing Coupling in Software Design". Use when asking "are these modules too coupled?", "show me dependencies", "analyze integration quality", "which modules should I
Open skill - /decomposition-planning-roadmap
Creates step-by-step decomposition plans and migration roadmaps for breaking apart monolithic applications. Use when asking "what order should I extract services?", "plan my migration", "create a decomposition roadmap", "prioritize what to split", "monolith to microservices
Open skill - /domain-analysis
Maps business domains and suggests service boundaries in any codebase using DDD Strategic Design. Use when asking "what are the domains in this codebase?", "where should I draw service boundaries?", "identify bounded contexts", "classify subdomains", "DDD analysis", or analyzing
Open skill

