Account scoring
State: to-be-approved. Deploy-verified against a live workspace: not yet. Treat Done when
below as the acceptance test and review cargo-ai cdk plan before deploying. Make no outcome claim
for this skill until it is approved.
The outcome
Every account scored against your ICP, tiered, and written back to the CRM with the rationale,
so a rep can always see why an account is tier A. The criteria are not point weights in code: they
are the ICP markdown in your context repo, versioned in git and shared with every other agent. Edit
the ICP and accounts re-score against it as they come due.
Two failure modes worth knowing before you start. If the CRM properties do not exist, the run
looks successful and the scores land nowhere, which wastes the whole batch. And cargo_score plus
cargo_tier must be selected as columns on the accounts model, or the tier segments filter on a
column they cannot see.
Put it in your project
This folder is a worked example: real CDK resources written for some other company. The job
is to end up with the code your company would have written, in your project, and an agent does the
adapting. If the cargo-cdk skill is in your session it carries the long form of this; if not,
this is enough.
- Install it — the CLI does the copy. From inside the CDK project,
cargo-ai cdk add cookbook/account-scoring writes this example to infra/account-scoring/ and
this procedure to .claude/skills/account-scoring/. No project yet?
cargo-ai cdk init <dir> --cookbook account-scoring && cd <dir> && npm install does both; this
folder never ships a shell. If you are reading this from the project's .claude/skills/, the
install already happened — start at step 2. On a CLI too old to have add, copy this folder
in as a sibling of what is there by hand; everything below is unchanged.
- Reconcile it with what is already declared. For every model or connector this example
carries that the project already has (an accounts model keyed on website, a HubSpot connector,
an OpenAI connector), rewire the imports to the existing one and drop the copy. Two resources
with one slug is a collision at deploy. Append this folder's
.env needs to the project's
.env.example; never overwrite it.
- Adapt. Work the sections below in order: What should not change is what you argue back
about (say what breaks, then do it if they still want it); What you can change is what you
offer unprompted (nobody asks for a variant they do not know exists); What you will be asked
is the floor, and you derive before you ask. If you are asking more than about four questions
you have skipped lookups. Record what you changed and why under a
## Decisions section in
your copy of this file.
- Plan, then stop.
npm run check && cargo-ai cdk plan (check validates the resource tree
offline; the blank template ships it). Show the diff. Deploy only on an explicit yes:
cargo-ai cdk deploy. Never cdk init --force into a non-empty directory.
- Verify. Walk Done when line by line and report each with evidence. Deployed cleanly and
produced nothing is the normal failure.
What you will be asked
Derive before you ask. An input with a lookup is looked up, not asked. Only the ones marked
asked genuinely live in the operator's head.
| Input |
Kind |
How it is answered |
Why it matters |
icp (the repo's root context/) |
generated |
derived: If the workspace already has closed-won and closed-lost data, extract the industry, size, geography and stack that separate won from lost accounts and propose the ICP from it rather than asking cold. Write it to the knowledge layer at the repository root — context/icp/ in a scaffolded repo — which the project's own defineContext already syncs. This skill declares none: it is a per-workspace singleton, and a second one collides at deploy. |
The criteria ARE the prompt. There are no point weights in code, so a vague ICP produces vague scores and the disqualifiers are what cap a bad account at 20. |
languageModel (infra/agents/scorer.ts) |
value |
derived: whichever LLM connector is already authenticated in the workspace |
Scoring quality and per-account cost both live here. |
crmScoreProperties |
manual |
derived: read the CRM's account schema through the CRM connector and report which of the four are missing |
The play writes all four back. If they do not exist the run looks successful and the scores land nowhere, which is the failure mode that wastes a whole batch. |
tierThresholds (infra/segments/tiers.ts) |
value |
asked |
The agent emits A, B and C but the skill ships segments for A and C only. Tier B accounts land in no segment unless you add one. |
Checked before moving on, not after the deploy:
icp: the file names at least one disqualifier, not only fit signalscrmScoreProperties: all four exist, and cargo_score plus cargo_tier are selected as columns on the accounts model so the tier segments can filter on themtierThresholds: every tier the agent can emit is either covered by a segment or deliberately excluded
What you can change
The code is a worked example. These reshapes are expected, and the agent offers them rather than
waiting to be asked. Every one costs something; that is what makes it a variation and not the default.
| Variation |
When it is right |
How |
What it costs |
deterministic-scoring |
You need fixed cost and exact reproducibility, or an LLM judgement is not acceptable to your team |
Swap the agent call for the native scoring node, with criteria as {name, value, score} booleans in the workflow (infra/agents/scorer.ts, infra/plays/score-accounts.ts) |
The criteria move out of the ICP markdown and into code, so they stop being reviewable by non-engineers, and you lose the rationale entirely |
skip-crm-roundtrip |
You want the score on the model directly and do not need it visible in the CRM |
Write with the platform's native.modelUpsert({...}) in the workflow instead of going through the CRM connector (infra/plays/score-accounts.ts) |
Reps lose the score and rationale where they actually work. The native's input is untyped, so confirm the field shape on the first run |
no-crm-at-all |
You have no CRM, or you do not want to hand this skill a CRM credential |
Take skip-crm-roundtrip, then delete infra/connectors/hubspot.ts so no CRM connector is registered |
Every other CRM-dependent skill you install later brings a CRM connector of its own; reuse one |
What should not change
However far you adapt, these hold. Ask for one anyway and the agent tells you what breaks, then does
it if you still want it, and records why under ## Decisions in your copy of this file.
- The scorer looks the account up before judging it. (
infra/agents/scorer.ts) A score guessed from the domain name is unfalsifiable and the rationale cites nothing. The evaluator exists to fail exactly this, and a book scored that way is worse than an unscored one because people trust it.
- ICP disqualifiers cap the score, they are not just negative weight. (
infra/agents/scorer.ts) Without a cap, a disqualified account with many fit signals still scores high and reaches a rep. The disqualifiers are the half of an ICP that actually protects the team's time.
cargo_score and cargo_tier are selected as columns on the accounts model. (infra/segments/tiers.ts) The tier segments filter on a column they cannot see, so they come back empty while everything upstream reports success.- Every tier the scorer can emit is either covered by a segment or excluded on purpose. (
infra/segments/tiers.ts) The shipped segments cover A and C. The agent also emits B, so tier B accounts land nowhere and quietly disappear from the book.
Done when
- a test account run shows the agent's lookups in the trace, not a score guessed from the domain name
- the CRM record carries a score with a rationale citing real evidence and named ICP criteria
- the evaluator scores at least 0.8
- after the next model refresh the account appears in the matching tier segment
What it costs
One LLM call plus up to two Cargo database calls (matchBusiness,
enrichBusinessFirmographics) per account, on arrival and again on the weekly sweep of accounts
last scored three or more months ago. It scales with accounts in the model times re-scores, so a
TAM built by tam-building scores at that size. Score a sample before the book.
Composes into
routing-engine (territories and capacity over the scored book), rep-cockpit, ai-sdr.
1---2name: account-scoring3description: Keep every account scored and tiered against your written ICP by a deployed agent that re-scores as accounts arrive and as the ICP changes, writing the rationale back to the CRM. Triggers: "keep our accounts scored as they arrive", "re-score everything when the ICP changes", "which accounts should the team work first", "our scoring is a spreadsheet nobody trusts", "why is this account tier A", "stand up account tiering". Cargo CDK, defineAgent, cargo_score, cargo_tier, HubSpot, Salesforce, Attio. Skip when: someone hands you a list and wants it qualified once, which is cargo-gtm's job, not a deployed scorer's.4---56# Account scoring78**State: to-be-approved.** Deploy-verified against a live workspace: not yet. Treat `Done when`9below as the acceptance test and review `cargo-ai cdk plan` before deploying. Make no outcome claim10for this skill until it is approved.1112## The outcome1314Every account scored against your ICP, tiered, and written back to the CRM **with the rationale**,15so a rep can always see why an account is tier A. The criteria are not point weights in code: they16are the ICP markdown in your context repo, versioned in git and shared with every other agent. Edit17the ICP and accounts re-score against it as they come due.1819**Two failure modes worth knowing before you start.** If the CRM properties do not exist, the run20looks successful and the scores land nowhere, which wastes the whole batch. And `cargo_score` plus21`cargo_tier` must be selected as columns on the accounts model, or the tier segments filter on a22column they cannot see.2324## Put it in your project2526This folder is a **worked example**: real CDK resources written for some other company. The job27is to end up with the code your company would have written, in your project, and an agent does the28adapting. If the `cargo-cdk` skill is in your session it carries the long form of this; if not,29this is enough.30311. **Install it — the CLI does the copy.** From inside the CDK project,32 `cargo-ai cdk add cookbook/account-scoring` writes this example to `infra/account-scoring/` and33 this procedure to `.claude/skills/account-scoring/`. No project yet?34 `cargo-ai cdk init <dir> --cookbook account-scoring && cd <dir> && npm install` does both; this35 folder never ships a shell. **If you are reading this from the project's `.claude/skills/`, the36 install already happened — start at step 2.** On a CLI too old to have `add`, copy this folder37 in as a sibling of what is there by hand; everything below is unchanged.382. **Reconcile it with what is already declared.** For every model or connector this example39 carries that the project already has (an accounts model keyed on website, a HubSpot connector,40 an OpenAI connector), rewire the imports to the existing one and drop the copy. Two resources41 with one slug is a collision at deploy. Append this folder's `.env` needs to the project's42 `.env.example`; never overwrite it.433. **Adapt.** Work the sections below in order: _What should not change_ is what you argue back44 about (say what breaks, then do it if they still want it); _What you can change_ is what you45 offer unprompted (nobody asks for a variant they do not know exists); _What you will be asked_46 is the floor, and you derive before you ask. If you are asking more than about four questions47 you have skipped lookups. Record what you changed and why under a `## Decisions` section in48 your copy of this file.494. **Plan, then stop.** `npm run check && cargo-ai cdk plan` (`check` validates the resource tree50 offline; the blank template ships it). Show the diff. Deploy only on an explicit yes:51 `cargo-ai cdk deploy`. Never `cdk init --force` into a non-empty directory.525. **Verify.** Walk _Done when_ line by line and report each with evidence. Deployed cleanly and53 produced nothing is the normal failure.5455## What you will be asked5657**Derive before you ask.** An input with a lookup is looked up, not asked. Only the ones marked58_asked_ genuinely live in the operator's head.5960| Input | Kind | How it is answered | Why it matters |61| -------------------------------------------- | --------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |62| `icp` (the repo's root `context/`) | generated | **derived**: If the workspace already has closed-won and closed-lost data, extract the industry, size, geography and stack that separate won from lost accounts and propose the ICP from it rather than asking cold. Write it to the knowledge layer at the repository root — `context/icp/` in a scaffolded repo — which the project's own `defineContext` already syncs. This skill declares none: it is a per-workspace singleton, and a second one collides at deploy. | The criteria ARE the prompt. There are no point weights in code, so a vague ICP produces vague scores and the disqualifiers are what cap a bad account at 20. |63| `languageModel` (`infra/agents/scorer.ts`) | value | **derived**: whichever LLM connector is already authenticated in the workspace | Scoring quality and per-account cost both live here. |64| `crmScoreProperties` | manual | **derived**: read the CRM's account schema through the CRM connector and report which of the four are missing | The play writes all four back. If they do not exist the run looks successful and the scores land nowhere, which is the failure mode that wastes a whole batch. |65| `tierThresholds` (`infra/segments/tiers.ts`) | value | **asked** | The agent emits A, B and C but the skill ships segments for A and C only. Tier B accounts land in no segment unless you add one. |6667Checked before moving on, not after the deploy:6869- `icp`: the file names at least one disqualifier, not only fit signals70- `crmScoreProperties`: all four exist, and cargo_score plus cargo_tier are selected as columns on the accounts model so the tier segments can filter on them71- `tierThresholds`: every tier the agent can emit is either covered by a segment or deliberately excluded7273## What you can change7475The code is a worked example. These reshapes are expected, and the agent offers them rather than76waiting to be asked. Every one costs something; that is what makes it a variation and not the default.7778| Variation | When it is right | How | What it costs |79| ----------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |80| `deterministic-scoring` | You need fixed cost and exact reproducibility, or an LLM judgement is not acceptable to your team | Swap the agent call for the native `scoring` node, with criteria as {name, value, score} booleans in the workflow (`infra/agents/scorer.ts`, `infra/plays/score-accounts.ts`) | The criteria move out of the ICP markdown and into code, so they stop being reviewable by non-engineers, and you lose the rationale entirely |81| `skip-crm-roundtrip` | You want the score on the model directly and do not need it visible in the CRM | Write with the platform's `native.modelUpsert({...})` in the workflow instead of going through the CRM connector (`infra/plays/score-accounts.ts`) | Reps lose the score and rationale where they actually work. The native's input is untyped, so confirm the field shape on the first run |82| `no-crm-at-all` | You have no CRM, or you do not want to hand this skill a CRM credential | Take `skip-crm-roundtrip`, then delete `infra/connectors/hubspot.ts` so no CRM connector is registered | Every other CRM-dependent skill you install later brings a CRM connector of its own; reuse one |8384## What should not change8586However far you adapt, these hold. Ask for one anyway and the agent tells you what breaks, then does87it if you still want it, and records why under `## Decisions` in your copy of this file.8889- **The scorer looks the account up before judging it.** (`infra/agents/scorer.ts`) A score guessed from the domain name is unfalsifiable and the rationale cites nothing. The evaluator exists to fail exactly this, and a book scored that way is worse than an unscored one because people trust it.90- **ICP disqualifiers cap the score, they are not just negative weight.** (`infra/agents/scorer.ts`) Without a cap, a disqualified account with many fit signals still scores high and reaches a rep. The disqualifiers are the half of an ICP that actually protects the team's time.91- **`cargo_score` and `cargo_tier` are selected as columns on the accounts model.** (`infra/segments/tiers.ts`) The tier segments filter on a column they cannot see, so they come back empty while everything upstream reports success.92- **Every tier the scorer can emit is either covered by a segment or excluded on purpose.** (`infra/segments/tiers.ts`) The shipped segments cover A and C. The agent also emits B, so tier B accounts land nowhere and quietly disappear from the book.9394## Done when9596- a test account run shows the agent's lookups in the trace, not a score guessed from the domain name97- the CRM record carries a score with a rationale citing real evidence and named ICP criteria98- the evaluator scores at least 0.899- after the next model refresh the account appears in the matching tier segment100101## What it costs102103One LLM call plus up to two Cargo database calls (`matchBusiness`,104`enrichBusinessFirmographics`) per account, on arrival and again on the weekly sweep of accounts105last scored three or more months ago. It scales with accounts in the model times re-scores, so a106TAM built by `tam-building` scores at that size. Score a sample before the book.107108## Composes into109110`routing-engine` (territories and capacity over the scored book), `rep-cockpit`, `ai-sdr`.
getcargohq