crm-hygiene-audit

name	crm-hygiene-audit
version	1.0.0
deployment_target	plugin
status	PROPOSED
description	Overall CRM health score plus rep-level hygiene scorecard across three dimensions: completeness, accuracy, and recency. Produces weekly hygiene report for RevOps review before sharing with Sales managers. Never writes to CRM — all corrections are proposals. Triggers: 'CRM hygiene', 'data quality', 'hygiene report', 'field completeness', 'CRM health score'.

[PROPOSED]

CRM Hygiene Audit

Three-dimension health score at portfolio and rep level. All corrections are proposals — requires Write-tier confirmation before any CRM edits.

Reference: Governance tiers → ../../../shared/revops-domain-model.md §9 Config reads: crm_system, primary_segment

---

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: crm_system, primary_segment

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

Routing: Use this skill when a point-in-time CRM health score is needed — for field completion rates over time use field-completion-monitoring; for contact/record age and enrichment staleness use data-decay-tracking.

• CRM data quality needs a structured audit across key pipeline fields
• Missing fields, stale close dates, or inactive deals need systematic identification
• Pre-forecast hygiene sweep required to improve forecast accuracy

Do NOT use for

• Stage entry/exit criteria validation (use stage-integrity-audit)
• Duplicate contact or company detection (use duplicate-detection)
• Field completion rate monitoring over time (use field-completion-monitoring)
• CS platform data quality — use the CS Ops plugin's data-quality-check skill (if the cs-ops plugin is installed, run /cs-ops:data-quality-check)

Typical Activation

"CRM hygiene audit", "audit the CRM", "hygiene sweep before forecast", "clean up the pipeline"

---

Reasoning Protocol

Before generating output, apply these primers:

1. CLASSIFY: What type of CRM hygiene request is this?

   • Full portfolio hygiene audit (all reps, all dimensions)
   • Pre-forecast hygiene sweep (current quarter pipeline only)
   • Rep-level scorecard (specific rep or team)
   • Single-dimension check (completeness, accuracy, or recency only)

2. CONSTRAINTS: What limits the solution space?

   1. Confirm activation — user requesting hygiene audit or data quality review
   2. Check HubSpot — full field scan required; declare scope limits if data is large
   3. Apply G6 — data-as-of on all field reads
   4. Apply governance Write-tier — no autonomous CRM edits; all corrections are proposals
   5. Confirm scope: full portfolio, current quarter pipeline, or specific rep

3. EXPERT CHECK: What would a veteran RevOps analyst verify first?

   • Is the scope confirmed before pulling data? Full portfolio scans on large CRMs may be slow or incomplete.
   • Is the Write-tier gate explicit in the output? Managers may act on scorecard data — corrections must be clearly labeled as proposals.
   • Are close date anomalies cross-referenced with stage? A past close date on a deal that hasn't moved stages is a different problem than one that has.
   • Is the data-as-of timestamp surfaced before the score? A score without a timestamp is meaningless for trend tracking.

4. ANTI-PATTERNS: Common mistakes to avoid:

   • Surfacing a health score without a data-as-of label (G6 violation)
   • Presenting rep scorecard without the Write-tier confirmation note
   • Running full portfolio scan without declaring scope limits when HubSpot data is large
   • Treating hygiene flags as autonomous correction triggers — all corrections are proposals

After execution, verify:

• G6 data-as-of label present on all HubSpot reads
• Write-tier confirmation note present on all correction proposals
• Rep scorecard labeled [DRAFT — for RevOps review before sharing with Sales managers]
• Confidence: High when HubSpot is connected and data is fresh; Moderate when any field group is estimated or connector data is stale
  • Confidence: [High] when HubSpot is connected and data is fresh / [Medium] when any field group is estimated or connector data is stale / [Low] if all inputs are manual or unverified

---

Three Dimensions

Completeness — Required fields populated at each stage gate (per field-completion-monitoring gate definitions)

Accuracy — Field values passing format and logic validation:

• Close dates not in the past on open deals
• Stage inconsistent with activity history
• ACV outside segment range (flag for review, not auto-correct)
• Contact email format invalid

Recency — Staleness signals:

• Last activity date >14 days on open deal (G6 threshold)
• Last contact update >90 days
• Last stage change >30 days on non-stale deal

---

Output

CRM HYGIENE AUDIT — [Scope] — [Date]
[HubSpot ✓ live — as of YYYY-MM-DD] [Confidence: High]

Overall health score: [N]/100  (vs. [N] prior week  ↑/↓)

Dimension breakdown:
  Completeness:  [N]/100  [N] deals with missing stage-gate fields
  Accuracy:      [N]/100  [N] deals with logic/format issues
  Recency:       [N]/100  [N] deals with stale activity (>14 days)

Rep scorecard:
Rep       Completeness   Accuracy   Recency   Overall
[Rep A]   92             88         85        88
[Rep B]   71             90         62        74  ⚠
[Rep C]   55             78         70        67  ⚠

Top 5 hygiene issues by revenue impact:
1. [Issue type] — [N] deals, $XXXk ACV — Action: [what to fix]
2. ...

[DRAFT — for RevOps review before sharing with Sales managers]
[Write-tier: CRM corrections require human confirmation before execution]

---

Reference Files

File	Purpose
references/reasoning-blueprint.md	Problem 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 customer, deal, and operational 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

• G6: Data-as-of required
• G9 (Write Protocol): No autonomous CRM edits
• G5: Rep scorecard shared with manager — manager owns the coaching response