技能 pricing-diagnostic
📦
pricing-diagnostic
内容修订 r1 安全 ⚙️ 外部命令📁 文件系统访问
Diagnose Pricing Gaps Before Changing Prices
Pricing problems can come from weak demand evidence, misaligned billing units, or confusing tiers. This skill evaluates all three and recommends a focused next step.
支持: Claude Codex Code(CC)
使用我的智能体安装
将此请求复制给你的智能体，其中包含权威 Skill 页面和清单。
智能体请求
Review the Skillstore skill "pricing-diagnostic" from https://skillstore.io/skills/cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic/manifest. Verify the artifact. You may proceed after verification, subject to the environment's own policy.你的智能体仍应展示其计划，并按安全策略请求必要确认。
Agent 可读资源
当 AI Agent、爬虫或脚本需要干净上下文，而不是读取完整页面时，请使用这些链接。
测试它
正在使用“pricing-diagnostic”。 Illustrative case: research is absent, discounts exceed policy, billing aligns with value, and tested tiers are clear.
预期结果:
- Willingness to pay: low. Main gaps are missing research and discounts above policy.
- Value metric: high. The supplied billing evidence aligns charges with customer value.
- Packaging: high. Tested differentiation supports the existing tiers.
- Triage: willingness-to-pay discovery before raising prices. Suggested timeline: about four weeks.
正在使用“pricing-diagnostic”。 Illustrative case: recent segment research and billing alignment are strong, but 60% of buyers choose a confusing bottom tier.
预期结果:
- Willingness to pay: high. Recent segment evidence supports the review.
- Value metric: high. Charges scale with customer success.
- Packaging: low. Tier confusion and buyer concentration suggest a packaging problem.
- Triage: packaging rebuild rather than a price change. Suggested timeline: about three weeks.
安全审计
安全v1 • 2026/10/3 打开版本化报告
All 23 static findings are false positives in the reviewed SKILL.md. Backticks format Markdown, parent-relative paths name documentation, and the reconnaissance match concerns customer billing behavior. No evidence found of executable commands, credential collection, data exfiltration, or prompt injection; referenced dependencies were not reviewed.
1
已扫描文件
172
分析行数
0
复核项
0
已忽略误报
风险因素
⚙️ 外部命令 (17)
📁 文件系统访问 (5)
最新一次完成的静态与语义审计未检测到已确认的安全发现。这并不能证明该 Skill 没有副作用。
审计者: codex
分享与引用此报告
分享版本化评估报告、中性徽章、嵌入卡片和引用。Skillstore 只报告证据，不判断该 Skill 是否安全。
复制报告链接
https://skillstore.io/skills/cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic/audits/1?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_reportMarkdown 徽章
[](https://skillstore.io/skills/cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic?utm_source=security_passport_badge)HTML 徽章
<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>嵌入卡片
<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic.html" title="Skillstore Security Assessment" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" width="420" height="180"></iframe>学术引用 (APA · BibTeX · CFF)
APA 引用
cmj-hub. (2026). pricing-diagnostic security audit report (audit version 1) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic/audits/1BibTeX 引用
@techreport{cmj-hub-cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic-2026,
author = {cmj-hub},
title = {pricing-diagnostic security audit report (audit version 1)},
institution = {Skillstore},
year = {2026},
number = {1},
url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic/audits/1},
note = {Author version unspecified}
}CITATION.cff
cff-version: 1.2.0
message: "If you use this Skill, cite its author and this versioned security audit report."
title: "pricing-diagnostic security audit report (audit version 1)"
version: "unspecified"
type: report
authors:
- name: "cmj-hub"
date-released: "2026-10-03"
url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic/audits/1"
identifiers:
- type: other
value: "skillstore:cmj-hub-pricing-diagnostic:audit:1"
description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"
Skillstore 评分
评分依据 证据置信度: 中 55
架构
85
可维护性
87
内容
65
社区
83
规范符合性
你能构建什么
Evaluate a Proposed Price Increase
Separate missing willingness-to-pay evidence from genuine pricing opportunities before deciding whether to raise prices.
Review Billing Metric Alignment
Investigate whether high-value customers pay proportionately and whether the current billing unit limits expansion.
Prioritize Tier Packaging Changes
Compare tier clarity, feature placement, and buyer distribution to determine whether packaging needs attention before price levels.
试试这些提示
Start a Pricing Review
Diagnose my pricing using the attached tiers, billing metric, customer profiles, and discount policy. Identify missing evidence before scoring.
Investigate Discount Pressure
Review these segment close rates, discounts, and willingness-to-pay research. Score the three surfaces and explain whether more research should precede a price increase.
Compare Metric and Packaging Problems
Use these usage ratios, customer payment ratios, tier features, and buyer distributions. Distinguish billing misalignment from packaging problems and prioritize the gaps.
Prepare a Pricing Triage Report
Evaluate all supplied pricing evidence by customer profile. Explain each score, apply the triage matrix, name the next workflow, and estimate a timeline.
最佳实践
- Provide dated research and segment-level evidence alongside current tiers, billing units, customer profiles, and discount policy.
- Explain each score using supplied evidence and distinguish missing data from observed problems.
- Use the triage decision to prioritize investigation before implementing a material pricing change.
避免
- Inventing willingness-to-pay percentiles, close rates, or customer usage data to complete the report.
- Treating qualitative surface scores as precise forecasts of revenue or customer response.
- Raising prices when the evidence indicates a billing metric or packaging problem.
常见问题
What inputs are required?
Provide current tiers and cadence, the billing unit, customer Pain Signal Profiles, and the discount policy.
What does the report contain?
It includes three 0-100 scores, evidence-based gaps, recommended actions, a triage decision, a next workflow, and a timeline.
Can it work without willingness-to-pay research?
It can use supplied close rates and discount evidence. It must identify missing research and must not invent willingness-to-pay numbers.
Does it automatically change prices?
No. The documented workflow produces diagnostic recommendations, not automatic billing changes or pricing-page deployment.
Is it a standalone command?
No. It is marked as not user-invocable and is designed for routing from the parent pricing skill.
What did the security review cover?
The review covered SKILL.md and adjudicated 23 static detections as false positives. Referenced resources and sibling skills were not reviewed.