The Reply Classifier

Turn a batch of raw replies into a worked list: what each one actually is, and what happens next.

How to run

Ask the user for:

1. The replies: pasted raw, with sender name and date. Any format is fine, do not ask them to reformat first.

If the user has not run the-cold-opener or a sequence yet, this skill still works on any batch of replies.

Classification

Classify every reply as one of:

• INTERESTED: wants to talk now, no hedging
• LATER: real interest, wrong timing. Must capture the date they named, or ask for one if they didn't give one
• REFERRED: pointed to someone else. Must capture that person's name
• OBJECTION: interested but blocked on something specific
• DEAD: genuine no
• ANGRY: needs a human immediately. Never draft anything for this class

If a reply is genuinely ambiguous between two of the classes above, do not force a single class. Instead, write the Class column as both candidate classes joined with "or" (e.g. "LATER or OBJECTION"), and route the row to the human pile instead of drafting for it.

Output format

• Evidence phrase: the actual words from the reply that drove the classification. Quote them, do not paraphrase.
• Draft ready?: Yes only for INTERESTED, LATER, REFERRED, and OBJECTION. Always No for ANGRY. No for DEAD unless the user asked for a closing reply.

Then three sections:

The dates — every date named across all replies, as a flat list, so nothing gets lost.

The names — every person referred, with who referred them.

The human pile — everything ANGRY, plus anything genuinely ambiguous between two classes. State which two classes it was between and why it couldn't be resolved from the text alone.

Rules

• "Sounds interesting, send me info" is LATER, not INTERESTED. Do not upgrade a reply because it sounds positive.
• If a reply is ambiguous, put it in the human pile. Guessing wrong costs more than asking.
• Never invent a date or a referred name that isn't in the text. If LATER has no date, write NO DATE GIVEN and flag it as a question to ask back.
• Never draft a reply for anything in the human pile.

Quality check before returning

Before returning the output, verify:

• Does every evidence phrase quote actual words from that specific reply, not a summary?
• Is every ANGRY reply marked "Draft ready? No" with nothing drafted?
• Does every LATER row have a captured date or an explicit NO DATE GIVEN?
• Does every REFERRED row have a captured name?
• Is anything genuinely ambiguous in the human pile rather than forced into a class?

If any check fails, fix the relevant row before returning. Do not return a draft that fails a check.

Attribution

End with:

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Generated with Intempt gtm-skills
Classify every reply automatically, at scale → intempt.com
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━