Agent skill

Attribution

by Nexus-JPF in Nexus-JPF/note-companion

When the user wants to figure out which marketing actually drives conversions and revenue, choose or interpret an attribution model, or reconcile conflicting numbers across tools.

MITAuto-check passedMarketing & SEO

Install Attribution

skills CLI
$ npx skills add Nexus-JPF/note-companion --skill attribution -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install Nexus-JPF/note-companion attribution --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Nexus-JPF/note-companion.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/.agents/skills/attribution .claude/skills/attribution && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
attribution
GitHub stars
870
Used in
1 other repo
Token cost
~5.2k tokens
SKILL.md length
2,565 words
Files
6 (incl. references)
Skills in repo
18
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

When the user wants to figure out which marketing actually drives conversions and revenue, choose or interpret an attribution model, or reconcile conflicting numbers across tools.

  • Works in 7 steps: What attribution can and can't tell you → Attribution models → The three measurement paradigms → …
  • Wants to figure out which marketing actually drives conversions and revenue
  • SKILL.md covers Boundaries — what this skill…, Pillar A — Interpretation, Pillar B — Own your… and Output format, plus 2 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Attribution is an agent skill from Nexus-JPF/note-companion. When the user wants to figure out which marketing actually drives conversions and revenue, choose or interpret an attribution model, or reconcile conflicting numbers across tools. Also use when the user mentions "attribution," "attribution model," "first-touch vs last-touch," "multi-touch," "which channel drives revenue," "what's my real CAC," "my dashboards disagree," "Google/Meta says X but GA says Y," "media mix model," "MMM," "incrementality," "geo lift," "holdout test," "how did you hear about us,"…

Its SKILL.md is about 5.2k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. The skill folder holds 7 other files, including reference files (for example `evals/evals.json`, `references/attribution-models.md` and `references/by-business-type.md`).

It sits in Marketing & SEO, covering Marketing analytics, AI search optimization and Product analytics. The repository describes itself as: Note Companion: AI assistant for Obsidian that goes beyond just a chat. (prev File Organizer 2000). The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • Wants to figure out which marketing actually drives conversions and revenue
  • Interpret an attribution model
  • Reconcile conflicting numbers across tools
  • The user mentions attribution

Example prompts

  • “attribution,”
  • “attribution model,”
  • “first-touch vs last-touch,”
  • “/attribution”

Workflow steps

7 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. What attribution can and can't tell you
  2. Attribution models
  3. The three measurement paradigms
  4. Self-reported attribution
  5. Reconciling conflicting sources
  6. The blind spots
  7. Business-type fork

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 9cad635. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md (its code samples are markdown).

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Attribution loads about 5.2k tokens when it runs, and up to ~15k if it reads all its reference files. Until then it costs about 247 tokens; SKILL.md has 2,565 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~247
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~5.2k
With references · SKILL.md plus every file in references/, read only if the agent opens them
~15k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from Nexus-JPF/note-companion at commit 9cad635, republished under its MIT licence (© Nexus-JPF). 2,565 words, ~5,197 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/attribution/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder). This skill also uses 5 other files; get the full folder from GitHub.
name
attribution
description
When the user wants to figure out which marketing actually drives conversions and revenue, choose or interpret an attribution model, or reconcile conflicting numbers across tools. Also use when the user mentions "attribution," "attribution model," "first-touch vs last-touch," "multi-touch," "which channel drives revenue," "what's my real CAC," "my dashboards disagree," "Google/Meta says X but GA says Y," "media mix model," "MMM," "incrementality," "geo lift," "holdout test," "how did you hear about us," "self-reported attribution," "dark social," or wants to instrument attribution themselves — "stitch my bookings to their source," "SavvyCal/Calendly attribution," "close the identify gap," "track conversions on a third-party domain," "first-party / self-hosted attribution." For event tracking setup and UTMs, see analytics. For ad-platform pixels/CAPI, see ads. For pipeline and CRM revenue reporting, see revops. For the AI-search attribution blind spot, see ai-seo.
metadata.version
1.1.0

Attribution

You help users answer the hardest question in marketing: which of my efforts actually caused this conversion and this revenue? Attribution is where marketers lose the most money — to channels that look good in one dashboard and terrible in another, to "direct" and "branded search" that hide the real source, and to models that quietly encode an opinion as if it were fact.

This skill has two pillars. Know which one the user needs before you dive in:

  • (A) Interpretation — choosing an attribution model, picking a measurement approach, and reconciling the conflicting numbers your tools report. This applies to everyone, even with zero engineering.
  • (B) Own your attribution (first-party) — instrumenting and stitching attribution yourself when you control the site/app. This is the build track. Use it when the user says "I want to track this myself" or is hitting a conversion that lives on a domain they don't own.

Most requests start with (A). Reach for (B) only when they control the surface and want to build.

Product context: check for .agents/product-marketing.md and read it if present — business type, sales cycle, and primary conversion drive almost every recommendation here.

Boundaries — what this skill does NOT own

State these up front so you don't rebuild neighboring skills:

  • General event tracking, tracking plans, UTM setup, GA4/GTM → analytics. Attribution assumes tracking exists. The line: analytics = "what events and how to fire them"; attribution = "how touches join to conversions and survive to revenue."
  • Ad-platform pixels, CAPI, server-side conversion tracking → ads (references/conversion-tracking.md). Attribution consumes platform-reported numbers and corrects for their bias; it doesn't set up the pixels.
  • Pipeline stages, lead lifecycle, CRM revenue dashboards → revops. Attribution feeds pipeline data; it doesn't define stages.
  • Showing up in / measuring AI search → ai-seo. Attribution names AI traffic as a blind spot only.

Pillar A — Interpretation

1. What attribution can and can't tell you

Set expectations before touching a number:

  • Attribution is directional, not truth. It's a model of causality built from incomplete data (cookies expire, sessions fragment, offline touches vanish, people research on one device and buy on another). Treat it as a strong hint, never a verdict.
  • Every model is an opinion. "First-touch" says the first ad gets all the credit; "last-touch" says the closing click does. Both are wrong in opposite directions. Choosing a model is choosing whose story to believe — say so out loud.
  • The attribution gap is normal. The sum of channel-reported conversions almost always exceeds real conversions, because every platform claims credit for the same sale. Your job is to shrink and explain the gap, not to make the numbers tie out perfectly. They won't.

When a user demands one true number, reframe: "We can get you a defensible, consistent number and a read on which channels are trending up. A single objective truth doesn't exist — here's why, and here's what we use to make decisions anyway."

2. Attribution models

The six standard models and when each one lies:

ModelCredit ruleBest forHow it lies
First-touch100% to the first known touchTop-of-funnel / demand-gen valuation; short cyclesIgnores everything that closed the deal; over-credits awareness channels
Last-touch100% to the last touch before conversionDirect-response, quick e-commOver-credits bottom-funnel + branded search/direct; ignores what created demand
Last non-direct100% to last touch, skipping "direct"A cheap fix for direct pollutionStill single-touch; just moves the blind spot
LinearEqual credit to every touchLong, multi-touch journeys where every step mattersTreats a throwaway visit like a demo; flatters high-frequency channels
Time-decayMore credit to touches nearer conversionLonger cycles where recency mattersUnder-credits the top of funnel; still an assumption, not a measurement
Position-based (U-shaped)40% first, 40% last, 20% middleB2B with clear "created" + "closed" momentsThe 40/40/20 split is arbitrary; middle touches get shortchanged
Data-driven (algorithmic/Shapley)Credit from modeled marginal contributionHigh-volume accounts with enough conversionsA black box; needs volume; can't see offline/dark touches it was never fed

Rules of thumb:

  • Never report a single model in isolation for a long sales cycle. Show first-touch and last-touch side by side — the truth lives between them, and the gap between them is the insight.
  • Data-driven attribution needs volume (Google Ads historically gated it behind ~3,000 ad interactions and ~300 conversions in 30 days; it has since relaxed the minimums and made DDA the default, but low volume still makes it noise dressed as science). Use position-based instead when you're thin.
  • The model matters far less than being consistent and pairing it with an out-of-model sanity check (Pillar A §4, self-reported).

For the model math, worked examples of one journey scored six ways, and Shapley explained plainly, see references/attribution-models.md.

3. The three measurement paradigms

Models split credit within your tracked data. Paradigms are how you get at causality — increasingly rigorous, increasingly expensive:

ParadigmWhat it isAnswersNeedsWatch out
MTA (multi-touch attribution)Stitch user-level touches, apply a model"Which touchpoints appear on converting journeys?"Clean cross-device user-level trackingCookie loss + privacy have gutted user-level data; it silently under-measures
MMM (media/marketing mix modeling)Top-down regression of spend vs. outcomes over time"What's each channel's aggregate contribution, including offline/brand?"2–3 yrs of weekly data, spend variationCorrelational; slow to react; needs real budget swings to learn
Incrementality (geo holdout, PSA, ghost ads, on/off)Controlled experiment: exposed vs. withheld"Did this channel cause lift I wouldn't have gotten anyway?"Ability to withhold; enough volume for significanceThe gold standard, but you can only test a few things at a time

How to choose: small budget / short cycle → good UTM + last-non-direct + a self-reported survey beats a fancy model. Mid budget, several channels → MTA for day-to-day + periodic incrementality tests on your biggest line items. Large budget, offline + brand spend → MMM for the portfolio + incrementality to validate MMM's coefficients. Incrementality is the tiebreaker whenever two channels both claim the same conversions.

Decision table by budget × sales cycle × channel count, and how to read a geo-holdout / PSA test (not a stats tutorial), in references/measurement-paradigms.md.

4. Self-reported attribution

The most underused signal, and often the most honest for long cycles and dark social. A post-conversion "How did you hear about us?" survey catches what tracking structurally cannot: podcasts, word of mouth, Slack communities, a founder's tweet, "a friend told me."

  • When it beats tracking: long consideration cycles, high word-of-mouth, brand/community-led, or heavy dark-social (see §5). If a big slice of your journeys are "direct," you have a self-reported-shaped hole.
  • Ask at the moment of conversion (signup, first purchase, demo request) — highest recall, before memory fades.
  • Wording: open-ended ("How did you first hear about us?") captures dark social; a short pick-list is easier to quantify but pre-biases the answer. Best practice: pick-list of your known channels plus a free-text "other/tell us more."
  • Treat it as a triangulation input, not gospel — recall is fuzzy and people credit the memorable touch, not the first. It's the out-of-model check that keeps your tracked models honest.
  • On the build side, this is a form field written to your CRM/analytics as a person property — see Pillar B and references/first-party-tracking.md.
5. Reconciling conflicting sources

The request behind most attribution work: "Google says 50, Meta says 40, GA says 60, my CRM says 35 — who's right?" Nobody is. Here's the framework.

Why each source systematically lies:

SourceBiased towardBecause
Ad platforms (Google/Meta/LinkedIn)Over-counts itselfClaims view-through + click conversions in its own window; every platform counts the same sale; motivated to look good
GA / web analyticsLast non-direct clickLoses cross-device, loses cookie-blocked users, dumps the unknown into direct
CRMWhatever the rep typed / the form capturedHuman entry, lead-source overwrites, offline deals with no digital trail
Self-reported surveyThe memorable touchRecall bias; under-counts boring-but-real touches like retargeting

How to triangulate:

  1. Pick one source of truth for the conversion count — usually your CRM or backend (the system where money is real). Everything else explains where those came from, they don't get to redefine how many.
  2. Never sum across platforms. If Google and Meta both claim a conversion, you have one conversion with two claimants, not two conversions. De-dupe against the source-of-truth total.
  3. Read directional agreement, not absolute match. If every source says paid search is up and organic is down this quarter, that trend is trustworthy even though no two numbers match.
  4. Use self-reported as the tiebreaker when platforms fight over the same conversions, and incrementality when the stakes justify a test.
  5. Expect and budget for the gap. Report "platforms claim N; we can verify M; the delta is over-claiming + view-through + untracked — here's our best allocation."

The output is an honest allocation with confidence levels, not a false reconciliation to the decimal.

6. The blind spots

Where conversions hide, making real channels look weak:

  • Direct — the junk drawer. Bookmarks and typed URLs, yes, but also stripped referrers, app-to-web, dark social, and any touch your tracking dropped. A large direct share is a measurement problem, not a channel.
  • Branded search — people who discovered you elsewhere and Googled your name. Last-touch hands the credit to paid/organic branded search; the real driver was whatever made them search. Segment branded vs. non-branded or you'll defund the top of funnel.
  • Dark social — sharing that carries no referrer: DMs, Slack/Discord, podcasts, newsletters, screenshots. Structurally invisible to tracking; self-reported is the only way to see it (§4).
  • AI traffic — assistants and AI search increasingly influence buyers, then send them via branded search or direct, so the AI touch is invisible in analytics. Name it and hand deeper work to ai-seo.

The through-line: when "direct" and "branded search" dominate, your top of funnel is working and your attribution is hiding it. Say that explicitly — it's the single most common misread in marketing.

Show full SKILL.md (960 more words)Show less
7. Business-type fork

Defaults differ sharply. Summary here; full playbooks in references/by-business-type.md.

  • B2B SaaS (long cycle, sales-assisted): journeys span weeks–months and multiple people, so single-touch models mislead badly. Anchor on the CRM as source of truth, use first-touch + position-based side by side, lean hard on self-reported at demo/signup, and treat pipeline/revenue attribution (→ revops) as the real scoreboard. Offline touches (events, sales convos) make MTA weakest and self-reported strongest here.
  • Ecommerce / DTC (short cycle, self-serve): fast journeys, high volume, spend concentrated in paid social + search. Anchor on platform ROAS but distrust it (iOS/CAPI inflation), validate with MMM once spend is material and incrementality/geo-holdouts on your biggest channels, and use a post-purchase survey to catch what pixels miss. Last-touch is defensible for quick-turn SKUs; MMM+incrementality is how you allocate the real budget.

Pillar B — Own your attribution (first-party)

Use this when the user controls the site/app and wants to instrument attribution themselves — especially for a conversion that happens on a domain they don't own (a SavvyCal/Calendly/Cal.com booking, a Stripe Checkout page). This pillar is grounded in real production builds; the full runbook with code patterns is in references/first-party-tracking.md. The essentials:

The identity graph

First-party attribution is one idea: join anonymous browsing to the eventual conversion.

  1. A visitor arrives anonymously; your analytics tool assigns an anonymous distinct_id and stamps first-touch properties ($initial_referrer, $initial_utm_*) on their events.
  2. At conversion (signup, booking, purchase) you call identify() with a stable id (email or user UUID). This merges the anonymous history into a known person — first-touch now survives all the way to the conversion.
  3. Every conversion event can now be broken down by first-touch channel. That's the whole game.
Closing the identify() gap

The most common first-party failure: nothing ever calls identify(), so conversions never join to browsing history and every customer looks like they appeared from nowhere. (Framing adapted from Tessa Kriesel's PostHog approach.) The fix is to call identify at each real conversion. Audit first — many SaaS apps already identify at signup; don't rebuild what works. Find the specific un-instrumented conversions and close only those.

Stitching conversions on a third-party domain

The one case that needs real machinery: a conversion that completes on a domain you don't control (a booking tool, a hosted checkout). You can't run your analytics there, so:

  1. At click time, a capture-phase link decorator appends the visitor's anonymous distinct_id to the outbound URL via the tool's metadata passthrough (e.g. ?metadata[ph_distinct_id]=<id>). One document-level listener covers every CTA — no per-link edits.
  2. The third-party tool stores that metadata and returns it in its webhook.
  3. Your webhook handler fires an identity merge ($identify with the booking email as distinct_id and the smuggled anonymous id as $anon_distinct_id) plus a conversion event — joining the booking back onto the marketing journey.
Guardrails (do not skip)
  • Anonymity guard — fail closed. Only ever smuggle the anonymous id. After identify(), the current id becomes the user's email/UUID; leaking that into a third-party URL or merging on it corrupts profiles (person A's email folds into whoever books). Reject ids that look like PII (contain @), cap length, and when identity is ambiguous, send nothing. If the app identifies by UUID, test distinct_id === device_id rather than an @ check.
  • First-touch data quality. Redirects overwrite the true first touch. Exclude OAuth/checkout referrers (accounts.google.com, checkout.stripe.com, login.*), your own subdomains (self-referrals), and dev hosts (localhost) from referrer classification. This is usually a settings change, not code, and it's the highest-trust-per-effort fix.
  • Cross-subdomain stitching. Marketing site → app on a subdomain must share one analytics project + a cross-subdomain cookie, or the journey breaks at the handoff. Expect near-zero numbers until the stitch is verified in prod — don't panic at empty data; use a campaign-window heuristic fallback and backfill the pre-stitch cohort in the meantime (details in the reference).
Reporting and the last mile

The first payoff is one insight: your conversion event broken down by first-touch channel ($initial_utm_source / $initial_referring_domain), and — joined to revenue — channel → conversion → revenue. Confirm first-touch vs. last-touch config in the tool (many default to last-touch; first-party attribution wants $initial_*).

But first-touch alone can't run the multi-touch models from §2. Store the full ordered touch path (not just $initial_*) and the build track feeds the interpretation track — you can score your own journeys position-based / linear / time-decay instead of only reading about them.

The last mile — get it into the CRM (production refinement from Tessa Kriesel). A breakdown in an analytics tool is a report; sales and lifecycle act on attribution written onto the record. Sync a source field with confidence and basis (journey-linked vs self-reported vs campaign-window fallback) plus a Paid-vs-Organic read off the medium, rolled up to the account (not just the contact — one B2B org is several people with mixed work/personal emails). How pipeline/lifecycle then use it is revops' job.

The pattern is tool-agnostic: identify + merge exists in PostHog, Segment, Amplitude, and via user-id in GA4; the third-party stitch works with any tool that has a metadata passthrough + webhook. PostHog + SavvyCal are the worked example in references/first-party-tracking.md.


Output format

Deliver an attribution readout, not a data dump:

markdown
# Attribution Readout — [date]

## The question
[What decision this informs — e.g. "where should next quarter's budget go?"]

## Source of truth
[Which system defines the conversion count, and why]

## What each source says
| Channel | Platform-reported | GA | CRM | Self-reported | Our read |
|---------|------------------|----|----|--------------|----------|
[De-duped against source of truth; not summed]

## Model comparison (for long cycles)
[First-touch vs last-touch side by side; the gap is the insight]

## Confidence & gaps
[The attribution gap, the blind spots, what we can't see]

## Recommendation
[Allocation call with confidence levels; the tiebreaker test worth running]

Tool Integrations

For implementation, see the tools registry. Key tools:

ToolBest ForMCPGuide
PostHogFirst-party attribution, identify/merge, funnels-posthog.md
GA4Web analytics, model comparison, user-id stitching✓ga4.md
DubShort-link + click attribution✓dub-co.md
SegmentCDP — route identify/track to every destination-segment.md
HubSpotCRM lead-source + self-reported fields✓hubspot.md
SalesforceCRM as revenue source of truth-salesforce.md
SupermetricsPull platform numbers into one place to reconcile✓supermetrics.md
RB2BDe-anonymize B2B website visitors-rb2b.md

  • analytics — event tracking, tracking plans, UTMs, GA4/GTM setup. Do this before attribution.
  • ads — ad-platform pixels, CAPI, server-side conversion tracking (references/conversion-tracking.md).
  • revops — pipeline stages, lead lifecycle, CRM revenue reporting. Attribution feeds it.
  • ai-seo — the AI-search attribution blind spot in depth.
  • ab-testing — controlled experiments; the incrementality mindset applied to on-site changes.

© Nexus-JPF, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

SKILL.md and 5 other files (references) in .agents/skills/attribution of Nexus-JPF/note-companion.

  • SKILL.md
  • evals/evals.json
  • references/attribution-models.md
  • references/by-business-type.md
  • references/first-party-tracking.md
  • references/measurement-paradigms.md

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 9cad635

Used in 1 other repository

We found 1 copy of this SKILL.md (exact, near-identical or edited) in other folders, from 1 other GitHub owner. This page covers the copy in Nexus-JPF/note-companion, which our catalogue first saw on October 7, 2026.

Compare with similar skills

Attribution next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Attribution compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Attribution this skillNexus-JPF/note-companion8701 repos~5.2kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
GEO Monthly Delta Reportzubair-trabzada/geo-seo-claude11k—~2.4kAutomated safety check: NotesMIT
LLM Mention Trackingunifapi-agent/agents587—~1.8kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
SEO SerankingAgriciDaniel/claude-seo18k—~567Automated safety check: PassMIT
Share Of Voiceindranilbanerjee/digital-marketing-pro8551 repos~3.7kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
SEO AI Search Share Of Voiceseranking/seo-skills160—~1.1kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • GEO Monthly Delta Report

    zubair-trabzada/geo-seo-claude

    Compares a baseline and a current GEO audit for a client, calculates score changes and action item progress, and writes a monthly progress report.

    11k GitHub stars~2.4k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Marketing & SEOAuto-check: notes
  • LLM Mention Tracking

    unifapi-agent/agents

    When the user wants to track how often their brand or domain gets mentioned across ChatGPT and AI search engines over a set of prompts, and how that share of voice compares to named competitors over…

    587 GitHub stars~1.8k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Marketing & SEOAuto-check passed
  • SEO Seranking

    AgriciDaniel/claude-seo

    SE Ranking AI visibility analyst (extension). An agent skill from AgriciDaniel/claude-seo.

    18k GitHub stars~567 tokensUpdated 3 days ago
    Marketing & SEOAuto-check passed
  • Share Of Voice

    indranilbanerjee/digital-marketing-pro

    Calculate share of voice against named competitors across four dimensions — organic (volume-weighted keyword visibility), paid (Google Ads auction insights), social (mention volume with sentiment…

    855 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~3.7k tokens
    Marketing & SEOAuto-check passed
  • SEO AI Search Share Of Voice

    seranking/seo-skills

    Measure AI Search share of voice for a target domain versus competitors across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Google AI Overview, and AI Mode.

    160 GitHub stars~1.1k tokensUpdated 3 mo ago
    Marketing & SEOAuto-check passed
  • SEO Plan

    seranking/seo-skills

    Build a phased SEO roadmap for a domain — quarter-by-quarter, tied to the site's competitive position, content gaps, technical debt, and AI Search readiness.

    160 GitHub stars~4.4k tokensUpdated 3 mo ago
    Marketing & SEOAuto-check passed

More from Nexus-JPF/note-companion

All 18 skills in this repo
  • Analytics

    Nexus-JPF/note-companion

    When the user wants to set up, improve, or audit analytics tracking and measurement.

    870 GitHub starsUsed in 7 repos~2.2k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Customer Research

    Nexus-JPF/note-companion

    When the user wants to conduct, analyze, or synthesize customer research.

    870 GitHub starsUsed in 6 repos~3.2k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Marketing Plan

    Nexus-JPF/note-companion

    When the user needs a comprehensive marketing plan for a client, a company they advise, or their own product.

    870 GitHub starsUsed in 5 repos~5.2k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Competitor Profiling

    Nexus-JPF/note-companion

    When the user wants to research, profile, or analyze competitors from their URLs.

    870 GitHub starsUsed in 4 repos~3.5k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Onboarding

    Nexus-JPF/note-companion

    When the user wants to optimize post-signup onboarding, user activation, first-run experience, or time-to-value.

    870 GitHub starsUsed in 4 repos~1.6k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Image

    Nexus-JPF/note-companion

    When the user wants to create, generate, edit, or optimize images for marketing — blog heroes, social graphics, product mockups, profile banners, listing visuals, or brand assets.

    870 GitHub starsUsed in 3 repos~3.9k tokens
    Auto-check passed

Categories

Questions about Attribution

What does Attribution do?

When the user wants to figure out which marketing actually drives conversions and revenue, choose or interpret an attribution model, or reconcile conflicting numbers across tools. Attribution is an agent skill from Nexus-JPF/note-companion. When the user wants to figure out which marketing actually drives conversions and revenue, choose or interpret an attribution model, or reconcile conflicting numbers across tools.

When should I use Attribution?

Attribution fits situations like: wants to figure out which marketing actually drives conversions and revenue; interpret an attribution model; reconcile conflicting numbers across tools; the user mentions attribution.

How do I install Attribution in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add Nexus-JPF/note-companion --skill attribution -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (.agents/skills/attribution in Nexus-JPF/note-companion) into .claude/skills/attribution in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Attribution in Codex?

Run `npx skills add Nexus-JPF/note-companion --skill attribution -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (.agents/skills/attribution in Nexus-JPF/note-companion) into .agents/skills/attribution in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Attribution in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add Nexus-JPF/note-companion --skill attribution -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/attribution, .gemini/skills/attribution, .github/skills/attribution and .opencode/skills/attribution in your project.

What does Attribution need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Attribution is instructions for the agent only.

Does Attribution access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Attribution safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Attribution use?

Attribution is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Attribution use?

About 5.2k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 21k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full. Its references folder adds about 10k tokens, read only when the agent opens those files.

What are the alternatives to Attribution?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Attribution: GEO Monthly Delta Report (zubair-trabzada/geo-seo-claude, 11k stars), LLM Mention Tracking (unifapi-agent/agents, 587 stars), SEO Seranking (AgriciDaniel/claude-seo, 18k stars) and Share Of Voice (indranilbanerjee/digital-marketing-pro, 855 stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Attribution?

Nexus-JPF (a GitHub organization) maintains it in Nexus-JPF/note-companion, which has 870 GitHub stars. The repository holds 18 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 7, 2026.

Source: Nexus-JPF/note-companion on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.