skill: cold-outreach

# Prompts that MUST load `cold-outreach`. The skill owns the COPY of an
# unsolicited 1:1 touch (cold email, LinkedIn note/DM) and the CADENCE around it
# (step count, spacing, per-inbox volume, warm-up ramp, compliant footer). It
# does NOT source the list (lead-gen), set up DNS/auth (email-deliverability),
# run the CRM after a reply (sales-pipeline), or write the proposal (proposals).
should_trigger:
  - prompt: "Write me a cold email to a VP of Engineering pitching our CI/CD tool."
    why: "Core job — a first-touch cold message to a no-prior-relationship recipient, under the word ceiling with one binary CTA."

  - prompt: "My open rate is fine but I get basically zero replies — can you fix my follow-up sequence?"
    why: "Non-obvious: the user names a symptom (opens, no replies) not the skill. The 58/42 reply split and the 4-7 step bump table exist for exactly this rescue."

  - prompt: "How many cold emails can I send per inbox per day before I get blacklisted, and how do I warm up a new domain?"
    why: "Cadence/volume is owned here — per-inbox 20-50/day and the new-domain ramp table. The user is asking about sending rhythm, not DNS auth."

  - prompt: "Escríbeme una secuencia de 4 correos en frío para captar agencias de marketing."
    why: "Spanish phrasing for a 4-step cold email sequence — same skill regardless of language; the sequence decision table and Spanish skeleton apply."

  - prompt: "Draft a LinkedIn connection note plus a DM bump for these 5 prospects."
    why: "Channel adaptation — LinkedIn note (≤300 chars, no pitch) + DM sequence is an explicit owned variant with its own char caps and weekly limits."

  - prompt: "This email reads like a template — every prospect can tell it's mail-merged. Make it feel one-to-one."
    why: "Rescuing copy that 'reads like a template' is an explicit trigger; the one-real-signal rule and the spintax/name-only-merge anti-pattern answer it directly."

should_not_trigger:
  - prompt: "Set up SPF, DKIM and DMARC on our sending domain so we stop landing in spam."
    route_to: email-deliverability
    why: "DNS/auth configuration is the deliverability plumbing; cold-outreach only applies the resulting rules to cadence, it never edits DNS records."

  - prompt: "Find me 200 SaaS CTOs with verified work emails I can email."
    why: "Sourcing/qualifying the prospect list is lead-gen; cold-outreach assumes a verified recipient already exists."
    route_to: lead-gen

  - prompt: "A prospect just replied 'yes, interested' — move them to the right stage and set my next follow-up tasks."
    route_to: sales-pipeline
    why: "The moment a reply lands the relationship leaves this skill; stages, tasks, and CRM hygiene are sales-pipeline."

  - prompt: "They asked for a proposal — write the SOW and pricing for the engagement."
    route_to: proposals
    why: "A cold touch earns a conversation, not a contract; the proposal/SOW/pricing document is owned by proposals."

  - prompt: "Write the launch announcement email to our existing opted-in newsletter list."
    route_to: marketing
    why: "Broadcast copy to an opted-in list is marketing, not an unsolicited 1:1 cold touch — different legal basis and different playbook."

capability:
  - scenario: "Write a full 4-step cold email sequence for a DevOps observability tool, sent to a Head of Platform at a 200-person fintech, including sending cadence and a compliant footer."
    must_include:
      - "First touch is under ~80 words."
      - "Exactly one binary (yes/no) CTA in the first touch — no double ask."
      - "A plain subject line under ~6 words, no clickbait or spam-trigger words."
      - "One observed, plausible signal as the hook (not 'I came across your company')."
      - "Four steps with explicit day offsets (e.g. Day 0 / +3 / +7 / +12)."
      - "Each step adds one new angle (proof, different pain, breakup) — no 'just following up' filler."
      - "A breakup step that offers a graceful out."
      - "A compliant footer: a one-click opt-out line AND a physical postal-address placeholder."
      - "Per-inbox volume guidance noted (20-50/day) and that warm-up precedes high volume."
      - "Points DNS/auth setup to email-deliverability rather than configuring it inline."

# Evals — cold-outreach

These cases are read by the catalog's routing harness (or by hand). There is no bundled runner. `should_trigger` asserts that the SKILL.md description + body are specific enough that the listed prompt would load `cold-outreach`; `should_not_trigger` asserts a near-miss prompt routes to the named real sibling instead (each `route_to` id must exist in the catalog); and `capability` is a rubric — feed the scenario to an agent with this skill loaded and grade the generated sequence against every `must_include` bullet (each is pass/fail). To sanity-check a *generated* draft against the structural rules, run `../scripts/verify.sh path/to/draft.md` from this directory — it is read-only and flags missing opt-out, multiple CTAs, over-ceiling word count, and spam/AI-tell phrases.

# Compliance footer — wording, matrix, LIA checklist

Every cold send needs a footer that (a) identifies you truthfully, (b) gives a working opt-out, and (c) satisfies the recipient's jurisdiction. Write for the **strictest plausible jurisdiction** the recipient could be in. All figures accessed 2026-06-02.

## Jurisdiction matrix

| | CAN-SPAM (US) | GDPR (EU B2B) | CASL (Canada) | Spam Act (Australia) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Legal basis for cold B2B | Truthful + opt-out (no prior consent) | Art. 6(1)(f) legitimate interest **+ documented LIA** | Implied consent (conspicuous publication / existing relationship) — strict | Inferred consent for conspicuously-published business addresses |
| Postal address | **Required**, physical | Identify the controller; address recommended | **Required** | Sender identification required |
| Opt-out window | Within **10 business days** | Without undue delay (**treat 24-48h**) | Honored **without delay**, ≤10 business days | Functional unsubscribe, honored ≤5 business days |
| Penalty | Up to **$53,088 per email** (Jan 2025) | Up to **€20M or 4%** of global revenue | Up to **CA$10M** per violation | Civil penalties per breach |

*(Sources: Instantly compliance guide / Puzzle Inbox; litemail.ai / complydog GDPR cold-email guides 2026; standard CASL / Australian Spam Act 2003 references.)*

## EU country notes (enforcement varies)

- **UK (ICO) / France (CNIL):** relatively permissive for genuine B2B legitimate-interest outreach.
- **Germany:** strict — UWG often treated as requiring prior consent for B2B email; tread carefully.
- **Poland:** frequently requires prior consent even B2B.
- Default: if you cannot confirm the recipient's country, write to the strictest (assume consent-style) and keep the LIA on file.

## Footer wording (drop-in)

```text
You're receiving this because {{the legitimate-interest reason — e.g. "you lead
infra at a team we believe we can help"}}. Not relevant? Reply "stop" or use the
one-click unsubscribe and you won't hear from us again.

{{Company legal name}}
{{Physical postal address — street, city, country}}
Unsubscribe: {{one-click opt-out link}}
```

Notes:
- The `Unsubscribe:` link must be backed by an RFC 8058 one-click header (`List-Unsubscribe` + `List-Unsubscribe-Post`) for bulk Gmail/Yahoo sending. **You specify it must exist and be one-click; wiring the header is `email-deliverability`'s job.**
- "Reply stop" is a fallback, not a substitute for the link.
- Keep the From/Reply-To accurate and the subject honest — a deceptive subject voids CAN-SPAM compliance on its own.

## Legitimate Interest Assessment (LIA) checklist — EU sends

Keep this documented *before* sending to EU recipients:

1. **Purpose test** — is there a genuine business interest (offering a relevant solution to a relevant role)? Name it.
2. **Necessity test** — is cold email a proportionate way to reach this interest, or is there a less intrusive route?
3. **Balancing test** — does your interest override the recipient's privacy expectation? B2B role-based address + relevant offer usually passes; consumer address usually does not.
4. **Data minimization** — you hold only what's needed (name, role, business email, the signal). No scraped personal/sensitive data.
5. **Opt-out honored fast** — 24-48h, suppression list updated, never re-contacted.

If any test fails, do not send — that is a targeting problem to take back to `lead-gen`, not a wording fix.

# Hook derivation — worked OBSERVE → INFER → BRIDGE → PROVE chains

The four-line bridge (SKILL.md → "Deriving the hook") is the method. This file shows it executed across industries so you can pattern-match the *shape* of a good INFER line — the one step that separates a one-to-one email from a mail-merge wearing a name tag.

Read these for the INFER line specifically. Notice that in every good example the inference is something the recipient privately knows but didn't expect a stranger to. That recognition — not flattery, not a value prop — is what earns the reply.

## The test every chain must pass

After drafting the INFER line, ask: **"Would this sentence be FALSE for a competitor in the same situation?"**
- If it's true of everyone in the industry → it's a platitude. Go back, pick a sharper OBSERVE fact.
- If it's true only because of *this* specific signal → it's a hook. Ship it.

---

## 1. DevOps / infra tooling

- **OBSERVE:** 3 SRE roles open on their careers page for the full quarter.
- **INFER:** unfilled for a quarter means the current rotation is thin and absorbing the pages — recruiting isn't keeping up with on-call load.
- **BRIDGE:** we reduce page volume so a short-staffed rotation survives without the missing hires.
- **PROVE:** ~40% fewer alerts for two infra teams your size, month one.
- *Why it passes:* a competitor with a fully staffed team wouldn't feel this. The pain is specific to the unfilled-reqs signal.

## 2. B2B SaaS selling to RevOps

- **OBSERVE:** they just announced a Series B and a new VP of Sales on LinkedIn.
- **INFER:** post-B2 + new sales leader means the number tripled and the existing pipeline reporting won't survive the new board's scrutiny.
- **BRIDGE:** we make pipeline forecasts the new VP can defend in week one, not month three.
- **PROVE:** [named comparable] cut forecast variance from 30% to under 10% in a quarter.
- *Why it passes:* a flat company with a tenured VP doesn't have the "defend the number to a new board" pain. The funding + hire combination creates it.

## 3. E-commerce / DTC brand

- **OBSERVE:** their site runs a specific subscription app you can see in the page source / their checkout flow.
- **INFER:** that stack has a known involuntary-churn leak at card-expiry — they're losing ~5-8% of subscribers monthly to failed payments, not to cancellations.
- **BRIDGE:** we recover the failed-payment cohort before it churns.
- **PROVE:** [comparable DTC brand] recovered 6% of MRR that was bleeding to dunning failures.
- *Why it passes:* the inference is tied to a *detectable tech detail*, so it's true of them specifically, not "all DTC brands churn."

## 4. Professional services (agency → mid-market CMO)

- **OBSERVE:** they published a case study landing page but their blog hasn't shipped since Q3.
- **INFER:** the content engine stalled — likely the one person who owned it left or got pulled onto launches, and the pipeline that content fed is now thinning silently.
- **BRIDGE:** we keep the demand-gen content shipping without the headcount they just lost.
- **PROVE:** kept [comparable]'s organic pipeline flat through a content-team gap.
- *Why it passes:* the gap between "has case studies" and "blog stopped" is the specific, observable evidence of a stall — not a guess.

## 5. Fintech / regulated

- **OBSERVE:** a new compliance regulation with a known enforcement date hits their license type in 6 months.
- **INFER:** their compliance team is now triaging which controls to retrofit first, and the audit-trail gap is usually the one that surfaces late and panics legal.
- **BRIDGE:** we close the audit-trail gap so the deadline is a checkbox, not a fire drill.
- **PROVE:** [comparable] passed the equivalent audit with zero findings on first pass.
- *Why it passes:* the deadline is real and dated; the inference about *which* control bites last is the insider-grade detail that earns trust.

## 6. When the only signal is weak (the honest fallback)

Sometimes you genuinely cannot find a strong signal — the company is quiet, no hiring, no news. Do NOT fabricate. Two legitimate moves:

- **Use a category-level trigger honestly framed as a hypothesis, not a fake observation.** "Most [role]s at [company size] in [industry] are hitting [specific pain] right now — if that's you, [ask]. If not, ignore me." This is weaker than a real signal (expect reply rates at the low end of the band) but it's honest and still binary.
- **Kick it back to targeting.** If you keep landing on companies with no signal, the list is the problem, not the copy — that's a `lead-gen` ICP/timing gap. The fix is a better-segmented list with built-in triggers (recently funded, recently hiring, recently launched), not a cleverer sentence.

Never close the gap with an invented "I loved your recent post" — a signal the recipient knows is false destroys the contact on the first line.

## Anti-examples — INFER lines that FAIL the test

| Generic INFER (platitude) | Why it fails | Sharper version |
|---|---|---|
| "...so you probably want to grow revenue" | True of every company alive | Tie growth to the specific signal (new funding round → "defend a 3x number") |
| "...so you care about efficiency" | Vacuous; everyone claims this | Name the specific inefficiency the signal implies |
| "...AI is transforming your industry" | A trend, not a fact about *them* | Drop it; find a fact you can screenshot |
| "...I imagine scaling is a challenge" | Hedged guess, no observed basis | Only say it if a hiring/funding signal makes it observable |

The pattern: a failing INFER line is true regardless of the OBSERVE fact. A working one is true *because* of it.

# Templates — first-touch + bump skeletons

Fill **every** `{{slot}}` with a real value before sending. An unfilled slot is a defect. The slots:

- `{{signal}}` — the one true, public, business-relevant trigger (a hiring post, a launch, a number from their site, a role change).
- `{{outcome}}` — one concrete result you delivered for a comparable team (with a number when you have one).
- `{{proof}}` — a named comparable, a mini case study, or a metric.
- `{{ask}}` — the binary yes/no CTA.
- `{{name}}` / `{{company}}` — recipient + their company.

## Email — first touch (≤ ~80 words)

```text
Subject: {{signal}}   ← ≤6 plain words, no clickbait

Hi {{name}} — {{signal, stated plainly}}. Usually that means {{the pain it
implies}}.

We {{outcome}} for {{a comparable team}}.

{{ask}} — yes or no?

— {{your name}}, {{your company}}
{{compliant footer: see references/compliance-footer.md}}
```

## Email — 4-step bump (same thread, reply to your own send)

```text
STEP 1 — Day 0   (the first touch above)

STEP 2 — Day +3   (angle: proof)
Hi {{name}} — following the note below, here's the concrete version:
{{proof}}. {{ask}} — yes or no?

STEP 3 — Day +7   (angle: different pain, lower-friction ask)
One more angle: teams like {{company}} also hit {{second pain}}. I wrote a
2-page teardown on it — want me to send it? (no call required)

STEP 4 — Day +12 (the breakup)
Hi {{name}} — I'll stop here so I'm not cluttering your inbox. Should I
close the file, or is {{the value}} worth 15 minutes later this quarter?
```

The breakup is the highest-converting follow-up after step 1 — never skip it. Extend to step 5-7 only if a genuinely new `{{signal}}` appears.

## LinkedIn — connection note (≤ ~300 chars, NO pitch)

```text
Hi {{name}} — {{signal, e.g. "your post on cutting on-call toil"}} resonated.
Working on the same problem for infra teams; would value connecting.
```

No ask, no product name in the note. Earn the connection on a real signal.

## LinkedIn — DM bump (after they accept, ~3-4 sentences)

```text
DM 1 — Day 0 (after accept)
Thanks for connecting, {{name}}. {{signal}} is exactly what we work on — we
{{outcome}} for {{comparable team}}. Open to a quick look, or not the right
time?

DM 2 — Day +4
No worries if the timing's off. If on-call noise is on your radar this
quarter, happy to share the {{proof}} we used — say the word.

DM 3 — Day +9 (breakup)
I'll leave it here, {{name}}. If {{the value}} ever moves up your list, my
door's open. Either way, glad to be connected.
```

## Spanish — secuencia de cold email (primer toque, ≤ ~80 palabras)

```text
Asunto: {{signal}}

Hola {{name}} — {{signal}}. Normalmente eso implica {{el dolor}}.

Logramos {{outcome}} para {{un equipo comparable}}.

{{ask}} — ¿sí o no?

— {{tu nombre}}, {{tu empresa}}
{{pie de página conforme: ver references/compliance-footer.md}}
```

Keep the same rules in any language: one true signal, one binary ask, ≤ ~80 words, a compliant footer. The breakup step is mandatory in every sequence.

#!/usr/bin/env bash
#
# verify.sh — structural guardrail for a drafted cold email / sequence.
#
# WHAT IT DOES (read-only; never edits or writes a file)
#   Static, network-free checks over ONE draft file you point it at (a cold
#   email or a multi-step sequence in plain text / markdown):
#     1. First-touch length: the first message block's body is over ~80 words
#        -> warn (soft; brevity is a strong preference, not a law).
#     2. Single binary CTA: more than one question-mark line ("?") in the first
#        touch -> warn (a cold first touch should ask exactly one binary thing).
#     3. Opt-out present: no unsubscribe / opt-out / "reply stop" line anywhere
#        -> FAIL (CAN-SPAM/GDPR hard requirement).
#     4. Postal address present: no street-style postal-address placeholder
#        (a line with a digit + a street/PO token, or an explicit
#        {{address}} / [address] placeholder) -> FAIL (CAN-SPAM requirement).
#     5. Banlist: spam-trigger + AI-tell phrases ("I hope this email finds you
#        well", "just circling back", "just following up", "act now",
#        "100% free", "free guide", "guarantee(d)", "limited time",
#        "to whom it may concern", "I came across your") -> warn each hit.
#     6. Unfilled template slots ({{...}}, [SLOT], ???) outside the address
#        line -> warn (fill before sending).
#
#   Only #3 and #4 are hard failures. Everything else is a warning. A clean OR
#   empty/missing-content file exits 0 — never a false failure.
#
# HOW TO RUN (inside YOUR project, not the skills repo)
#   ./verify.sh draft.md                 # warnings + hard checks
#   ./verify.sh draft.md --ceiling 100   # raise the first-touch word ceiling
#   ./verify.sh draft.md --strict        # treat warnings as failures (CI gate)
#
# EXIT CODES
#   0  clean, warnings only (without --strict), or empty/missing-content file
#   1  a hard failure (no opt-out, or no postal address) — or any warning under --strict
#   2  bad usage (no file given, or file does not exist)
#
# Runs on stock macOS bash 3.2: no mapfile, no associative arrays, no bc.

set -euo pipefail

if [ -t 1 ]; then
  RED=$'\033[31m'; GREEN=$'\033[32m'; YELLOW=$'\033[33m'; NC=$'\033[0m'
else
  RED=''; GREEN=''; YELLOW=''; NC=''
fi

warn_count=0; fail_count=0
ok()   { printf '%s[ ok ]%s %s\n' "$GREEN"  "$NC" "$*"; }
warn() { printf '%s[warn]%s %s\n' "$YELLOW" "$NC" "$*"; warn_count=$((warn_count + 1)); }
fail() { printf '%s[fail]%s %s\n' "$RED"    "$NC" "$*"; fail_count=$((fail_count + 1)); }

usage() { sed -n '2,42p' "$0" | sed 's/^# \{0,1\}//'; }

FILE=""
CEILING=80
STRICT=0
while [ $# -gt 0 ]; do
  case "$1" in
    -h|--help) usage; exit 0 ;;
    --ceiling) CEILING="${2:-80}"; shift 2 ;;
    --strict) STRICT=1; shift ;;
    -*) printf '%sunknown option: %s%s\n' "$RED" "$1" "$NC" >&2; usage; exit 2 ;;
    *) if [ -z "$FILE" ]; then FILE="$1"; fi; shift ;;
  esac
done

if [ -z "$FILE" ]; then
  printf '%sno draft file given%s\n' "$RED" "$NC" >&2; usage; exit 2
fi
if [ ! -f "$FILE" ]; then
  printf '%sfile not found: %s%s\n' "$RED" "$FILE" "$NC" >&2; exit 2
fi

# Empty / whitespace-only file: nothing to check, do not false-fail.
if [ ! -s "$FILE" ] || ! grep -q '[^[:space:]]' "$FILE" 2>/dev/null; then
  ok "empty file — nothing to check"
  exit 0
fi

printf 'cold-outreach verify — %s (ceiling=%s words)\n\n' "$FILE" "$CEILING"

# --- isolate the first-touch block --------------------------------------------
# Heuristic: the first touch ends at the first "STEP 2", "Day +", "Follow-up",
# or a markdown heading after content. We grab everything up to that marker,
# then strip subject/footer-ish lines for the word count.
FIRST_BLOCK="$(awk '
  NR==1 {seen=0}
  /^[[:space:]]*(STEP[[:space:]]*2|Follow[- ]?up[[:space:]]*2|Day[[:space:]]*\+|DM[[:space:]]*2|##[[:space:]])/ && seen {exit}
  /[^[:space:]]/ {seen=1}
  {print}
' "$FILE")"

# Body words: drop subject lines, unsubscribe/footer lines, and address lines.
FIRST_WORDS="$(printf '%s\n' "$FIRST_BLOCK" \
  | grep -iv -e '^[[:space:]]*subject:' -e '^[[:space:]]*asunto:' \
             -e 'unsubscribe' -e 'opt[- ]out' -e 'reply "stop"' -e 'reply stop' \
  | tr -s '[:space:]' '\n' | grep -c '[^[:space:]]' || true)"

if [ "${FIRST_WORDS:-0}" -gt "$CEILING" ]; then
  warn "first touch is ~${FIRST_WORDS} words (over the ${CEILING}-word ceiling) — tighten it"
else
  ok "first-touch length ~${FIRST_WORDS} words (<= ${CEILING})"
fi

# --- single binary CTA in the first touch -------------------------------------
CTA_LINES="$(printf '%s\n' "$FIRST_BLOCK" | grep -c '?' || true)"
if [ "${CTA_LINES:-0}" -gt 1 ]; then
  warn "first touch has ${CTA_LINES} question lines — a cold first touch should ask exactly one binary thing"
elif [ "${CTA_LINES:-0}" -eq 0 ]; then
  warn "first touch has no question-mark CTA — add one binary yes/no ask"
else
  ok "first touch has exactly one CTA line"
fi

# --- opt-out present (hard) ----------------------------------------------------
if grep -Eiq 'unsubscribe|opt[- ]out|reply[[:space:]]+["'\'']?stop|darse de baja|cancelar la suscripci' "$FILE"; then
  ok "opt-out / unsubscribe line present"
else
  fail "no opt-out / unsubscribe line found — CAN-SPAM/GDPR requires a working opt-out"
fi

# --- postal address present (hard) --------------------------------------------
# Accept either an explicit placeholder or a line that looks like a street addr.
if grep -Eiq '\{\{[[:space:]]*(postal[_ ]?)?address|\[[[:space:]]*(postal[_ ]?)?address' "$FILE" \
   || grep -Eiq '[0-9]+[[:space:]].*(street|st\.|ave|avenue|road|rd\.|blvd|suite|ste\.|p\.?o\.? box|calle|carrer|via)' "$FILE"; then
  ok "postal address (or placeholder) present"
else
  fail "no physical postal address found — CAN-SPAM requires one (a {{address}} placeholder counts)"
fi

# --- banlist: spam-trigger + AI-tell phrases ----------------------------------
BAN='i hope this email finds you well|just circling back|just following up|circling back|act now|100% free|free guide|guarantee|limited time|to whom it may concern|i came across your|dear sir or madam'
HITS="$(grep -Eio "$BAN" "$FILE" 2>/dev/null | sort -u || true)"
if [ -n "$HITS" ]; then
  while IFS= read -r h; do
    [ -n "$h" ] && warn "banned phrase present: \"$h\" (spam-trigger / AI-tell — rewrite)"
  done <<EOF
$HITS
EOF
else
  ok "no banned spam/AI-tell phrases"
fi

# --- unfilled template slots (ignore the address-placeholder convenience) -----
SLOTS="$(grep -Eo '\{\{[^}]*\}\}|\?\?\?|\[[A-Z_]{3,}\]' "$FILE" 2>/dev/null \
  | grep -Eiv '\{\{[[:space:]]*(postal[_ ]?)?address|\[[[:space:]]*(POSTAL[_ ]?)?ADDRESS' \
  | sort -u || true)"
if [ -n "$SLOTS" ]; then
  SLOT_N="$(printf '%s\n' "$SLOTS" | grep -c '[^[:space:]]' || true)"
  warn "${SLOT_N} unfilled template slot(s) remain (e.g. $(printf '%s' "$SLOTS" | head -1)) — fill before sending"
else
  ok "no unfilled template slots"
fi

# --- summary ------------------------------------------------------------------
printf '\n'
if [ "$fail_count" -gt 0 ]; then
  printf '%s%d hard failure(s), %d warning(s)%s\n' "$RED" "$fail_count" "$warn_count" "$NC"
  exit 1
fi
if [ "$warn_count" -gt 0 ]; then
  if [ "$STRICT" -eq 1 ]; then
    printf '%s%d warning(s) — failing under --strict%s\n' "$YELLOW" "$warn_count" "$NC"
    exit 1
  fi
  printf '%s%d warning(s), 0 hard failures%s\n' "$YELLOW" "$warn_count" "$NC"
  exit 0
fi
printf '%sall checks passed%s\n' "$GREEN" "$NC"
exit 0