
Finance Billing Ops
Reconcile revenue, refunds, team-seat billing, and pricing claims against real Stripe and codebase behavior for operator decisions—not generic payment tips.
Install
npx skills add https://github.com/affaan-m/everything-claude-code --skill finance-billing-opsWhat is this skill?
- Evidence-first workflow for MRR snapshots, refunds, and recent customer activity
- Code-backed checks for team billing, per-seat logic, and quota stacking vs marketing claims
- Explicit ECC skill stack: customer-billing-ops, research-ops, market-research, github-ops, verification-loop
- Separates operator billing truth from customer remediation handled by customer-billing-ops
- Pricing comparisons and benchmarks when competitor or market evidence is required
Adoption & trust: 3.1k installs on skills.sh; 210k GitHub stars; 2/3 security scanners passed (skills.sh audits).
Recommended Skills
China Stock Analysissugarforever/01coder-agent-skills
Grimoire Polymarketfranalgaba/grimoire
Backtesting Frameworkswshobson/agents
Stock Analysisgracefullight/stock-checker
Coinglassstarchild-ai-agent/official-skills
Akshare Stockmolezzz/openclaw-stock-skill
Journey fit
Common Questions / FAQ
Is Finance Billing Ops safe to install?
skills.sh reports 2 of 3 security scanners passed. Review the Security Audits panel on this page before installing in production.
SKILL.md
READMESKILL.md - Finance Billing Ops
# Finance Billing Ops Use this when the user wants to understand money, pricing, refunds, team-seat logic, or whether the product actually behaves the way the website and sales copy imply. This is broader than `customer-billing-ops`. That skill is for customer remediation. This skill is for operator truth: revenue state, pricing decisions, team billing, and code-backed billing behavior. ## Skill Stack Pull these ECC-native skills into the workflow when relevant: - `customer-billing-ops` for customer-specific remediation and follow-up - `research-ops` when competitor pricing or current market evidence matters - `market-research` when the answer should end in a pricing recommendation - `github-ops` when the billing truth depends on code, backlog, or release state in sibling repos - `verification-loop` when the answer depends on proving checkout, seat handling, or entitlement behavior ## When to Use - user asks for Stripe sales, refunds, MRR, or recent customer activity - user asks whether team billing, per-seat billing, or quota stacking is real in code - user wants competitor pricing comparisons or pricing-model benchmarks - the question mixes revenue facts with product implementation truth ## Guardrails - distinguish live data from saved snapshots - separate: - revenue fact - customer impact - code-backed product truth - recommendation - do not say "per seat" unless the actual entitlement path enforces it - do not assume duplicate subscriptions imply duplicate value ## Workflow ### 1. Start from the freshest billing evidence Prefer live billing data. If the data is not live, state the snapshot timestamp explicitly. Normalize the picture: - paid sales - active subscriptions - failed or incomplete checkouts - refunds - disputes - duplicate subscriptions ### 2. Separate customer incidents from product truth If the question is customer-specific, classify first: - duplicate checkout - real team intent - broken self-serve controls - unmet product value - failed payment or incomplete setup Then separate that from the broader product question: - does team billing really exist? - are seats actually counted? - does checkout quantity change entitlement? - does the site overstate current behavior? ### 3. Inspect code-backed billing behavior If the answer depends on implementation truth, inspect the code path: - checkout - pricing page - entitlement calculation - seat or quota handling - installation vs user usage logic - billing portal or self-serve management support ### 4. End with a decision and product gap Report: - sales snapshot - issue diagnosis - product truth - recommended operator action - product or backlog gap ## Output Format ```text SNAPSHOT - timestamp - revenue / subscriptions / anomalies CUSTOMER IMPACT - who is affected - what happened PRODUCT TRUTH - what the code actually does - what the website or sales copy claims DECISION - refund / preserve / convert / no-op PRODUCT GAP - exact follow-up item to build or fix ``` ## Pitfalls - do not conflate failed attempts with net revenue - do not infer team billing from marketing language alone - do not compare competitor pricing from memory when current evidence is available - do not jump from diagnosis straight to refund without classifying the issue ## Verification - the answer includes a live-data statement or snapshot timestamp - product-truth claims are code-backed - customer-impact and broader pricing/product conclusions are separated cleanly