cc-call-summariser — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited cc-call-summariser (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Generates structured post-call summaries from transcripts or CSM notes. Extracts discussion points, decisions, action items, sentiment signals, and flags -- then routes extracted data to downstream skills for tracking and action. Part of the Communication & Content Production pillar.
This is a content extraction and structuring skill. It transforms unstructured conversation data into structured, actionable records. It does not interpret relationship dynamics or make strategic assessments -- those are human reads the CSM applies after reviewing the summary.
Accept input from any available source:
| Source | Quality | Processing Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Full transcript (Gong, Chorus) | High | Best extraction quality. Speaker labels enable per-person analysis |
| Partial transcript (auto-generated) | Medium | May miss segments. Speaker labels may be inaccurate. Flag sections with low confidence |
| CSM-provided notes | Variable | Depends on note quality. Summary is only as good as the input |
| Meeting recording metadata | Low (supplementary) | Attendees, duration, date -- context only, not content |
Identify the 3-7 main topics covered during the call:
Scan for explicit and implicit commitments:
| Type | Signal Language | Example | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Explicit commitment | "I will...", "We will...", "Let me..." | "I will send the API docs by Friday" | High |
| Customer commitment | "We can...", "I'll have...", "Our team will..." | "We'll have the data ready by next week" | High |
| Agreed action | "Let's do...", "We should...", "Agreed" | "Let's schedule a follow-up for April" | Medium -- "let's" without a named owner is ambiguous |
| Implicit commitment | Offered without a deadline | "I can look into that" | Low -- may be polite hedging. Flag for CSM confirmation |
| Decision | "We've decided...", "The plan is...", "Going with..." | "Going with Option B for the integration" | High |
For each action item captured:
Analyse the emotional undercurrent of the conversation:
| Signal Category | Indicators | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Positive | Praise, enthusiasm, forward-looking language, expansion interest, laughter (if detectable), "love" or "great" language | High for explicit praise. Medium for tone inference |
| Negative | Frustration, concern, hedging, multiple caveats, "disappointed" or "concerned" language, repeated questions (indicating the answer was not satisfactory) | High for explicit frustration. Medium for hedging detection |
| Competitive | Mentions of alternatives, comparison language ("Competitor X does..."), pricing pressure framed as "other options" | High for explicit competitor naming. Medium for implied evaluation |
| Disengagement | Short answers, low energy, delegation to a junior person, "we'll get back to you" with no timeline | Low-Medium -- may indicate disengagement or simply a busy day |
Produce an overall sentiment classification: positive / neutral / negative / mixed. Include specific evidence for the classification.
Structured data from the summary feeds downstream skills:
| Extracted Element | Routes To | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Action items with owners and deadlines | lo-sla-monitor | Commitment tracking |
| Risk signals (frustration, competitive mentions, disengagement) | bi-risk-detector | Risk signal input |
| Expansion signals (growth interest, new team mentions) | bi-expansion-detector | Expansion signal input |
| Product feedback (feature requests, product complaints) | pa-feedback-aggregator | Product feedback pipeline |
| Competitive mentions | bi-competitive-intel | Competitive signal input |
| Full summary | CRM activity record (via cc-crm-updater) | Account history |
| Summary + action items | cc-email-drafter | Post-call follow-up email generation |
{
"call_id": "string",
"account_id": "string",
"date": "2026-03-10",
"duration_minutes": 32,
"source": "gong_transcript",
"attendees": {
"customer": [
{ "name": "Tom Chen", "role": "VP Engineering", "speaking_share": 0.45 },
{ "name": "Lisa Park", "role": "Engineering Manager", "speaking_share": 0.20 }
],
"internal": [
{ "name": "Jane Doe", "role": "CSM", "speaking_share": 0.35 }
]
},
"summary": "Discussed API latency resolution and Q2 expansion plans. Tom confirmed satisfaction with support response. Lisa raised concerns about onboarding timeline for new engineering team.",
"discussion_points": [
{
"topic": "API latency resolution",
"summary": "Engineering fix deployed for ticket #4521. Currently in monitoring phase -- 7 days before declaring resolved",
"conclusion": "Both sides satisfied with progress. Will confirm resolution next week"
},
{
"topic": "Q2 engineering expansion",
"summary": "Customer planning to onboard 15 new engineers in April. Need API documentation and training materials before they start",
"conclusion": "CSM to provide advanced API docs by March 14. Training plan to be discussed next call"
},
{
"topic": "Advanced reporting interest",
"summary": "Tom asked about custom dashboards. Currently on Professional tier which does not include this. Expressed interest if available",
"conclusion": "No commitment. CSM noted interest for potential expansion conversation"
}
],
"decisions": [
"Proceed with 15-engineer expansion in April"
],
"action_items": [
{
"action": "Send advanced API documentation to Lisa",
"owner": "Jane Doe (CSM)",
"deadline": "2026-03-14",
"priority": "high",
"source_quote": "I will get that API documentation over to you by Friday",
"confidence": "high"
},
{
"action": "Confirm API latency fix is stable after 7-day monitoring period",
"owner": "Jane Doe (CSM)",
"deadline": "2026-03-17",
"priority": "medium",
"source_quote": "We will confirm resolution after the monitoring period",
"confidence": "high"
},
{
"action": "Provide headcount plan and start dates for April engineering onboarding",
"owner": "Tom Chen (Customer)",
"deadline": "2026-03-21",
"priority": "medium",
"source_quote": "I will get you the details of who is starting and when",
"confidence": "high"
},
{
"action": "Build training plan for new engineering team",
"owner": "TBD -- confirm",
"deadline": "Before April onboarding",
"priority": "medium",
"source_quote": "Let's put together a training plan for the new team",
"confidence": "medium -- 'let's' without a named owner"
}
],
"sentiment": {
"overall": "positive",
"signals": [
{ "type": "positive", "evidence": "Tom: 'Really happy with how fast your team responded on the latency issue'", "confidence": "high" },
{ "type": "positive", "evidence": "Expansion planning indicates commitment to growing with the product", "confidence": "medium" }
]
},
"flags": {
"risk": [],
"expansion": [
{ "signal": "15 new engineers planned for Q2", "type": "seat_growth", "confidence": "high" },
{ "signal": "Interest in Advanced Reporting (higher tier feature)", "type": "tier_upgrade", "confidence": "low -- exploratory, no commitment" }
],
"competitive": [],
"product_feedback": [
{ "topic": "Custom dashboards", "type": "feature_interest", "detail": "Asked about custom reporting dashboards. Currently not available on their tier" }
]
},
"routing": {
"lo_sla_monitor": 4,
"bi_expansion_detector": 2,
"pa_feedback_aggregator": 1,
"cc_crm_updater": 1,
"cc_email_drafter": "follow_up_email_triggered"
},
"next_touchpoint": "Follow-up email today. Next call scheduled for March 24"
}| Decision Point | Context Provided | What the Human Decides |
|---|---|---|
| Summary accuracy | Full structured summary with source quotes | Whether the agent captured the tone and intent correctly. Did it miss nuance, misinterpret a polite deflection as agreement, or overweight a casual mention? |
| Commitment validation | Action items with confidence ratings | Whether low-confidence items are real commitments or polite conversation. "I can look into that" may or may not be an action item -- the CSM was in the room and knows |
| Sentiment interpretation | Sentiment signals with evidence | Whether the classification matches the CSM's read. A customer can say positive things while being fundamentally dissatisfied -- the CSM detects this from tone, body language, and context |
| Routing overrides | Suggested routing for flags and signals | Whether the expansion signal is worth routing (or just casual curiosity), whether the product feedback is formal enough to log |
| Follow-up content | Summary and action items ready for cc-email-drafter | What to include in the follow-up email. Some discussion points are internal-only. Some action items do not need to appear in the customer-facing recap |
Required:
Strongly recommended:
Downstream consumers:
references/extraction-patterns.md -- Signal language patterns, confidence calibration, and extraction rules~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.