ic-feature-request-tracker — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited ic-feature-request-tracker (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.
Logs feature requests, links to the product roadmap, tracks status changes, and notifies CSMs when requested features ship. Part of the Internal Coordination pillar.
This is a logging and tracking skill. It maintains the record and surfaces updates. The CSM decides what to request, how to prioritise for their customer, and when to communicate roadmap updates.
For each feature request, capture:
| Field | Source | Required |
|---|---|---|
| Account ID | CRM | Yes |
| Contact who raised it | Call notes, ticket, or CSM input | Yes |
| Contact role | CRM contact record | Yes -- executive requests carry different weight |
| Description | Customer's own words where possible | Yes |
| Business impact | Why they need it -- what problem it solves for their business | Yes -- this is what makes a request actionable for product |
| Customer priority | Critical (blocking), important (significant pain), nice-to-have (improvement) | Yes |
| Source | Call, support ticket, email, QBR, community forum | Yes |
| Date logged | Timestamp | Auto |
| Current workaround | How the customer is handling this without the feature | If known -- shows urgency |
Check the product roadmap or feature tracking system for matches:
| Match Type | Criteria | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Exact match | Feature is planned or in development that directly addresses the request | Link the request to the roadmap item. Inherit timeline and status |
| Partial match | Related feature is planned that may partially address the need | Link with a note explaining what is and is not covered |
| No match | Request is new to the product team | Log as unlinked. Include in the next pa-feedback-aggregator report for product review |
Each request follows a lifecycle:
| Status | Definition | CSM Notification |
|---|---|---|
| Logged | Request captured, not yet reviewed by product | None (acknowledge to customer that it is logged) |
| Acknowledged | Product team has seen and accepted the request into the backlog | Optional -- CSM decides whether to tell the customer |
| Planned | Feature is on the roadmap with estimated timeline | Alert CSM: "[Feature] planned for [timeline]" |
| In development | Feature is actively being built | Alert CSM: "[Feature] in development, expected [date]" |
| Shipped | Feature is live and available on the customer's tier | Alert CSM: "[Feature] is live. Here are the release notes. Consider reaching out to [contacts who requested it]" |
| Declined | Product team decided not to build (with rationale) | Alert CSM with rationale: "[Feature] will not be built because [reason]. Suggested alternative: [if any]" |
| Workaround available | The need can be addressed with existing capabilities | Alert CSM with documentation: "This can be achieved using [existing feature]. Here is how: [link]" |
A searchable registry of all feature requests with:
This data feeds pa-feedback-aggregator for the monthly product feedback report.
Per-account request view (for QBR or renewal prep):
{
"account_id": "string",
"active_requests": [
{
"id": "FR-2026-0089",
"description": "Custom reporting dashboards with drag-and-drop configuration",
"business_impact": "Analytics team spends 4 hours per week building reports manually",
"customer_priority": "critical",
"status": "planned",
"roadmap_item": "ROAD-2026-Q3-014",
"estimated_availability": "Q3 2026",
"first_raised": "2025-09-15",
"times_raised": 4,
"days_open": 176
}
],
"resolved_requests": [
{
"id": "FR-2025-0312",
"description": "Bulk user import from CSV",
"status": "shipped",
"shipped_date": "2026-01-15",
"customer_notified": true
}
],
"summary": "3 active requests (1 critical, 1 important, 1 nice-to-have). 2 resolved in last 6 months."
}Product team summary (feeds pa-feedback-aggregator):
{
"total_open_requests": 87,
"unique_themes": 34,
"top_requested": [
{
"theme": "Custom reporting dashboards",
"unique_accounts": 12,
"total_arr": 890000,
"avg_days_open": 142,
"status": "planned_q3",
"churn_correlation": "2 churned accounts had this as an open request"
}
],
"recently_shipped": [
{ "feature": "Bulk user import", "shipped": "2026-01-15", "accounts_requesting": 8 }
]
}| Decision Point | Context Provided | What the Human Decides |
|---|---|---|
| Request prioritisation | Request details, customer priority, business impact | How strongly to advocate for this request in product discussions. Not all critical requests from one customer are critical for the portfolio |
| Customer communication on status | Status update, roadmap timeline, alternatives | How and when to communicate. "Planned for Q3" can be shared as-is, but "Declined" requires careful framing |
| Workaround delivery | Existing feature documentation that addresses the need | Whether the workaround is genuinely adequate for this customer or whether the request stands |
| Shipped feature follow-up | Release notes, customer contacts who requested | Whether to reach out proactively, include in the next QBR, or let the customer discover it |
Required:
Strongly recommended:
Downstream consumers:
references/request-lifecycle.md -- Full lifecycle definitions, matching criteria, and notification templates~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.