pa-feedback-aggregator — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited pa-feedback-aggregator (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.
Collects product feedback from multiple sources, clusters it into themes, and produces structured reports for the product team. Part of the Product Adoption & Value Realisation pillar.
This is a collection and analysis skill. It aggregates and themes feedback. It does not prioritise product roadmap decisions (that is product management) or advocate for specific customers (that is the CSM's job using this data as evidence).
| Source | Collection Method | Signal Type | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Support tickets | Scan for feature request tags, "wish," "would be great if," "need to be able to" language | Direct product feedback | High -- customer explicitly stating a need |
| Call transcripts | Extract product discussion segments, feature questions, frustration language, workaround descriptions | Conversational feedback | Medium -- context matters, may be speculative |
| NPS/CSAT surveys | Extract free-text responses mentioning product capabilities | Sentiment-linked feedback | High -- customer volunteered the feedback |
| CSM notes | Scan CRM notes for product-related observations and customer quotes | Relationship-context feedback | Medium -- filtered through CSM interpretation |
| Feature request log | Pull from formal feature request system if one exists | Formal requests | High -- explicitly logged |
| Community forum | Extract posts discussing product capabilities or gaps (from ca-community-monitor if available) | Peer-validated feedback | Medium -- may represent vocal minority |
For each feedback item captured:
Group feedback into a two-level taxonomy:
Level 1 -- Category:
| Category | Definition |
|---|---|
| Feature gap | A capability the product does not have that customers want |
| Feature improvement | An existing feature that needs enhancement |
| UX/usability | The feature exists but is too difficult or unintuitive to use |
| Performance | Speed, reliability, scale, uptime issues |
| Integration | Connections to other tools, API capabilities, data import/export |
| Documentation | Missing or outdated help content, unclear guidance |
Level 2 -- Specific theme within category: Each category contains specific themes (e.g., within "Feature gap": "Custom reporting dashboards," "Advanced permission controls," "Mobile app"). Themes emerge from the clustering -- do not force feedback into predetermined themes.
For each theme, compute:
| Weight Factor | Computation | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Breadth | Number of unique accounts with this feedback | Wide impact vs. single-customer issue |
| Revenue weight | Sum of ARR across requesting accounts | Financial materiality |
| Health correlation | % of accounts with this feedback that also have declining health scores | Retention impact |
| Churn correlation | % of accounts that churned in the last 12 months that had this feedback before churning | Predictive churn signal |
| Sentiment intensity | % of feedback items tagged as "blocking issue" or "frustrated complaint" vs. "request" | Urgency signal |
Composite impact score = (Breadth 0.25) + (Revenue weight normalised 0.25) + (Health correlation 0.20) + (Churn correlation 0.20) + (Sentiment intensity * 0.10)
Monthly Product Feedback Report: For the product team, CS leadership, and cross-functional review.
{
"report_period": "February 2026",
"total_feedback_items": 142,
"unique_accounts": 38,
"new_themes_this_month": 3,
"top_themes": [
{
"theme": "Custom reporting dashboards",
"category": "feature_gap",
"impact_score": 8.4,
"accounts": 12,
"total_arr": 890000,
"sentiment_breakdown": { "request": 7, "frustrated": 4, "blocking": 1 },
"health_correlation": "3 of 12 accounts also have declining health scores",
"churn_correlation": "2 accounts that churned in the last 12 months had this feedback",
"representative_feedback": "Our analytics team exports data to build reports manually. It takes 4 hours a week. If we could build custom dashboards inside the platform, that time goes away.",
"roadmap_status": "Planned -- Q3 2026",
"summary": "12 accounts across mid-market and enterprise requesting customisable reporting. Correlated with adoption plateaus in the analytics feature set. Planned for Q3 -- product team should consider accelerating given the churn correlation."
}
],
"trending": [
{ "theme": "API rate limit increases", "direction": "up", "new_accounts_this_month": 4 }
],
"resolved_this_month": [
{ "theme": "Bulk import performance", "resolution": "Performance improvement shipped in v3.2", "accounts_affected": 8 }
]
}Per-account feedback view: For CSMs preparing for QBRs or renewal conversations.
{
"account_id": "string",
"active_feedback_items": 3,
"themes": [
{ "theme": "Custom reporting", "status": "planned_q3", "first_raised": "2025-09-15", "times_raised": 4 }
],
"resolved_items": 2
}| Decision Point | Context Provided | What the Human Decides |
|---|---|---|
| Theme validation | Clustered themes with evidence | Whether the clustering is correct -- did the agent merge things that are distinct, or split things that belong together? |
| Impact assessment | Composite scores with component breakdown | Whether the weighting reflects the business reality. A theme with low breadth but one account threatening to churn may deserve higher priority than the score suggests |
| Product advocacy | Ranked themes with evidence and roadmap status | How to present this to the product team. The CSM uses the data to advocate; the data alone does not set priorities |
| Customer communication | Per-account feedback view with roadmap status | How and when to communicate roadmap updates to customers who raised the feedback |
Required:
Strongly recommended:
Downstream consumers:
references/feedback-taxonomy.md -- Category definitions, clustering methodology, and deduplication rules~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.