pa-value-reporter — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited pa-value-reporter (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.
Measures and reports on value delivered to customers. Tracks time-to-value, assembles ROI evidence, and produces value narratives for customer-facing and internal use. Part of the Product Adoption & Value Realisation pillar.
This is a measurement and evidence assembly skill. It quantifies what the product has delivered. It does not define what value means to the customer (that is a consultative conversation) or fabricate outcomes the data does not support.
Value metrics fall into two tiers:
Universal metrics (applicable to all accounts, computed automatically):
Custom metrics (account-specific, defined during onboarding or QBR):
If no custom metrics are defined, use universal metrics with segment benchmarks for context. Custom metrics always take priority because they represent what the customer actually cares about.
For each metric type, apply the appropriate computation:
| Metric | Computation | Data Source | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Time saved | Automated workflow completions * estimated manual time per workflow | Product analytics + manual time estimate from feature catalogue | Medium -- estimate depends on assumed manual time |
| Productivity gain | Workflow completions per user: current vs. baseline period | Product analytics | High -- direct measurement |
| Adoption ROI | Features adopted * utilisation rate, compared to pricing | pa-adoption-tracker + contract data | Medium -- value-per-feature is estimated |
| Custom KPI | Current value vs. baseline established at onboarding | Product analytics + CRM (baseline) | High if baseline is well-defined; Low if baseline was not captured |
| Cost avoidance | What the customer would have spent on headcount/tools to achieve the same output manually | Industry benchmarks + customer input | Low -- highly estimated. Use only if customer has validated the methodology |
For accounts in early lifecycle or approaching renewal:
| Milestone | Definition | How Measured | Benchmark |
|---|---|---|---|
| Activation | First meaningful product use (not just login) | First key workflow completion | Segment median from pa-benchmark-engine |
| Habit formation | Sustained regular usage by the team | 4 consecutive weeks of >50% user activity | Segment median |
| Value realisation | First measurable business outcome | Custom KPI meets or exceeds baseline target, or universal metric reaches significant threshold | Segment median |
Track actual days vs. benchmark at each milestone. Accounts that reach value faster than segment peers are strong retention and expansion candidates.
Assemble the evidence into a structured narrative:
Headline metric: The single most compelling number. Choose based on:
Supporting evidence: 2-3 additional metrics that reinforce the headline.
Benchmark context: How this compares to segment peers (from pa-benchmark-engine). Frame as validation: "Your outcomes are in the top quartile for companies your size."
Trend: Value trajectory over time. Is the customer getting more value each quarter, or has value plateaued?
Forward look: What additional value is available if adoption deepens. This bridges the value report into the adoption and expansion conversation.
Adapt the output based on consumption context:
| Context | Emphasis | Length |
|---|---|---|
| QBR slide | Headline metric + supporting chart + peer comparison | 1-2 slides |
| Renewal conversation | Cumulative value over contract period, ROI calculation, forward projection | 1 page |
| Executive summary | Headline metric + one sentence on trend | 3-4 sentences |
| Internal business case | Full evidence package with methodology notes | 1 page |
| Expansion conversation | Value delivered + untapped value available with expanded product/seats | 1 page |
{
"account_id": "string",
"report_period": "Q1-2026",
"value_framework": "custom",
"headline": {
"metric": "Estimated hours saved through automated workflows",
"value": 340,
"period": "Q1-2026",
"trend": "increasing",
"vs_prior_period": "+22%"
},
"supporting_metrics": [
{
"metric": "Automated workflow completions",
"value": 2847,
"vs_prior_period": "+22%",
"vs_segment_median": "+38%"
},
{
"metric": "Active feature count",
"value": 18,
"vs_available": 24,
"adoption_rate": 0.75
},
{
"metric": "Active user ratio",
"value": 0.78,
"trend": "growing"
}
],
"time_to_value": {
"activation_days": 8,
"habit_formation_days": 28,
"value_realisation_days": 52,
"segment_benchmark": { "activation": 12, "habit_formation": 35, "value_realisation": 60 },
"position": "faster_than_72_percent_of_peers"
},
"custom_kpis": [
{
"kpi": "Manual reporting time per week",
"baseline": "12 hours",
"current": "4 hours",
"improvement": "67% reduction",
"source": "Customer-confirmed in Q4 QBR"
}
],
"narrative": {
"headline_sentence": "Your team saved an estimated 340 hours this quarter through automated workflows -- up 22% from last quarter.",
"benchmark_sentence": "You are realising value faster than 72% of similar companies.",
"forward_look": "With Advanced Reporting adoption (currently untouched), your analytics team could save an additional 4-6 hours per week."
},
"customer_safe": true,
"methodology_notes": "Time saved estimate uses 7.2 minutes per workflow as the manual baseline, derived from industry average for this workflow type. Customer has not independently validated this estimate."
}| Decision Point | Context Provided | What the Human Decides |
|---|---|---|
| Value framework selection | Universal metrics computed; custom KPI status | Whether to use universal metrics, custom KPIs, or both. Whether to invest in defining custom KPIs if none exist |
| Credibility check | Full evidence with methodology notes | Whether the numbers are credible enough to present. If the customer will challenge the methodology, the CSM adjusts or adds caveats |
| Narrative framing | Headline, supporting evidence, benchmark context | How to frame for this specific customer and conversation. The data is objective; the story is human |
| Sharing decision | Customer-safe flag, methodology notes | What to share, what to keep internal, and how to present uncertainty in estimates |
| Forward look positioning | Available untapped value from adoption gaps | Whether to frame the forward look as consultative (helping them get more value) or commercial (justifying expansion) |
Required:
Strongly recommended:
Downstream consumers:
references/value-methodology.md -- Estimation methods, confidence ratings, and customer validation process~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.