feedback-triage
Skill0 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub
Cluster + score a raw pile of customer feedback (200+ items from Intercom, Zendesk, sales notes, support tickets, NPS comments) into ranked themes with a composite Volume × Severity × Strategic Fit × Customer Weight priority score. Scoring sub-scores stay visible so reviewers can challenge specific dimensions, not just the final number. Use instead of basic feature-request analyzers when you have multi-source feedback and need composite priority scoring with visible sub-scores, not just frequency counts. Triggers on phrases like "triage this feedback", "cluster these requests", "themes in this feedback", "synthesize Intercom export", "make sense of NPS dump", "quarterly feedback review", "process sales-team feedback", "разобрать обратную связь", "темы в фидбеке".
4 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- fullstackhouse/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- civitai/civitaitheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- joeywhelan/judged-feedbacktheir own version, first seen Sep 27, 2026
- danjdewhurst/story-skillstheir own version, first seen Jun 3, 2026
Other versions4 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 4
- civitai/civitai★ 7.3ksame name
- danjdewhurst/story-skills★ 417same name
- fullstackhouse/skills★ 1same name
- joeywhelan/judged-feedback★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository6 other files it gives its agents.
- ai-eval-scorerSkill
- deep-market-researchSkill
- prd-builderSkill
- prd-criticSkill
- product-trio-sessionSkill
- synthetic-user-interviewSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 40
Default assumption: every item is one unit unless metadata says otherwise.
- Distinctive: line 114
Hiding scoring inputs: if you only show composite, reviewers can't challenge it
- Distinctive: line 120
If the input is a structured file (CSV, JSON), parse it programmatically.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Feedback Triage
Purpose
PMs drown in feedback. 200 Intercom tickets, 50 sales call notes, 80 NPS comments, a Slack channel of complaints. Manual triage takes a day and you still miss patterns.
This skill turns a raw dump into a ranked, themed report with enough structure to drive prioritization decisions and enough quotes to defend them.
The output is opinionated: it ranks themes by a composite score, not just frequency. A theme mentioned once by a strategic enterprise customer can outweigh 30 generic requests.
When to use
- Quarterly feedback review
- Post-launch: triage the inbound noise
- Onboarding: get a fast read on what customers actually want
- Pre-roadmap-planning: ground the strategy in real evidence
- Customer-success or sales-team feedback synthesis
When NOT to use
- For 5-10 feedback items - just read them
- For a single critical incident - dedicated triage, not statistical
- For real-time monitoring (use alerting tools)
Inputs
Required:
- Feedback items: paste, file (CSV / JSON / markdown), or path
Strongly improves quality:
- Customer metadata (segment, plan tier, ARR, account name) per item if available
- Business priorities or strategic themes the PM cares about
- Time window the feedback covers
Default assumption: every item is one unit unless metadata says otherwise. With metadata, items can be weighted.
Process
Phase 1: Normalize
- Deduplicate near-identical items
- Standardize format (each item: id, text, source, date, customer metadata if any)
- Flag items that are not feedback (sales pitches, internal notes, irrelevant chatter) and exclude from clustering
- Report normalization stats: original count, deduped count, excluded count
Phase 2: Theme extraction
Cluster items by underlying job-to-be-done, not surface words. "I need an export to CSV" and "give me a way to get this data into Excel" are the same theme.
For each theme:
- Theme name (concrete, not generic - "Bulk edit roles in user admin" not "Better UX")
- Underlying JTBD ("When I'm onboarding a new team, I want to assign roles in bulk, so I can finish setup faster")
- Item count
- Sample quotes (3, diverse)
Aim for 8-15 themes. More than 20 means theming is too granular.
Phase 3: Score each theme
Four sub-scores (1-5 each):
- Volume: how many items, normalized
- Severity: how blocking is this for affected users
- Strategic fit: does this align with stated priorities
- Customer weight: are these high-value accounts (uses metadata if provided)
Composite priority = average of the four (1-5).
Report each theme with all four sub-scores plus composite. Do not hide the inputs - reviewers will want to challenge specific dimensions.
Phase 4: Sentiment slice
For each theme:
- % positive / neutral / negative
- Tone shift over time if time-window data available
- Flag themes where sentiment is sharply negative (escalation candidates)
Phase 5: Surprises and orphans
- Surprises: themes the PM probably didn't expect (compare against stated priorities)
- Orphans: items that didn't cluster - sometimes these are the most interesting (early signals)
- Conflicts: where customer segments want opposite things
Output
# Feedback Triage Report
## Stats: original / deduped / excluded
## Top 5 themes (executive summary)
## Full theme table
| # | Theme | JTBD | Items | Volume | Severity | Fit | Weight | Composite | Sentiment |
## Detailed theme breakdowns
[For each theme: name, JTBD, sample quotes, scoring rationale]
## Surprises
## Orphans worth attention
## Conflicts across segments
## Recommended next actions (3)The output should be paste-into-Notion ready. Tables, not paragraphs, for the structured data.
Common failure modes to avoid
- Theme inflation: 30 themes is not analysis, it's transcription
- Generic theme names: "Better mobile experience" is not actionable. Be specific.
- Hiding scoring inputs: if you only show composite, reviewers can't challenge it
- Ignoring metadata: feedback from 5 enterprise customers worth $2M ARR is not the same weight as 50 free-tier users
- Pretending the data is clean: report the noise honestly. PMs need to know how much they're trusting.
Tools strategy
If the input is a structured file (CSV, JSON), parse it programmatically. If pasted text, normalize first, then process. For 500+ items, batch the clustering and consolidate.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

