Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Synthesize recent customer feedback and pain points
.claude/skills/davekilleen-customer-intel/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 144% | 0% |
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 194% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 110% | 0% |
| case-11 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 1% | 0% |
| case-13 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 51% | 0% |
Aggregate and analyze customer feedback from all sources - meeting notes, person pages, feedback captures - to identify patterns, prioritize pain points, and inform product decisions.
Treat customer intelligence as an evidence ledger, not as memory or a polished guess.
unknown and return insufficient evidence rather than filling the gap./customer-intel - Review last 30 days of feedback/customer-intel [timeframe] - Specify timeframe (e.g., "last week", "Q1", "last 90 days")/customer-intel [customer-name] - Deep dive on specific customerResolve the requested customer or time window before gathering. Build a dated source ledger from meeting notes, person pages, feedback captures, and project records. Preserve exact quotes separately from paraphrases, deduplicate copied records, and distinguish independent mentions from repetitions. Classify every theme, frequency, trend, sentiment, and roadmap connection as observed, inferred, contradictory, stale, or unknown. Compare supporting and disconfirming evidence, then produce recommendations only where coverage is sufficient. Keep the entire analysis read-only unless the user separately approves an exact write preview.
Return the resolved scope and coverage, source ledger, deduplication decisions, themes with independent-source counts, exact quotes with provenance, conflicting or missing evidence, and recommendations awaiting human judgment. Counts must state their denominator and exclude unknown or duplicate records. When evidence cannot support a conclusion, output insufficient evidence rather than a weak theme. End with the save state and, only after a confirmed write, the destination, byte or diff receipt, and read-back result. Never call a draft saved or current.
Search across multiple sources for customer mentions:
Create an evidence ledger before categorizing: one entry per source occurrence with its source ID, source date, as-of date, customer attribution, exact quote or clearly labeled paraphrase, and location. Do not collapse entries yet; this ledger is what preserves provenance through later deduplication.
Group findings into categories:
For each theme, identify:
Count independent source occurrences, not copied text. When deduplicating a repeated capture, retain the full list of source IDs and dates and state how many independent mentions remain. Mark trend as unknown when the dated evidence cannot support it.
Check if pain points or requests are already being addressed:
Present findings in this format:
markdown# 🎯 Customer Intelligence Report **Period:** [Timeframe] **Sources analyzed:** [Count] distinct source IDs ([Count] meetings, [Count] person pages, [Count] feedback captures; duplicate copies noted separately) **Customers represented:** [Count] --- ## 🔥 Top Pain Points ### [Pain Point Theme] **Mentioned by:** [X customers] ([Customer names]) **Frequency:** [X mentions] in last [timeframe] **Urgency:** High / Medium / Low **Trend:** ↑ Increasing / → Stable / ↓ Decreasing **Details:** - `[Source ID]` — "[Exact quote from customer 1]" — [Customer name], source date [Date], reviewed as of [As-of date] - `[Source ID]` — "[Exact quote from customer 2]" — [Customer name], source date [Date], reviewed as of [As-of date] **Roadmap status:** [On roadmap / Planned / Not planned] **Related project:** [Link to 04-Projects/ file if exists] --- ## ✨ Feature Requests [Same format as pain points] --- ## 🏆 Competitive Mentions [Same format] --- ## 💚 What's Working [Same format] --- ## 🎯 Recommendations ### Immediate Actions 1. [Action based on high-urgency items with increasing trend] 2. [Action based on frequency across multiple customers] ### Product Opportunities 1. [Opportunity where demand exists but no roadmap coverage] 2. [Opportunity where competitive gap is mentioned] ### Customer Follow-Ups 1. [Customer name] - [Why to follow up] 2. [Customer name] - [Why to follow up] --- ## 📊 Summary **High-urgency items:** [Count] **Feature requests:** [Count unique requests] **Competitive threats:** [Count mentions] **Customers needing follow-up:** [Count] **Top 3 insights:** 1. [Insight with the strongest signal] 2. [Insight with increasing trend] 3. [Insight with competitive implication]
After presenting the report, ask:
> "Want me to: > 1. Create a feature brief for top requested item]? > 2. Update person pages with this intelligence? > 3. Generate a stakeholder memo on these findings? > 4. Deep dive on specific customer or theme]?"
Support natural language timeframes:
When user specifies a customer:
/feature-decision for top requested items/roadmap to check coverage/meeting-prep [customer]This template demonstrates traceability, not sample customer claims. Keep every unsupported count, trend, quote, and roadmap relationship as Unknown.
markdown# Customer Intelligence Report **As-of date:** [As-of date] **Cohort and timeframe:** [Definition or Unknown] **Evidence completeness:** [Checked / eligible / Unknown] ## Source ledger | Source ID | Source date | Customer | Evidence type | Included once? | |---|---|---|---|---| | [Source ID] | [Source date] | [Customer ID or redacted] | [Meeting, feedback, person page] | [Yes / duplicate of Source ID / Unknown] | ## Theme **Theme:** [Evidence-backed label or Unknown] **Distinct customers:** [Count with denominator, or Unknown] **Trend:** [Comparable-period calculation, or Unknown] **Contradictory evidence:** [Source IDs on each side, or None observed] ### Quote-safe evidence - “[Exact excerpt or faithful summary]” — [Source ID], [Source date] - Missing context: [Unknown or named gap] ### Product relationship - Roadmap status: [Canonical source / date / Unknown] - Related project: [Exact path / source / Unknown] ## Recommendations 1. [Evidence-backed follow-up, owner, and source] 2. [Question required before a conclusion can be made] **Insufficient-evidence state:** [What cannot yet be concluded and why]
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.