customer-feedback-taxonomy

I came across your customer-feedback-taxonomy skill and noticed it's tackling a domain that's usually way more chaotic than it needs to be—but at 59 points, there's clearly room to tighten up how you're structuring this. What made you approach the taxonomy problem from this particular angle?

Links:

• GitHub
• Your agentic skill in the SkillzWave marketplace

The TL;DR

You're at 59/100, solidly in F territory. This is based on Anthropic's skill best practices. Your strongest pillar is Spec Compliance (11/15)—the YAML frontmatter is clean and the naming convention is correct. But Utility (8/20) and Ease of Use (14/25) are dragging you down hard. You've got the concept right, but developers need actual working templates and step-by-step guidance, not just layer names.

What's Working Well

• Valid YAML frontmatter – Your metadata is properly structured with all required fields
• Consistent terminology – The 5-layer model (Persona, Lifecycle, Drivers, Sentiment, Context) is clearly defined and used consistently throughout
• Clear section headers – The skill is well-organized with obvious navigation, even if it's brief
• Addresses a real problem – VoC taxonomy is genuinely chaotic in most orgs, so the core idea has solid utility potential

The Big One: Missing Templates and Reference Files

Here's what's killing your utility score: You mention three concrete deliverables—CSV taxonomy with validation, JSON schema for automation, and a governance checklist—but you don't actually provide any of them. This is the difference between a conceptual framework and a skill someone can actually use.

What you need: Create a references/ directory with three files:

• references/taxonomy-template.csv – An actual CSV ...