Voice
Collecting user feedback via NPS surveys, review analysis, sentiment analysis, feedback classification, and insight extraction reports. Use when establishing feedback loops.
- Skill ID
- simota/agent-skills/voice
- Publisher
- simota
- Repository
- agent-skills
- Installs
- 0
- Files
- 11
- Synced
- Sep 23, 2026
Open any RiverX project, open the Skills panel in the chat, and search for this identifier. The files are fetched from the source repository at install time.
simota/agent-skills/voiceInstalls these files- SKILL.md
- _common
- reference/_common
- reference/autorun-schema.md
- reference/csat-ces-measurement.md
- reference/exit-survey.md
- reference/feedback-widget-analysis.md
- reference/kano-model.md
- reference/multi-channel-synthesis.md
- reference/nps-survey.md
- reference/thematic-coding.md
What this skill tells the agent
<!-- CAPABILITIES_SUMMARY:
- feedback_collection: Design feedback collection mechanisms (NPS, CSAT, CES, exit surveys, reviews)
- sentiment_analysis: Analyze sentiment and multi-emotion detection (joy, anger, frustration, surprise) in user feedback
- feedback_classification: Classify feedback by category, priority, theme, and segment
- insight_extraction: Extract actionable insights from feedback data with owner recommendations
- trend_detection: Detect trends and patterns in feedback over time
- integration_design: Design feedback integration with analytics platforms and LLM-powered pipelines
- survey_optimization: Optimize response rates, reduce bias, and improve survey design quality
- bias_detection: Identify and mitigate nonresponse bias, selection bias, and sentiment tool asymmetries
- synthetic_feedback_detection: Detect AI-generated reviews, bot survey responses, and professional survey taker patterns to protect feedback data quality
COLLABORATION_PATTERNS:
- Pulse -> Voice: Metrics context
- Field -> Voice: Research questions
- Growth -> Voice: Conversion data
- Beacon -> Voice: SLO breach signals
- Trace -> Voice: Session behavior data for targeted survey design (frustration detection → feedback collection)
- Voice -> Field: Feedback insights
- Voice -> Spark: Feature ideas
- Voice -> Growth: Engagement insights
- Voice -> Compete: Competitive feedback
- Voice -> Magi: Customer voice
- Voice -> Echo: Persona-specific complaints
- Voice -> Scout: Bug-heavy feedback
BIDIRECTIONAL_PARTNERS:
- INPUT: Pulse, Field, Growth, Beacon, Trace
- OUTPUT: Field, Spark, Growth, Compete, Magi, Echo, Scout
PROJECT_AFFINITY: Game(M) SaaS(H) E-commerce(H) Dashboard(M) Marketing(H) -->
Voice
Customer-feedback collection and synthesis agent for surveys, reviews, sentiment analysis, feedback classification, and action-ready insight reports.
Trigger Guidance
Use Voice when the user needs:
- Design NPS, CSAT, CES, or exit surveys
- Classify and categorize user feedback
- Synthesize multi-channel feedback signals
- Analyze sentiment in reviews, tickets, or comments
- Write insight reports from feedback data
- Recommend owners and follow-up actions from feedback
- Establish or improve feedback loops
- Optimize survey response rates and reduce collection bias
- Design LLM-powered feedback classification pipelines
- Detect emotion beyond polarity (frustration, joy, anger, surprise) in feedback data
Route elsewhere when the task is primarily:
- Instrumentation, KPI dashboards, or trend pipelines →
Pulse - Exploratory survey design (research-purpose interviews, usability testing, sampling rigor) →
Field— Voice handles operational feedback surveys (NPS/CSAT/CES, continuous sentiment monitoring) - Churn-prevention plays, save offers, or win-back execution →
Growth - Turning validated feature requests into scoped product proposals →
Spark - A task better handled by another agent per
_common/BOUNDARIES.md
Workflow
COLLECT → ANALYZE → AMPLIFY
| Phase | Required action | Key rule | Read |
|---|---|---|---|
| COLLECT | Choose channel, design survey, define audience and consent | Privacy and consent first | reference/nps-survey.md |
| ANALYZE | Normalize signals, find patterns, segment and score | Patterns over anecdotes | reference/multi-channel-synthesis.md |
| AMPLIFY | Turn feedback into prioritized recommendations with owners | Actionable, not descriptive | reference/feedback-widget-analysis.md |
Core Contract
- Use
NPSfor loyalty and advocacy. Preserve score bands0-6(Detractor),7-8(Passive),9-10(Promoter). Compare only against dated benchmarks for a comparable industry, audience, touchpoint, and period; do not use universal “good/excellent/world-class” cutoffs. Set relationship and transactional cadence from the program context and survey-fatigue policy. - Use
CSATfor satisfaction at a specific touchpoint. Preserve the1-5scale. Benchmarks: > 80% top-two-box is good, ≥ 85% is world-class, ≤ 5% bottom-box target. Capture immediately after interactions while the experience is fresh (delayed surveys degrade accuracy). - Use
CESfor task effort. Preserve the1-7scale and treat1-3as high effort. Benchmark: ≥ 5 on the 7-point scale is a good score. Use after support interactions or self-service flows. - Use an
Exit Surveywhen cancellation, downgrade, or trial-end churn is the moment of truth. - Use
Multi-Channel Synthesiswhen input spans2+sources or when prioritization depends on segment, journey stage, or revenue exposure. - No single metric captures the full customer experience — use NPS (long-term loyalty), CSAT (touchpoint satisfaction), and CES (process friction) together for a well-rounded picture. Complement with retention, churn, CLV, and FCR for operational ROI linkage.
- Survey design: keep surveys ≤ 10 questions (3-5 min completion). Longer surveys (> 12 min) severely degrade response rates. Optimal collection window is 7-10 days with 1-2 strategic reminders; 90% of responses arrive within the first 48-72 hours.
- When using LLM-powered sentiment analysis, prefer models that detect beyond positive/negative/neutral — modern tools detect 6+ specific emotions (joy, anger, frustration, surprise, etc.) for more actionable insights. For granular product feedback, use aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA) to extract sentiment per feature/topic rather than per-document — this surfaces which specific features delight or frustrate users. Always validate with confusion matrices to catch systematic misclassification patterns.
- LLM-based sentiment classifiers suffer from the Model Variability Problem (MVP): inconsistent classification from prompt sensitivity, stochastic inference, and training data biases. Variance increases with model size, especially on ambiguous or sarcastic text. Mitigate with: (1) temperature=0 and structured output schemas to reduce run-to-run spread — necessary but not sufficient for reproducibility, since provider-side implementation, tie-breaking, distributed execution, and model updates still vary (pin the model snapshot and re-baseline on every migration), (2) multi-run ensemble consensus for critical classifications, (3) entropy-based uncertainty quantification to flag low-confidence predictions for human review, (4) semantic consistency checks across paraphrased inputs. Require explainability (token attribution or a rationale signal) before acting on LLM classifications in production.
- Right-size sentiment tooling: LLMs are 20×+ slower on GPU (40×+ on CPU) than fine-tuned smaller models. For high-volume, low-ambiguity classification (e.g., star-rating prediction, binary polarity), prefer fine-tuned compact models (BERT-class) for cost and latency. Reserve LLMs for complex tasks: aspect-based extraction, sarcasm detection, multi-emotion analysis, or zero-shot domain transfer where no labeled data exists. For large-scale ABSA, prefer a hybrid pipeline — few-shot LLMs (GPT-class reach ~90% accuracy) for aspect identification and opinion term extraction, then fine-tuned classical models (BERT/logistic regression) for per-aspect sentiment classification at scale — combining LLM semantic depth with classical ML's cost and latency profile.
- Response rate benchmarks by channel: email 15-25% (embedded; linked surveys drop to 6-15%), SMS 45-60%, in-app web 25-30% / mobile 35-40%, in-person 85-95%. Choose the channel that balances reach with response quality; SMS outperforms email by 3-4× but may feel intrusive for relationship surveys. For event-triggered surveys via SMS, send within 2 hours of the event — delayed sends lose up to 32% of completions. Track both participation rate (started) and completion rate (finished) — a gap reveals survey design issues.
More from simota
Use this skill in a project
Open any RiverX project, search the Skills panel for simota/agent-skills/voice, and install it in one click.
