This is a skillset -- it chains
/signal-scanner->/feedback-audit. Each skill also works independently. This is a lightweight monitoring skillset (2 skills) running on different cadences.
Use this when you want to stay aware of external market signals and internal team patterns without waiting for them to become problems. Signal scanning catches what's happening outside, feedback auditing catches what's building up inside.
Cadence: /signal-scanner weekly (Monday morning, before backlog work). /feedback-audit monthly (end of month).
The chain
| Step | Skill | What it produces | Cadence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | /signal-scanner | Clustered external signals -- the 3 things that matter this week | Weekly (Monday morning) |
| 2 | /feedback-audit | Pattern analysis from journals, retros, and language ledgers | Monthly (end of month) |
How skills chain
/signal-scannersurfaces market moves, competitor launches, and trend shifts -> these inform/backlog-refinepriorities and/stakeholder-preptalking points/feedback-auditidentifies recurring friction patterns from engagement journals -> top patterns feed into/retro-synthesizeaction items,/career-plandevelopment priorities, and working agreement updates
What the PM does between stages
| After... | PM decision |
|---|---|
/signal-scanner | Decide which signals warrant backlog action vs. which are just context. Share relevant signals in standup or stakeholder updates |
/feedback-audit | Save durable patterns as memory files. Flag contradictions for discussion. Update working agreements if patterns reveal team-level friction |
Related skills: Part of the
iteration-orbitrecipe. Signal scanner output feeds into/backlog-craftpriorities. Feedback audit output feeds into/retro-synthesizeaction items.
Example Output
Input
- Practice area: Growth & Monetization PM, B2B SaaS (mid-market CRM)
- Company: Veloxa Systems — 120-person company, PM team of 6
- Signal sources this week: Salesforce announced Einstein Copilot GA for SMB tier; HubSpot dropped per-seat pricing in favor of usage-based model; two LinkedIn posts from enterprise buyers complaining about CRM onboarding fatigue went viral in RevOps communities
- Feedback sources this month: Sprint retros (4), engagement journal (PM lead's running log, 6 weeks of entries), Slack language ledger (informal — PM lead tracks recurring phrases from eng and design partners)
- Current backlog focus: Q3 planning for AI-assisted deal scoring feature
Output (abbreviated)
/practice-health — Veloxa Systems Growth & Monetization PM
Chain run: Signal Scanner (weekly) → Feedback Audit (monthly) Date: Monday, July 14 — end-of-sprint-week
Stage 1 — /signal-scanner
The 3 signals that matter this week
| # | Signal | Source | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HubSpot moves to usage-based pricing | Competitor announcement | Veloxa's per-seat model is now the conservative option in-category. Mid-market buyers will ask about this in next QBR cycle. |
| 2 | Einstein Copilot GA for SMB | Salesforce launch | AI-assisted features are no longer a differentiator claim — they're table stakes. Deal scoring roadmap needs a "why Veloxa's AI" narrative, not just a feature date. |
| 3 | RevOps community noise on onboarding fatigue | LinkedIn / community signal | Buyers are pre-exhausted before they reach your product. Time-to-first-value framing may matter more than feature depth in Q3 messaging. |
Signal → action map
| Signal | Backlog action? | Stakeholder context? |
|---|---|---|
| Usage-based pricing shift | Yes — add pricing model spike to Q3 backlog | Yes — flag for CPO before next board update |
| Copilot GA | Yes — reprioritize deal scoring differentiation narrative | Yes — sales enablement talking points need update |
| Onboarding fatigue | Context only this week | Share in Monday standup |
PM decision point: Signals 1 and 2 warrant backlog action before Q3 planning locks. Signal 3 is context — watch for a second occurrence before creating a work item.
Stage 2 — /feedback-audit
Source material: 4 sprint retros, 6 weeks of engagement journal, Slack language ledger
Pattern clusters
Cluster A — Scope expansion at sprint boundary (high recurrence)
- Where it appears: Retros (3 of 4), journal entries tagged "Thursday pressure"
- Language ledger signal: "can we just add…" appears 11 times across 6 weeks, almost always Wednesday–Thursday
- Pattern: Scope additions arrive late in sprint, framed as small, and accepted without explicit trade-off discussion
- Friction level: Medium now, high-risk if Q3 planning increases sprint surface area
Cluster B — AI feature anxiety from design partner (emerging)
- Where it appears: Journal (4 entries), one retro action item that was closed without resolution
- Language ledger signal: "how will users know to trust it" — 5 appearances, all from same design lead
- Pattern: Unresolved trust/transparency concern about deal scoring feature. Not escalated formally, but recurring.
- Friction level: Low volume, high signal quality — this is a real design risk, not noise
Cluster C — Positive: async decision-making is working (stable)
- Where it appears: Retro sentiment, journal notes on "the Loom thing"
- Pattern: Team switched to async Loom updates for design reviews 5 weeks ago. Zero retro complaints about meeting load since. Durable win.
Contradiction flag
Retro language in weeks 2 and 4 suggests the team feels "well-aligned on priorities" — but the language ledger shows recurring late-sprint scope pressure. These contradict. Possible explanation: alignment is felt at sprint start, not maintained at sprint end. Worth a direct conversation, not just a retro item.
Recommended PM actions
| Action | Trigger | Route to |
|---|---|---|
| Add scope boundary working agreement | Cluster A pattern | Update team working agreement this week |
| Open explicit design conversation on AI trust | Cluster B recurrence | Pull into next /retro-synthesize action items; add to /career-plan as "facilitation moment" |
| Save async-Loom pattern as durable memory | Cluster C | Memory file — reference in future team onboarding |
| Name the alignment contradiction in next retro | Contradiction flag | /retro-synthesize framing |
Practice health summary
| Dimension | Status | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| External signal awareness | Strong — 3 actionable signals surfaced | ↑ Salesforce/HubSpot moves require response |
| Backlog responsiveness | At risk — Q3 lock is close, two signals need slots | Act this week |
| Team friction | Manageable — one structural pattern, one design risk | Address before Q3 velocity increases |
| Team wins | Stable — async practice is a genuine durable gain | Protect it |
Next signal scan: Monday, July 21. Next feedback audit: July 31 (end of month).