Atlas / Skills / revfactory / Sentiment Scoring

Sentiment ScoringSAFE

skills/revfactory/sentiment-scoring
Verdict
SAFE
Grade
B
Trust score
89 /100
Version
—
Hosts
—
License
Apache-2.0
Stars
1,297
01

Overview

An agent skill published by revfactory.

Read from source at commit 459e1bb8f76eOBSERVED · 2026-10-12
02

What it tells the agent

The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.

---
name: sentiment-scoring
description: "Sentiment analysis scoring framework. Referenced by the sentiment-analyst agent for systematic sentiment classification and scoring of text data. Used for 'sentiment analysis', 'emotion score', 'NPS analysis' requests. Note: ML model training and NLP pipeline development are out of scope."
---

# Sentiment Scoring

Enhances the sentiment-analyst agent's sentiment classification and scoring capabilities.

## Sentiment Classification System

### 3-Level Basic Classification

| Classification | Score Range | Signal Words |
|---------------|------------|--------------|
| Positive | +0.5 to +1.0 | good, satisfied, recommend, convenient, best |
| Neutral | -0.5 to +0.5 | average, okay, so-so |
| Negative | -1.0 to -0.5 | dissatisfied, disappointed, worst, inconvenient, slow |

### 5-Level Detailed Classification

| Classification | Score | Expression Examples |
|---------------|-------|-------------------|
| Very Positive | +0.8 to +1.0 | "Absolutely the best!", "Highly recommend" |
| Positive | +0.3 to +0.7 | "Pretty good", "Satisfied" |
| Neutral | -0.2 to +0.2 | "It's average", "Not bad" |
| Negative | -0.7 to -0.3 | "Somewhat inconvenient", "Below expectations" |
| Very Negative | -1.0 to -0.8 | "Never using this again", "Worst ever" |

## Sentiment Analysis Methodology

### Rule-based Analysis

```
1. Tokenize: Sentence → word/phrase segmentation
2. Sentiment dictionary matching:
   - Positive words (+1): satisfied, good, convenient, recommend...
   - Negative words (-1): dissatisfied, disappointed, inconvenient, slow...
   - Intensifiers (×1.5): very, really, extremely, totally...
   - Negators (×-1): not, no, cannot, never...
3. Sentence score = Σ(word scores) / word count
4. Document score = Σ(sentence scores) / sentence count
```

### Context Correction Rules

| Pattern | Handling | Example |
|---------|----------|---------|
| Positive + "but" + Negative | Weight latter part | "Good but expensive" → -0.3 |
| Negative + "but" + Positive | Weight latter part | "Expensive but good" → +0.3 |
| Sarcasm | Invert | "Really impressive (sarcastic)" → -0.5 |
| Comparison | Relative evaluation | "B is better than A" → B positive |
| Conditional | Weaken | "It would be nice if..." → -0.2 |

## NPS (Net Promoter Score) Analysis

### NPS Calculation

```
NPS Question: "Would you recommend this product?" (0-10 scale)

Promoter: 9-10
Passive: 7-8
Detractor: 0-6

NPS = Promoter% - Detractor%
Range: -100 to +100
```

### NPS Benchmark

| NPS Range | Rating | Interpretation |
|-----------|--------|----------------|
| 70+ | World-class | Apple, Tesla tier |
| 50-69 | Excellent | Industry leader |
| 30-49 | Good | Above average |
| 0-29 | Needs improvement | Average level |
| Below 0 | At risk | Immediate action needed |

## Sentiment Trend Analysis

### Time-series Sentiment Tracking

```
Monthly sentiment score changes:
  Jan: +0.45 (positive-dominant)
  Feb: +0.38 (slight decline)
  Mar: -0.12 (negative shift) ← event investigation needed
  Apr: +0.22 (recovering)

Anomaly detection threshold:
  ±0.3 or greater change from previous month → root cause analysis required
```

## Quality Checklist

| Item | Criteria |
|------|----------|
| Classification system | Consistent 3-level or 5-level application |
| Context correction | Inversion/intensification/conditional handling |
| Confidence interval | Ambiguous cases treated as neutral |
| NPS calculation | Standard formula applied |
| Trend | Time-series tracking + anomaly detection |
03

Trust audit

SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.

LayerWhat it checksResult
L0Provenance & inventoryPASS
L1Static analysis of the codeNA
L2Instruction surface (what it tells the agent)PASS
L3Class-specific surfacePASS
L4Behavioural (sandbox)SKIPPED

What the source does

Filesystem
none-observed
Network
none-observed
Shell
none-observed
Dependencies
pinned
Secrets in source
none-found

Findings (0)

No findings outside the package's declared scope.

Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.

Audited 2026-10-12 · audit v0.4.1 · source sha 459e1bb8f76efull audit observations/trust-audit/skill/revfactory__sentiment-scoring.json · Report an issue / request a re-scan
04

Audit history

Every audit this skill has had.

DateSourceVerdictGradeScoreChange
2026-10-12459e1bb8f76eSAFEB89first audit
05

Questions

Is Sentiment Scoring safe to install?

The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.

What can Sentiment Scoring access on my machine?

The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.

How current is this page?

The grade is for one exact copy of the source (459e1bb8f76e), read on 2026-10-12. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.

Advertisement