chore: sync skills/guideline-generation/references/confidence-scoring.md for v1.2.1

skills/guideline-generation/references/confidence-scoring.md

@@ -14,6 +14,8 @@ The guideline section is well-supported and actionable.
 - Specific, actionable instructions (not just vague principles)
 - No unresolved conflicts
 
+**Example:** Voice attribute "Confident but not arrogant" appears in the official style guide, is demonstrated in email templates, and matches patterns in top performer calls.
+
 ### Medium Confidence
 The section is reasonable but could benefit from more data or team confirmation.
 
@@ -24,6 +26,8 @@ The section is reasonable but could benefit from more data or team confirmation.
 - Actionable but some interpretation was required
 - May have one unresolved conflict
 
+**Example:** Tone for social media inferred from email templates and one Slack thread, but no official social media guidelines exist.
+
 ### Low Confidence
 The section is a best-effort recommendation. Team review strongly recommended.
 
@@ -34,6 +38,44 @@ The section is a best-effort recommendation. Team review strongly recommended.
 - Unresolved conflicts between sources
 - Limited specificity
 
+**Example:** Competitive positioning derived from a single sales call where a competitor was discussed, with no supporting documentation.
+
+## Section-Level Scoring Guide
+
+### Voice Attributes
+- **High**: Attributes appear in official brand guide AND are demonstrated in templates or calls
+- **Medium**: Attributes appear in one document type only, or are inferred from multiple conversations
+- **Low**: Attributes inferred from a single source or from indirect evidence
+
+### Messaging Framework
+- **High**: Value propositions documented in official materials AND used consistently in sales conversations
+- **Medium**: Documented but not observed in practice, OR observed but not documented
+- **Low**: Extracted from a single pitch deck or single call
+
+### Tone Matrix
+- **High**: Explicit tone guidance exists for the context AND matches observed behavior
+- **Medium**: Tone inferred from 3+ examples of content in that context
+- **Low**: Tone inferred from 1-2 examples, or extrapolated from similar contexts
+
+### Terminology
+- **High**: Terms explicitly listed in a style guide or glossary
+- **Medium**: Terms consistently used in templates and calls (pattern-based)
+- **Low**: Terms observed in a single document or inferred from brand personality
+
+### Language Patterns (from transcripts)
+- **High**: Pattern observed in 5+ calls across multiple speakers
+- **Medium**: Pattern observed in 3-4 calls or from a single top performer
+- **Low**: Pattern observed in 1-2 calls only
+
+### Transcript-Primary Scenarios
+
+When guidelines are generated primarily from conversational sources (no AUTHORITATIVE documents available):
+- Voice Attributes derived from 5+ transcripts = **Medium** (not Low)
+- Messaging Framework from consistent patterns across 5+ calls = **Medium**
+- Language Patterns weight increases from 10% to 20% in aggregate calculation (subtract 10% from Voice Attributes)
+
+Note this in the guideline metadata: "Guidelines generated primarily from conversational sources — team review recommended to formalize."
+
 ## Aggregate Confidence
 
 Calculate overall guideline confidence as the weighted average of section scores:
@@ -48,15 +90,39 @@ Calculate overall guideline confidence as the weighted average of section scores
 
 Convert scores: High = 1.0, Medium = 0.6, Low = 0.3
 
+**Example:**
+- Voice Attributes: High (1.0 x 0.30 = 0.30)
+- Messaging: Medium (0.6 x 0.25 = 0.15)
+- Tone: Medium (0.6 x 0.20 = 0.12)
+- Terminology: High (1.0 x 0.15 = 0.15)
+- Language: Low (0.3 x 0.10 = 0.03)
+- **Overall: 0.75 = Medium-High confidence**
+
 **Aggregate score thresholds:**
 - 0.85–1.0 = High
 - 0.60–0.84 = Medium
 - Below 0.60 = Low
 
+## Presentation
+
+Present confidence alongside each section header:
+
+```markdown
+## Voice Attributes (Confidence: High)
+[content]
+
+## Tone Matrix (Confidence: Medium)
+[content — note: no official social media guidelines found, tone inferred from email patterns]
+```
+
+For Medium and Low confidence sections, include a brief note explaining why confidence is limited and what would raise it.
+
 ## Relationship to Open Questions
 
+Low confidence sections should generate corresponding open questions:
+
 - **Low confidence + conflict** = High Priority open question
 - **Low confidence + gap** = Medium Priority open question
 - **Medium confidence + minor inconsistency** = Low Priority open question
 
-Every open question includes a recommendation that, if confirmed, would raise the section's confidence score.
+Every open question includes a recommendation that, if confirmed, would raise the section's confidence score.