Would it be possible to add 'Good', 'Excellent', and 'Best' move in the computer analysis?

I find it motivating but also interesting to learn about what were the good decisions I took in the game and not only the inaccuracies and mistakes.

All those computer categories tend to be misleading enough as it is...

These terms are from engine's point of view and it wouldn't motivate you unless you really think about moves on depth and analyse which is not required.
If you really care about those terms, better go to chess.com cause here we don't want to make it terrible.

The suggestion often says "Good move but you can do better". Don't you want to find the best move?

1-how another site adds ! and !! to moves?

2-lets say when you analyze position x layer deep your move count as blunder but when you analyze 2x layer deep its winning, that should ve ! or !! imo

3-lets say you are 2000 elo, i think engines can be play some elo when you go down its settings. lets set computer to 2000 elo, when you make a move way better than 2000 elo engine its ! or !!. i think thats the same as layer x-layer2x example

4-i wonder can computers learn to think like a human? okey they dont have psychology, they are like cold blooded reptiles i know that. but if we are good at making ais which can think waaaay better than human we can make also engines which can think like a human.

maybe it can analyze blunders mistakes and inaccuries at certain levels for certain time controls (below 1000, 1000-1500, 1500-2000, 2000-2500, 2500-2700, 2700+, lets add the zeitnot factor to that, and lets add the opponents rating pressure also (for example when you play magnus you more likely blunder maybe?) and you have more humanly stockfish. compare human stockfish to unhuman stockfish and there you go ! and !! moves

5- or maybe, when you analyze position for 5 move this is mistake, but after 6. move it become winning, that can be also ! or !!

You know it's a good move the engine doesn't count it as an inaccuracy, mistake or blunder.
If your theoretical power in any position is X, you can never improve it above X - assuming your opponent also plays to max theoretical power. Therefore, any move which does not decrease your ability to win - you can use the engine calculation of "+/-" as a reliable approximation. If that weight doesn't go down at all, you played a perfect move. If it goes down slightly, you played a great move, etc, you can apply your own labels.

@umut that sounds rather complicated to implement. Option 5 - depth required for it to become a good move, seems the most practical. But I don't see why it's important to see you made a "good move" beyond the engine calculation referenced in #6.

If you use Learn from your Mistakes and keep improving, you will make better moves and you will know you are making good moves because your rating will increase.