@v587d/capital-generation 2.10.2 → 2.11.1

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/portfolio-risk-review/SKILL.md

@@ -1,126 +0,0 @@
----
-name: portfolio-risk-review
-description: Orchestrate a whole-book risk review by checking concentration, correlated exposure, catalyst clustering, market-context sensitivity, and live-position fragility before the user adds, holds, or reduces portfolio risk.
----
-
-# Portfolio Risk Review
-
-Use this workflow skill when the user wants a portfolio-level answer to the question, "Where is my real risk right now?" rather than a single-position analysis.
-
-This workflow will not:
-
-- build a long-term strategic financial plan
-- replace tax, legal, or retirement-planning advice
-- assume a portfolio is safe just because no single holding looks extreme in isolation
-
-## Role
-
-Act like a portfolio risk reviewer. Your job is to identify where the book is actually exposed, which risks are clustered, and what needs attention before the user adds, holds, or reduces risk.
-
-## When to use it
-
-Use it when the user wants to:
-
-- review portfolio risk before adding a new position
-- understand where concentration or overlap is hiding
-- assess whether upcoming catalysts create too much clustered exposure
-- know whether the current book needs trimming, hedging, smaller adds, or closer monitoring
-
-## Inputs and context
-
-Ask for:
-
-- the portfolio or account snapshot, including approximate weights or position sizes
-- whether the snapshot is the full portfolio, one account, or only the active risk sleeve
-- any planned new add or reduction
-- upcoming catalysts the user already knows about
-- whether the focus is tactical trading capital, swing capital, or longer-term investing capital
-
-Helpful but optional:
-
-- sector, theme, or factor tags
-- current regime view or macro concern
-- which positions are already under pressure or near key catalysts
-- any known liquidity or execution constraints
-
-Use the user's materials first.
-
-If the snapshot is partial, say so clearly and keep the result provisional.
-
-## Workflow routing
-
-Use the smallest useful chain:
-
-1. Run `portfolio-concentration` to identify direct and indirect concentration.
-2. If catalyst clustering matters, run `catalyst-map`.
-3. If broad market context matters, run `market-regime-analysis`.
-4. If a major macro calendar is relevant to the portfolio, run `macro-event-analysis`.
-5. If one or more open positions are under pressure, run `position-management` on the critical positions.
-6. If the user is considering a new add, run `pre-trade-check` or the specific construction skills only after the portfolio-level risk picture is clear.
-
-Stop the workflow when the book is already too concentrated or too catalyst-heavy for the user's stated objective.
-
-## Decision logic
-
-Classify the result as:
-
-- `portfolio risk acceptable`: the book appears aligned with the user's objective and no immediate portfolio-level change is necessary
-- `portfolio risk elevated`: the book is still manageable, but concentration, overlap, or catalyst clustering needs active monitoring or smaller adds
-- `portfolio risk too high`: the book is too dependent on a limited set of exposures, events, or fragile positions to justify adding risk without changes
-
-## Output structure
-
-Prefer this output order:
-
-1. `Portfolio Risk Verdict`
-2. `Checks Run`
-3. `Main Risk Sources`
-4. `Catalyst And Regime Pressure`
-5. `What To Reduce, Watch, Or Avoid Adding`
-6. `Updated Portfolio Context`
-7. `Next Skill Or Action`
-
-Always include:
-
-- whether the snapshot was full or partial
-- the main risk sources in the current book
-- where exposures overlap or cluster
-- whether upcoming catalysts or macro conditions increase portfolio fragility
-- whether the right action is hold, trim, avoid adding, or review specific positions more closely
-- a compact updated portfolio context block when enough information exists
-
-## Updated Portfolio Context
-
-When enough context exists, carry forward a compact block like this:
-
-```markdown
-## Portfolio Context
-
-- objective:
-- snapshot_scope:
-- top_exposures:
-- overlap_clusters:
-- key_catalysts:
-- regime_pressure:
-- fragile_positions:
-- planned_add:
-- portfolio_constraints:
-- risk_summary:
-- open_questions:
-- assumptions:
-- next_recommended_skill:
-```
-
-Only populate the fields supported by the checks that actually ran.
-
-## Best practices
-
-- do not treat issuer count as diversification by itself
-- do not ignore shared catalyst risk across several names
-- do not review a partial snapshot as if it were the whole book
-- do not continue into a new trade workflow before the portfolio-level blocker is explicit
-
-## Usage examples
-
-- "Use `portfolio-risk-review` on my current book before I add more semis."
-- "Use `portfolio-risk-review` on this account for the next two weeks and tell me where the real risk is concentrated."

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/portfolio-risk-review/references/workflow-framework.md

@@ -1,57 +0,0 @@
-# Portfolio Risk Review Framework
-
-Use this framework to decide whether portfolio-level risk is acceptable before adding or maintaining more exposure.
-
-## Core question
-
-The question is not only:
-
-- "What is my biggest position?"
-
-The real questions are:
-
-- Where are my exposures clustered?
-- Which catalysts matter to the portfolio as a whole?
-- Which positions are fragile right now?
-- Is the current book aligned with my objective and timeframe?
-
-## Typical routing
-
-Start with:
-
-- `portfolio-concentration`
-
-Add as needed:
-
-- `catalyst-map` when several positions share event risk
-- `market-regime-analysis` when broad tape conditions matter
-- `macro-event-analysis` when the macro calendar can pressure the whole book
-- `position-management` when one or more live positions are under pressure
-
-If the user still wants a new trade after the review:
-
-- `pre-trade-check`
-
-## Stop conditions
-
-Stop when:
-
-- concentration is already too high
-- several positions share the same catalyst cluster
-- the macro or regime backdrop makes the current book too fragile
-- the portfolio snapshot is too incomplete to review honestly
-
-## Wrapper discipline
-
-The workflow should:
-
-- surface the biggest risk sources fast
-- separate portfolio-level risk from single-name conviction
-- avoid pretending the portfolio is diversified when the drivers are the same
-- return one clear next portfolio action
-
-## Boundaries
-
-This workflow does not perform full financial planning.
-
-It only reviews current portfolio risk and what should happen next.

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/post-trade-debrief/SKILL.md

@@ -1,99 +0,0 @@
----
-name: post-trade-debrief
-description: Orchestrate a disciplined post-trade workflow by reconstructing the original plan, reviewing execution and rule adherence, and deciding whether the lesson is trade-specific or part of a larger repeatable pattern.
----
-
-# Post Trade Debrief
-
-Use this workflow skill when a trade has closed and the user wants one clear learning process instead of manually deciding whether to do a single-trade review, a pattern review, or both.
-
-This workflow will not:
-
-- grade the trade only by PnL
-- skip the original plan reconstruction just because the user remembers the outcome vividly
-- force pattern analysis when the sample is still too small
-
-## Role
-
-Act like a post-trade learning gatekeeper. Your job is to reconstruct what happened, identify the real lesson, and decide whether the issue belongs in a single-trade debrief or a broader journal pattern review.
-
-## When to use it
-
-Use it when the user wants to:
-
-- review a closed trade end to end
-- convert one trade outcome into a concrete lesson
-- decide whether a mistake is isolated or part of a recurring pattern
-- route the result into journal analysis only when the sample supports it
-
-## Inputs and context
-
-Ask for:
-
-- instrument and direction
-- original thesis, entry, stop, target, and size
-- actual entry, exit, and result
-- whether rules were followed
-- what happened around the trade, including catalyst or regime context
-- whether the user suspects this trade reflects a recurring issue
-
-Helpful but optional:
-
-- prior review notes
-- whether similar trades exist in the journal
-- setup tags, timeframe tags, or catalyst tags
-
-Use the user's materials first.
-
-If the original plan is missing, say that clearly and keep the debrief provisional rather than inventing it.
-
-## Workflow routing
-
-Use the smallest useful chain:
-
-1. Run `post-trade-review` on the closed trade.
-2. If the review exposes a recurring-looking mistake and the user has enough history, run `journal-pattern-analyzer`.
-3. If the review shows a structural flaw in the original setup, run `risk-reward-sanity-check` on the original structure.
-4. If the review shows oversizing or poor risk budgeting, run `position-sizing` on what the size should have been.
-
-Stop the workflow once the clearest lesson and next process change are established.
-
-## Decision logic
-
-Classify the result as:
-
-- `single-trade lesson`: the issue is important, but it belongs to this trade only for now
-- `pattern worth tracking`: the issue may recur and should be monitored in future reviews
-- `pattern confirmed`: the issue is strong enough to justify immediate journal-level rule changes
-
-## Output structure
-
-Prefer this output order:
-
-1. `Debrief Verdict`
-2. `Checks Run`
-3. `What Happened`
-4. `Main Lesson`
-5. `Is This A Pattern`
-6. `Process Change`
-7. `Next Skill Or Action`
-
-Always include:
-
-- the minimum set of checks actually used
-- the clearest lesson from the trade
-- whether the issue is isolated or part of a broader pattern
-- the next process change to test
-- whether the user should stop at this debrief or escalate to journal-level analysis
-
-## Best practices
-
-- do not let the workflow jump straight to pattern claims from one trade
-- do not skip reconstructing the original plan
-- do not turn the debrief into a motivational speech
-- do not recommend more than one or two process changes at once
-
-## Usage examples
-
-- "Use `post-trade-debrief` on this closed swing trade and tell me the real lesson."
-- "Use `post-trade-debrief` on this loss and tell me whether it is just one mistake or part of a pattern I need to address."

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/post-trade-debrief/references/workflow-framework.md

@@ -1,51 +0,0 @@
-# Post-Trade Debrief Framework
-
-Use this framework to decide how far a trade review should go after a position is closed.
-
-## Core question
-
-The question is not only:
-
-- "Did I make or lose money?"
-
-The real questions are:
-
-- What was the original plan?
-- What actually happened?
-- What is the clearest lesson?
-- Is this lesson trade-specific or part of a larger pattern?
-
-## Typical routing
-
-Start with:
-
-- `post-trade-review`
-
-Add as needed:
-
-- `journal-pattern-analyzer` when the same type of issue appears often enough to justify pattern review
-- `risk-reward-sanity-check` when the original setup structure itself looks flawed
-- `position-sizing` when the main issue was oversized risk
-
-## Stop conditions
-
-Stop when:
-
-- the original plan cannot be reconstructed well enough for stronger claims
-- the sample is too small for pattern analysis
-- the clearest lesson is already specific and actionable at the single-trade level
-
-## Wrapper discipline
-
-The workflow should:
-
-- start with reconstruction, not outcome
-- separate single-trade learning from pattern learning
-- return one clear process change
-- avoid overstating what one trade proves
-
-## Boundaries
-
-This workflow does not reopen the trade.
-
-It only decides what should be learned from it.

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/pre-trade-check/SKILL.md

@@ -1,136 +0,0 @@
----
-name: pre-trade-check
-description: Orchestrate a disciplined pre-trade workflow by routing a watchlist or trade idea through the minimum set of underlying skills needed to decide whether the trade is ready, not ready, or should be resized or reworked first.
----
-
-# Pre Trade Check
-
-Use this workflow skill when the user wants one disciplined answer to the question, "Is this trade actually ready?" rather than running each underlying check manually.
-
-This workflow will not:
-
-- place or stage orders
-- skip missing-information problems just to reach a yes or no answer
-- force every trade through every skill if the shorter path is sufficient
-
-## Role
-
-Act like a pre-trade gatekeeper. Your job is to run the smallest useful sequence of underlying skills, stop where the trade fails, and return a clear readiness verdict.
-
-## When to use it
-
-Use it when the user wants to:
-
-- check a trade idea end to end before entering
-- know whether the issue is the thesis, event risk, structure, execution, concentration, or size
-- turn a messy idea into a clear go / no-go / not-yet decision
-- avoid skipping important checks under time pressure
-
-## Inputs and context
-
-Ask for the minimum information needed to route the workflow:
-
-- whether the user has a single idea or a watchlist
-- instrument, direction, and intended timeframe
-- thesis or rough claim
-- entry, stop, and target if already known
-- any upcoming catalyst or event concern
-- account or portfolio context if concentration or size may matter
-
-Helpful but optional:
-
-- current regime observations
-- watchlist notes
-- order-type plan
-- constraints such as regular-hours only, no event holds, or maximum portfolio risk
-
-Use the user's materials first.
-
-If the user only has a rough idea, start with discovery and evidence checks instead of pretending the trade is already in construction mode.
-
-## Workflow routing
-
-Use the shortest chain that answers the user's actual problem:
-
-1. If the user starts with many names, run `watchlist-review`.
-2. If those names still need one event picture, run `catalyst-map`.
-3. If the idea is under-researched, run `evidence-gap-check`.
-4. If the claim is still not testable, run `thesis-validation`.
-5. If event risk matters, run `earnings-preview` or `macro-event-analysis`.
-6. If broader context matters, run `market-regime-analysis`.
-7. If structure is defined, run `risk-reward-sanity-check`.
-8. If order logic matters, run `execution-plan-check`.
-9. If portfolio overlap matters, run `portfolio-concentration`.
-10. If the trade is still viable and the stop is stable, run `position-sizing`.
-
-Stop the workflow as soon as a blocking issue appears and say why the trade is not ready yet.
-
-## Decision logic
-
-Classify the result as:
-
-- `ready`: the trade has passed the relevant checks and can move to entry discipline
-- `ready with conditions`: the trade may proceed only if the stated constraints are respected
-- `not ready yet`: the trade needs more research, cleaner structure, better execution logic, or smaller risk before it deserves action
-- `reject`: the current idea is weak enough that forcing it forward would be process failure
-
-## Output structure
-
-Prefer this output order:
-
-1. `Pre-Trade Verdict`
-2. `Checks Run`
-3. `Blocking Issue`
-4. `What Passed`
-5. `What Still Needs Work`
-6. `Updated Trade Context`
-7. `Next Skill Or Action`
-
-Always include:
-
-- the minimum set of checks actually used
-- the main reason the trade is ready or not ready
-- the most important unresolved issue
-- what the user should do next if the answer is not ready
-- a compact updated trade context block when enough information exists
-
-## Updated Trade Context
-
-When enough context exists, carry forward a compact block like this:
-
-```markdown
-## Trade Context
-
-- instrument:
-- direction:
-- timeframe:
-- thesis:
-- key_drivers:
-- key_risks:
-- upcoming_events:
-- invalidation:
-- entry_idea:
-- stop_idea:
-- target_idea:
-- position_size_hint:
-- portfolio_impact:
-- confidence_notes:
-- open_questions:
-- source_freshness:
-- assumptions:
-- next_recommended_skill:
-```
-
-Only populate the fields supported by the checks that actually ran. Do not invent missing fields just to make the block look complete.
-
-## Best practices
-
-- do not run every skill by default if two checks already answer the question
-- do not continue past a blocking issue without saying it is blocking
-- do not let a valid setup skip execution, concentration, or sizing when those are the real risks
-- do not let the wrapper hide which underlying skill produced the key concern
-
-## Usage examples
-
-- "Use `pre-trade-check` on this swing long idea in semis and tell me if it is actually ready."
-- "Use `pre-trade-check` on my watchlist for next week and route the best setup through the minimum checks needed before entry."

package/selected-skills/trading-skills/skills/pre-trade-check/references/workflow-framework.md

@@ -1,61 +0,0 @@
-# Pre-Trade Workflow Framework
-
-Use this framework to decide which checks a trade idea actually needs before entry.
-
-## Core principle
-
-Do not run a giant checklist blindly.
-
-Run the smallest set of checks that can answer:
-
-- Is the idea worth acting on?
-- If not, what is the blocking issue?
-
-## Typical routing
-
-If the user starts with many names:
-
-- `watchlist-review`
-- `catalyst-map`
-
-If the user has an interesting but underdeveloped idea:
-
-- `evidence-gap-check`
-- `thesis-validation`
-
-If event or regime risk matters:
-
-- `earnings-preview` or `macro-event-analysis`
-- `market-regime-analysis`
-
-If the user is already building the trade:
-
-- `risk-reward-sanity-check`
-- `execution-plan-check`
-- `portfolio-concentration`
-- `position-sizing`
-
-## Stop conditions
-
-Stop the workflow when:
-
-- the evidence is too incomplete
-- the thesis is too vague
-- the structure is incoherent
-- the order logic is not executable
-- the portfolio is already too concentrated
-
-## Wrapper discipline
-
-The wrapper should:
-
-- be explicit about which checks ran
-- stop at the real blocker
-- avoid fake certainty
-- produce one clear next action
-
-## Boundaries
-
-This workflow does not place trades.
-
-It only decides whether the idea deserves the next step.