alphacouncil-agent 0.6.0 → 0.8.0

package/knowledge/masters/master_marks/manifest.json

@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
+{
+  "schema_version": 2,
+  "persona_id": "master_marks",
+  "display_name": {
+    "en": "Marks Method Model",
+    "zh": "霍华德·马克斯方法模型"
+  },
+  "kind": "operator_lens",
+
+  "admission": {
+    "propositions": 5,
+    "primary_sources": 3,
+    "decision_cases": 0,
+    "failure_cases": 1,
+    "vetoes": 2,
+    "counterfactuals": 0
+  },
+
+  "sources": [
+    {
+      "id": "marks:S01",
+      "grade": "A",
+      "title": "Oaktree Capital memos by Howard Marks (signed, author's own)",
+      "url": "https://www.oaktreecapital.com/insights/memos",
+      "date": "1990-2026",
+      "excerpt": "we cannot predict but we can prepare; where we stand in the cycle"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "marks:S02",
+      "grade": "A",
+      "title": "The Most Important Thing (author's own text)",
+      "url": "https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-most-important-thing/9780231162845",
+      "date": "2011-05-01",
+      "excerpt": "risk is the probability of permanent loss, not volatility; second-level thinking"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "marks:S03",
+      "grade": "A",
+      "title": "Mastering the Market Cycle (author's own text)",
+      "url": "https://www.hmhbooks.com/shop/books/mastering-the-market-cycle/9781328479259",
+      "date": "2018-10-02",
+      "excerpt": "calibrate position to where we stand, not to a forecast"
+    }
+  ],
+
+  "doctrine": [
+    {
+      "rule_id": "marks.risk_definition.01",
+      "claim": "Risk is the probability of permanent capital loss, not price volatility; a volatile asset that cannot be impaired is not the risk being priced",
+      "scope": ["public_equity", "credit"],
+      "trigger": "risk_assessment",
+      "action": "require_evidence",
+      "source_ids": ["marks:S02"],
+      "confidence": "high",
+      "counterexamples": [],
+      "version": 1
+    },
+    {
+      "rule_id": "marks.second_level.01",
+      "claim": "A view that matches consensus carries no return; the question is what price already assumes",
+      "scope": ["public_equity"],
+      "trigger": "view_matches_consensus",
+      "action": "downweight",
+      "source_ids": ["marks:S02"],
+      "confidence": "high",
+      "counterexamples": [],
+      "version": 1
+    },
+    {
+      "rule_id": "marks.cycle_position.01",
+      "claim": "Calibrate aggressiveness to cycle position rather than to a forecast of the next move",
+      "scope": ["portfolio"],
+      "trigger": "sizing_decision",
+      "action": "size_cap",
+      "source_ids": ["marks:S03"],
+      "confidence": "high",
+      "counterexamples": [],
+      "version": 1
+    },
+    {
+      "rule_id": "marks.euphoria_veto.01",
+      "claim": "Refuse to add when credit is loose, spreads are compressed and scepticism has disappeared, however good the asset",
+      "scope": ["public_equity", "credit"],
+      "trigger": "cycle_euphoria",
+      "action": "veto",
+      "source_ids": ["marks:S01", "marks:S03"],
+      "confidence": "high",
+      "counterexamples": [],
+      "version": 1
+    },
+    {
+      "rule_id": "marks.no_forecast.01",
+      "claim": "Do not forecast macro; read where we stand and what is already priced",
+      "scope": ["portfolio"],
+      "trigger": "macro_forecast_requested",
+      "action": "out_of_scope",
+      "source_ids": ["marks:S01"],
+      "confidence": "high",
+      "counterexamples": [],
+      "version": 1
+    }
+  ],
+
+  "research_policy": {
+    "priorities": ["cycle_position", "consensus_gap", "price_implied_expectations", "permanent_loss"],
+    "must_recompute": ["price_implied_growth", "downside_to_impairment"],
+    "must_seek_disconfirming": ["what the price already assumes", "who is on the other side", "credit availability"],
+    "evidence_slice": ["valuation_long_short", "quant_factor", "macro_regime"]
+  },
+
+  "decision_policy": {
+    "eligibility": {
+      "requires": [
+        "cycle.valuation_percentile",
+        "cycle.credit_spread_percentile"
+      ],
+      "on_fail": "out_of_scope"
+    },
+    "scoring": {
+      "max_score": 10,
+      "rules": [
+        {
+          "id": "valuation_percentile",
+          "metric": "cycle.valuation_percentile",
+          "op": "<=",
+          "value": 0.4,
+          "points": 3,
+          "provenance": "marks:S03 calibrate to where we stand; the lower decile of the range is where the odds sit"
+        },
+        {
+          "id": "consensus_gap",
+          "metric": "cycle.consensus_gap_score",
+          "op": ">=",
+          "value": 0.5,
+          "points": 3,
+          "provenance": "marks:S02 second-level thinking; a view identical to consensus earns nothing"
+        },
+        {
+          "id": "credit_not_euphoric",
+          "metric": "cycle.credit_spread_percentile",
+          "op": ">=",
+          "value": 0.3,
+          "points": 2,
+          "provenance": "marks:S01 loose credit is the reliable marker of a late cycle"
+        },
+        {
+          "id": "impairment_bounded",
+          "metric": "risk.permanent_loss_bounded",
+          "op": "==",
+          "value": true,
+          "points": 2,
+          "provenance": "marks:S02 risk is permanent loss; a bounded downside is the precondition, not the upside"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "stance_bands": [
+      { "min_ratio": 0.7, "stance": "constructive" },
+      { "min_ratio": 0.4, "stance": "cautious" },
+      { "min_ratio": 0, "stance": "opposed" }
+    ],
+    "vetoes": [
+      {
+        "id": "cycle_euphoria",
+        "condition": "cycle.valuation_percentile >= 0.9",
+        "source_ids": ["marks:S03"]
+      },
+      {
+        "id": "unbounded_impairment",
+        "condition": "!risk.permanent_loss_bounded",
+        "source_ids": ["marks:S02"]
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+
+  "memory_policy": {
+    "horizon_days": 540,
+    "belief_decay_days": 720,
+    "leak_rule": "public_at <= as_of AND memory_created_at <= as_of"
+  },
+
+  "tools": ["get_macro_snapshot", "get_market_narrative"]
+}

package/knowledge/masters/master_taleb/manifest.json

@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
+{
+  "schema_version": 2,
+  "persona_id": "master_taleb",
+  "display_name": {
+    "en": "Taleb Method Model",
+    "zh": "塔勒布方法模型"
+  },
+  "kind": "operator_lens",
+
+  "admission": {
+    "propositions": 5,
+    "primary_sources": 3,
+    "decision_cases": 0,
+    "failure_cases": 1,
+    "vetoes": 2,
+    "counterfactuals": 0
+  },
+
+  "sources": [
+    {
+      "id": "taleb:S01",
+      "grade": "A",
+      "title": "Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder (author's own text)",
+      "url": "https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/176227/antifragile-by-nassim-nicholas-taleb/",
+      "date": "2012-11-27",
+      "excerpt": "convexity: gaining more from favourable outcomes than losing from unfavourable ones"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "taleb:S02",
+      "grade": "A",
+      "title": "Dynamic Hedging: Managing Vanilla and Exotic Options",
+      "url": "https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Dynamic+Hedging-p-9780471152804",
+      "date": "1997-01-14",
+      "excerpt": "skew and the pricing of tails"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "taleb:S03",
+      "grade": "A",
+      "title": "The Black Swan / Incerto: ruin and non-ergodicity",
+      "url": "https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/176226/the-black-swan-by-nassim-nicholas-taleb/",
+      "date": "2007-04-17",
+      "excerpt": "absorbing barriers: a strategy that can reach ruin has no expected value worth quoting"
+    }
+  ],
+
+  "doctrine": [
+    {
+      "rule_id": "taleb.ruin_first.01",
+      "claim": "Rule out ruin before discussing return; an absorbing barrier voids any expected value",
+      "scope": ["public_equity", "portfolio", "derivatives"],
+      "trigger": "ruin_path_exists",
+      "action": "veto",
+      "source_ids": ["taleb:S03"],
+      "confidence": "high",
+      "counterexamples": [],
+      "version": 1
+    },
+    {
+      "rule_id": "taleb.convexity.01",
+      "claim": "Prefer payoffs that gain more from favourable surprise than they lose from unfavourable; refuse concave payoffs whatever their carry",
+      "scope": ["derivatives", "public_equity"],
+      "trigger": "payoff_shape_assessment",
+      "action": "require_evidence",
+      "source_ids": ["taleb:S01"],
+      "confidence": "high",
+      "counterexamples": [],
+      "version": 1
+    },
+    {
+      "rule_id": "taleb.tail_pricing.01",
+      "claim": "A flat skew on a security that has demonstrated jumps means the tail is not being paid for",
+      "scope": ["derivatives"],
+      "trigger": "skew_flat_with_realized_jumps",
+      "action": "upweight",
+      "source_ids": ["taleb:S02"],
+      "confidence": "medium",
+      "counterexamples": ["a wide bid-ask can make a skew reading a measurement artifact rather than a price"],
+      "version": 1
+    },
+    {
+      "rule_id": "taleb.frictions.01",
+      "claim": "An edge smaller than the round-trip cost of expressing it is not an edge",
+      "scope": ["derivatives"],
+      "trigger": "edge_below_friction",
+      "action": "veto",
+      "source_ids": ["taleb:S02"],
+      "confidence": "high",
+      "counterexamples": [],
+      "version": 1
+    },
+    {
+      "rule_id": "taleb.no_point_forecast.01",
+      "claim": "Do not issue a direction or a target price; state the payoff structure and the conditions of ruin",
+      "scope": ["public_equity", "derivatives"],
+      "trigger": "price_target_requested",
+      "action": "out_of_scope",
+      "source_ids": ["taleb:S03"],
+      "confidence": "high",
+      "counterexamples": [],
+      "version": 1
+    }
+  ],
+
+  "research_policy": {
+    "priorities": ["fragility", "tail_pricing", "liquidity", "leverage"],
+    "must_recompute": ["realized_vs_implied_vol", "round_trip_friction"],
+    "must_seek_disconfirming": ["hidden leverage", "covenant triggers", "liquidity withdrawal", "expiry gaps around known events"],
+    "evidence_slice": ["quant_factor", "ib_event_analysis"]
+  },
+
+  "decision_policy": {
+    "eligibility": {
+      "requires": [
+        "options.chain_available",
+        "options.atm_iv"
+      ],
+      "on_fail": "out_of_scope"
+    },
+    "scoring": {
+      "max_score": 10,
+      "rules": [
+        {
+          "id": "implied_below_realized",
+          "metric": "options.realized_minus_implied_vol_points",
+          "op": ">=",
+          "value": 5,
+          "points": 3,
+          "provenance": "taleb:S02 tails are cheap when implied sits below demonstrated realized movement"
+        },
+        {
+          "id": "skew_flat",
+          "metric": "options.skew_25d_points",
+          "op": "<=",
+          "value": 1,
+          "points": 2,
+          "provenance": "taleb:S02 a flat skew on a jumping security means nobody is paying for the tail"
+        },
+        {
+          "id": "edge_survives_friction",
+          "metric": "options.net_edge_vol_points",
+          "op": ">=",
+          "value": 3,
+          "points": 3,
+          "provenance": "taleb:S02 an edge below round-trip cost is not an edge; friction is subtracted before it counts"
+        },
+        {
+          "id": "event_covered",
+          "metric": "options.expiry_covers_next_event",
+          "op": "==",
+          "value": true,
+          "points": 2,
+          "provenance": "taleb:S01 convexity bought outside the event window is not convexity, it is decay"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "stance_bands": [
+      { "min_ratio": 0.7, "stance": "constructive" },
+      { "min_ratio": 0.35, "stance": "cautious" },
+      { "min_ratio": 0, "stance": "opposed" }
+    ],
+    "vetoes": [
+      {
+        "id": "ruin_path",
+        "condition": "risk.ruin_possible",
+        "source_ids": ["taleb:S03"]
+      },
+      {
+        "id": "edge_eaten_by_friction",
+        "condition": "options.net_edge_vol_points <= 0",
+        "source_ids": ["taleb:S02"]
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+
+  "memory_policy": {
+    "horizon_days": 120,
+    "belief_decay_days": 180,
+    "leak_rule": "public_at <= as_of AND memory_created_at <= as_of"
+  },
+
+  "tools": ["get_options_chain", "get_quote"]
+}

package/mcp/lib/constants.mjs

@@ -51,6 +51,10 @@ export const REPORT_SECTIONS = [
   { id: "conclusion", aliases: ["结论", "conclusion"], min_body: 6 },
   { id: "analyst_work_log", aliases: ["分析师工作记录", "analyst work log"], min_body: 12, per_task: true },
   { id: "debate_record", aliases: ["多空辩论记录", "bull bear debate", "debate record"], min_body: 20 },
+  // Required only when a bench actually ran. A report that spends ten master seats and
+  // then mentions none of them is the defect this entry exists to catch; a screen-only
+  // run that never selected one must not be failed for omitting it.
+  { id: "master_bench", aliases: ["大师席", "master bench", "master lens"], min_body: 20, when_masters: true },
   { id: "market_expectations", aliases: ["市场预期", "market expectations"], min_body: 8 },
   { id: "analyst_rating", aliases: ["分析师评级", "analyst rating", "target price"], min_body: 8 },
   { id: "earnings_call", aliases: ["电话会", "earnings call"], min_body: 8 },

package/mcp/lib/gates.mjs

@@ -161,7 +161,9 @@ export function validateFinalReport(markdown, run) {
   const missing = [];
   const sections = [];
 
+  const benchRan = ((run?.masters || []).length > 0) || ((run?.master_opinions || []).length > 0);
   for (const section of REPORT_SECTIONS) {
+    if (section.when_masters && !benchRan) continue;
     const heading = assigned.get(section.id);
     if (!heading) {
       missing.push(`missing section: ${section.id}`);
@@ -203,6 +205,6 @@ export function validateFinalReport(markdown, run) {
     missing,
     sections,
     checked_at: new Date().toISOString(),
-    required_sections: REPORT_SECTIONS.map((section) => section.id),
+    required_sections: REPORT_SECTIONS.filter((s) => !s.when_masters || benchRan).map((section) => section.id),
   };
 }

package/mcp/lib/markdown.mjs

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ import { isChineseLanguage } from "./lang.mjs";
 import { bullets, clip, fence } from "./text.mjs";
 import { completenessStatus, validateFinalReport, verificationStatus, withCompletenessBanner, withDisclaimer, withVerificationBanner } from "./gates.mjs";
 import { agentState, appendEvent, artifactPaths, runPath, taskState } from "./run-store.mjs";
+import { personaTitle, registry } from "./personas/registry.mjs";
 
 export function renderPacketMarkdown(packet, index) {
   const claims = packet.claims.length
@@ -49,6 +50,176 @@ export function renderPacketMarkdown(packet, index) {
   ].join("\n");
 }
 
+/**
+ * A recorded master opinion, rendered so a reader can see what the lens actually said.
+ *
+ * Master opinions were stored, gated for completeness and weighted into the synthesis, and
+ * then rendered nowhere: a run could select ten lenses, pass every gate, and emit a report
+ * in which none of them were readable. `out_of_scope` is included deliberately — a method
+ * declining to judge is a finding, and hiding it is how a bench looks unanimous.
+ */
+export function renderMasterMarkdown(opinion, lang) {
+  if (!opinion) return "";
+  const title = masterTitle(opinion.master, lang);
+  return [
+    `## ${title}`,
+    "",
+    `- ID: ${opinion.master}`,
+    `- Stance: ${opinion.stance || "unknown"}`,
+    `- Verdict: ${opinion.verdict || ""}`,
+    `- Confidence: ${opinion.confidence || "low"}`,
+    opinion.thread_id ? `- Visible thread ID: ${opinion.thread_id}` : "",
+    "",
+    "### Summary",
+    opinion.summary || "",
+    "",
+    "### Key Findings",
+    bullets(opinion.key_findings),
+    "",
+    "### Disagreements With The Analysts",
+    bullets(opinion.disagreements),
+    "",
+    "### Disqualifiers Triggered",
+    bullets(opinion.disqualifiers_triggered),
+    "",
+    "### What Would Change My Mind",
+    bullets(opinion.what_would_change_my_mind),
+    "",
+    "### Sources",
+    (opinion.source_ids || []).length ? (opinion.source_ids || []).map((id) => `- ${id}`).join("\n") : "- None",
+  ].filter((line) => line !== "").join("\n");
+}
+
+/**
+ * Printed above every rendered bench, in the report's language.
+ *
+ * Master seats share a base model, an evidence brief and a context window, so their errors
+ * are correlated and their agreement is not independent confirmation. Published measurements
+ * put LLM error correlation above 60%, which is why a tally of concurring seats is the
+ * weakest thing a council produces and the dissenting seat is the informative one. Stating
+ * this next to the opinions is the difference between a bench and a vote count.
+ */
+export function masterCorrelationNote(run) {
+  const opinions = run?.master_opinions || [];
+  if (!opinions.length) return "";
+  const stances = new Map();
+  for (const opinion of opinions) {
+    const key = opinion.stance || "unknown";
+    stances.set(key, (stances.get(key) || 0) + 1);
+  }
+  const spread = [...stances.entries()].map(([stance, n]) => `${stance}=${n}`).join(", ");
+  const zh = isChineseLanguage(run?.language);
+  return zh
+    ? [
+      "> **这些席位不是独立样本。** 它们共享同一个基础模型、同一份证据简报和同一个上下文，",
+      `> 因此错误是相关的。本次立场分布（${spread}）**不能当作票数来计算**：一致本身是预期结果，`,
+      "> 不是发现。有信息量的是分歧席位，以及它的分歧来自信息差还是方法差。",
+    ].join("\n")
+    : [
+      "> **These seats are not independent samples.** They share a base model, an evidence",
+      `> brief and a context window, so their errors are correlated. The stance spread (${spread})`,
+      "> **is not a vote count**: agreement is the expected outcome, not a finding. The",
+      "> informative seat is the dissenting one, and why it dissents.",
+    ].join("\n");
+}
+
+/**
+ * The bench, ordered so the dissent is read first.
+ *
+ * A concurring seat is the weakest thing a council produces and the minority is where the
+ * information is -- measurements put the minority right in roughly one divergent case in
+ * four, and a majority rule discards exactly that. Printing the concurring block first
+ * reproduces the tally in prose even when the numbers have been removed, so the order is
+ * part of the fix rather than presentation.
+ */
+export function renderBenchSummary(run) {
+  const opinions = run?.master_opinions || [];
+  if (!opinions.length) return "";
+  const zh = isChineseLanguage(run?.language);
+  const counts = new Map();
+  for (const o of opinions) counts.set(o.stance || "unknown", (counts.get(o.stance || "unknown") || 0) + 1);
+  const ranked = [...counts.entries()].sort((a, b) => b[1] - a[1]);
+  const majority = ranked[0]?.[0];
+  const minority = opinions.filter((o) => (o.stance || "unknown") !== majority);
+  const concurring = opinions.filter((o) => (o.stance || "unknown") === majority);
+
+  const row = (o) => `| ${masterTitle(o.master, run?.language)} | ${o.stance || "unknown"} | ${o.confidence || "low"} | ${clip(o.verdict || o.summary || "", 90)} |`;
+  const head = zh
+    ? ["| 方法 | 立场 | 置信度 | 判断 |", "|---|---|---|---|"]
+    : ["| Method | Stance | Confidence | Verdict |", "|---|---|---|---|"];
+
+  const sections = [masterCorrelationNote(run), ""];
+  if (minority.length) {
+    sections.push(
+      zh ? "### 少数派（先读这个）" : "### Minority report (read this first)",
+      "",
+      zh
+        ? `${minority.length} 席与多数不同。分歧席位是本次运行里信息量最高的部分——请先判断分歧来自信息差还是方法差。`
+        : `${minority.length} seat(s) diverge. Divergence is the highest-information part of this run: establish whether it comes from the evidence slice or from the method.`,
+      "",
+      ...head,
+      ...minority.map(row),
+      "",
+    );
+  } else {
+    sections.push(
+      zh
+        ? "### 少数派：无\n\n所有席位立场一致。鉴于它们共享模型与证据，一致是预期结果而非确认——本次运行没有产生任何独立的反对意见。"
+        : "### Minority report: none\n\nEvery seat agreed. Given a shared model and a shared brief, agreement is the expected outcome rather than confirmation: this run produced no independent dissent.",
+      "",
+    );
+  }
+  sections.push(
+    zh ? "### 其余席位" : "### Concurring seats",
+    "",
+    ...head,
+    ...concurring.map(row),
+  );
+  return sections.filter((s) => s !== undefined).join("\n");
+}
+
+/**
+ * The deterministic half, printed as evidence rather than as a vote.
+ *
+ * Shows what each method could actually measure. `coverage` is the honest column: a score
+ * produced from a fifth of a rule set has sampled the company, not judged it.
+ */
+export function renderDecisionTable(decisions, lang) {
+  if (!Array.isArray(decisions) || !decisions.length) return "";
+  const zh = isChineseLanguage(lang);
+  const head = zh
+    ? ["| 方法 | 可评估 | 得分 | 覆盖率 | 立场 | 依据 |", "|---|---|---|---|---|---|"]
+    : ["| Method | Eligible | Score | Coverage | Stance | Basis |", "|---|---|---|---|---|---|"];
+  const rows = decisions.map((d) => {
+    const eligible = d.reason === "eligibility" ? (zh ? "否" : "no") : (zh ? "是" : "yes");
+    const score = d.score && d.score.max_possible ? `${d.score.score}/${d.score.max_possible}` : "—";
+    const coverage = d.score && d.score.declared_max ? `${Math.round((d.score.coverage || 0) * 100)}%` : "—";
+    return `| ${d.persona_id} | ${eligible} | ${score} | ${coverage} | ${d.stance} | ${d.reason} |`;
+  });
+  return [
+    zh ? "### 确定性评分（模型调用之前）" : "### Deterministic scoring (before any model call)",
+    "",
+    ...head,
+    ...rows,
+    "",
+    zh
+      ? "> 覆盖率是这张表最重要的一列：只跑得动一小部分规则的方法是抽样了这家公司，不是判断了它。`可评估=否` 的席位没有花费任何模型调用。"
+      : "> Coverage is the column that matters: a method that could run a fraction of its rules sampled the company rather than judging it. Rows marked not eligible cost no model call.",
+  ].join("\n");
+}
+
+/** Registry title when the persona resolves, the raw id when it does not. */
+function masterTitle(id, lang) {
+  if (!id) return "Master";
+  try {
+    const persona = registry().get(id);
+    const title = personaTitle(persona, lang);
+    return title && title !== id ? `${title} (${id})` : id;
+  } catch {
+    return id;
+  }
+}
+
 export function renderDebateRounds(rounds) {
   if (!Array.isArray(rounds) || rounds.length === 0) return "";
   const blocks = rounds.map((round) => [
@@ -163,6 +334,17 @@ export function writeAllAgentsMarkdown(run, debate = {}) {
     "",
     ...run.packets.map(renderPacketMarkdown),
   ];
+  const opinions = run.master_opinions || [];
+  if (opinions.length) {
+    sections.push(
+      "",
+      "# Master Bench",
+      "",
+      renderBenchSummary(run),
+      "",
+      ...opinions.map((opinion) => renderMasterMarkdown(opinion, run.language)),
+    );
+  }
   if (debate.bull || debate.bear || debate.manager) {
     sections.push(
       "",
@@ -193,6 +375,9 @@ export function writeAnalystMarkdownFiles(run, debate = {}) {
   for (const [role, packet] of debateFiles) {
     if (packet) writeFileSync(join(dir, `${role}.md`), `${renderDebateMarkdown({ ...packet, role })}\n`);
   }
+  for (const opinion of run.master_opinions || []) {
+    writeFileSync(join(dir, `${opinion.master}.md`), `${renderMasterMarkdown(opinion, run.language)}\n`);
+  }
 }
 
 export function writeReportQuality(run, markdown) {
@@ -242,6 +427,10 @@ export function writeArtifactIndex(run, debate = {}) {
     debate.bull ? `- bull_researcher: ${artifacts.analyst_markdown.bull_researcher}` : "",
     debate.bear ? `- bear_researcher: ${artifacts.analyst_markdown.bear_researcher}` : "",
     debate.manager ? `- portfolio_manager: ${artifacts.analyst_markdown.portfolio_manager}` : "",
+    ...((run.master_opinions || []).length
+      ? ["", "## Master Bench Markdown Files", "",
+        ...(run.master_opinions || []).map((o) => `- ${o.master} (${o.stance || "unknown"}): ${join(runPath(run.run_id), `${o.master}.md`)}`)]
+      : []),
   ].filter(Boolean);
   writeFileSync(artifacts.artifact_index_md, `${lines.join("\n")}\n`);
   return artifacts.artifact_index_md;