review
Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
After the close — score EVERY pool name against the 10:00 ET anchor, find what would have surfaced the day's winners, and backfill the 3-day window. Mechanical only; this skill never changes a lever. Run after ~16:15 ET on every decision day.
192 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- microsoft/veronatheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- microsoft/FluidFrameworktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- charliee1w/consolidation-memorytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- jisuzzzz/haechitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- apokamo/kajitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- dirien/yet-another-agent-harnesstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use close-spec, design-with-images and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
dzhngSkillclose-spec
When a spec under specs/<feature>/ is done shipping (a write-spec build, or any planned task that produced a spec), archive it to specs/done/ and rewrite it from a build-plan into a durable rationale — the why, the principles, the invariants — pointing back to the real code for the how. Use when implementation has landed and the plan no longer matches what shipped, or the user says a feature/spec is finished. Pairs with [write-spec](../write-spec/SKILL.md) (the plan this closes) and [review](../review/SKILL.md) (run before closing).
Also in 5 projects that use this
dzhngSkilldesign-with-images
Explore UI and visual design with image generation, then iterate the real implementation against the user-selected concept. Use when brainstorming visual directions, offering mockup variants, or implementing an approved generated design; do not stop at the mockups or the first code approximation.
Also in 5 projects that use this
LambenthanSkilldaily-arxiv
每日从 arXiv 拉取新论文,过滤相关性,auto-ingest 高优先级论文,检测 SOTA 更新
Also in 5 projects that use this
LambenthanSkillexp-eval
实验判决门:Review LLM 独立评判实验结果 → 4 种判决路径 → 自动更新 claims confidence、ideas status、graph edges
Also in 5 projects that use this
- +3 more from dzhng
- +5 more from Lambenthan
Other versions192 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 192
- garrytan/gstack★ 141ksame name
- ansible/ansible★ 71ksame name
- docling-project/docling★ 70ksame name
- traefik/traefik★ 65ksame name
- ClickHouse/ClickHouse★ 51ksame name
- temporalio/temporal★ 24ksame name
- tisfeng/Easydict★ 15ksame name
- juicedata/juicefs★ 15ksame name
- elie222/inbox-zero★ 13ksame name
- gitkraken/vscode-gitlens★ 10ksame name
182 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository5 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- coachSkill
- ste100Skill
- tradeSkill
- wiki-distillSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 157 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 14
All data via the gammarips MCP only.
- Distinctive: line 40
Did the ranked list contain today's winners?: If not, what separated them from what was brought forward?
- Distinctive: line 42
Did the tradeability screen throw away a winner?: Check every dropped name. If a "winner" won on a tape of single-lot prints, the screen …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 157 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
review
The point is not to record what happened. It is to find the thing that would have put today's winners on this morning's list — and to check whether the screen beat the pool it drew from. Output is DATA: funnel rows and, rarely, a FINDINGS entry. Lever opinions are forbidden here — one day's winners are noise; proposals go through the ledger with pre-registered hypotheses and operator sign-off.
All data via the gammarips MCP only.
1. Outcomes on every pool name, not just yours
- One batched
get_liquidityreturns each pool contract's day bar. Rows whoseday.last_updatedis not today are excluded AND counted — never dropped silently. - For names that traded meaningfully,
replay_contract(minute, today): itsanchor(close of the first bar at/after 10:00 ET) is the honest entry reference. Compute post-anchor MFE%, MAE%, close%, and target/stop touches from the bars — never from the day bar alone (the day high can predate 10:00). Honesty caveats carried verbatim: delayed tape,session_complete, thin-tape (no bar = no prints that minute; touches are evidence, not ticks). - Take session volume from
get_liquidity'sday_volume, never by summing bars (bars can duplicate on some contracts). - Sub-$0.50 contracts get flagged — a lowball print can fake +200%; never let one
top the table unflagged. Contracts with a handful of prints all session get
status: unlabeled_illiquid— there is no honest anchor for a tape that never printed, and they are never counted as missed winners. - Upsert
outcome_sessiononto every row of today's funnel viapython scripts/funnel_log.py upsert. A log of only your own picks cannot answer the question this skill exists for — the regret data lives in the passed-over rows.
2. Did the screen earn its keep today?
Rank the pool by the 10:00-anchored move, then answer plainly:
- Did the ranked list contain today's winners? If not, what separated them from what was brought forward?
- Did the tradeability screen throw away a winner? Check every dropped name. If a "winner" won on a tape of single-lot prints, the screen was right and the winner was never enterable — say that explicitly instead of counting it as a miss. Record both sides: winners the gates dropped AND losers they avoided.
Then run python scripts/edge.py — it asks the same question across every accumulated
day and reports when N is too small to conclude anything. Believe it over the day's
narrative, and read its day-demeaned column before its pooled one.
3. Backfill — T+3 is where the money is
Winners peak overwhelmingly AFTER the entry session ([[three-day-harvest-curve]],
[[path-calibrated-giveback]]), so outcome_3d is the column that matches a real hold.
- Cheap path:
query_outcomes(view="surface", scan_date=...)— it fills on a lag (the window's last session must be strictly before today, so the newest filled scan_date is ~4 trading days back;WINDOW_OPENinside that frontier is normal, not a fault). - Fallback when the surface can't serve a day:
replay_contract(granularity="day", from_date=entry_day, to_date=entry_day+2 sessions)— ~3 bars per contract, a whole pool is ~50 light calls. Compute 3-day MFE/MAE against the anchor already stored onoutcome_session, never against the day open. Bar highs/lows are touch ceilings, not fills. - Rows the surface can't serve and whose anchor is missing get
status: unlabeled; sub-floor tapes getunlabeled_illiquid. Both tails are non-random — keep them visible, never fake-score them.
Then python scripts/skill_eval.py — the per-rule scorecard: does each
exclusion_reason earn its keep, weighting losers-avoided equally with winners-dropped?
Proposals go to the operator through your skill ledger; this skill never edits a rule.
4. Findings
Append to eval/FINDINGS.md only when the accumulated evidence moves, or when a process
failure cost a real decision. Each entry: date, observation with numbers, what it implies
for /trade, and the current N. Most days add nothing, and that is the correct
output.
Never
- Change, propose inline, or "just this once" adjust any lever or doctrine rule.
- Score against a fixed bracket as though it were your exit ([[fixed-exit-composites-negative]]).
- Count a winner that traded a handful of contracts as an opportunity missed.
- Fetch any non-MCP market data or external pick.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

