BC management-deep-dive
Deep management assessment — the 'buying a stock is buying a person' layer. For a company or a named executive, evaluate integrity (promise-vs-delivery tracking, crisis behavior, stakeholder treatment), ability (strategic foresight, execution, capital-allocation record) and governance (equity structure, compensation, related-party deals). Outputs a weighted score across integrity / ability / capital-allocation / governance plus Duan Yongping's 3-question verdict ('would you hand this person your money for 10 years'). Use when standard research leaves management quality uncertain, or when management IS the investment thesis.
Deep management assessment — the 'buying a stock is buying a person' layer.
As a process C 51/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
How to improve
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 51/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 2 mutating operations with no state check
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 15 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2066 tokens
- low 11 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 631: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 23 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 15 items
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 80.