SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AB stockbee-episodic-pivot-analyzer

Analyze Stockbee-style Day 1 Episodic Pivot candidates from earnings, guidance raises, M&A, FDA/regulatory approvals, analyst actions, major contracts, product launches, short-squeeze catalysts, or theme/story events. Scores catalyst quality together with gap/range expansion, volume shock, neglect/revaluation context, liquidity, and risk to the EP-day low. Use when the user asks for EP candidates, episodic pivots, Day 1 catalyst trades, game-changing news reactions, delayed EP watchlists, or handoffs into PEAD monitoring.

tradermonty/claude-trading-skills Agent Skills author: tradermonty 9 files · 4 scripts body ≈ 1 167 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 32 h ago

Analyze Stockbee-style Day 1 Episodic Pivot candidates from earnings, guidance raises, M&A, FDA/regulatory approvals, analyst actions, major contracts…

As a process B 68/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: running it twice, progress reporting

AnalyzerInfrastructuretype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
98/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
94
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
68/100
Nearly there
Progress reporting w 2
0
Running it twice w 4
30
Failures and branches w 10
50
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • 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: 9. 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 68/100

    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web, python) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 85Steps. 29 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1167 tokens

    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)
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 527: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 11 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 29 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
    • +3All 2 scripts are documented

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 94.