CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

bottleneck-hunter

Supply-chain bottleneck arbitrage. Given a super-trend (AI infra, energy transition, defense, semiconductor reshoring, space economy), decompose its physical supply chain down to Layer 2/3 choke points (optics, lasers, InP/SOI substrates, IC substrates, probe cards, specialty fiberglass...) and surface under-the-radar listed companies sitting on each bottleneck. Scores each link on 6 scarcity criteria, applies mandatory valuation gates (PS/PE/safety-margin) via the financial_rigor tool, and Munger-style reverse-validates. Outputs a ranked bottleneck opportunity board. Use when the user wants hidden beneficiaries of a structural trend rather than already-priced leaders.

72

Quality

90%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A highly actionable, well-sequenced research workflow with concrete thresholds, tool invocations, search-query templates, and built-in validation gates. Its main weakness is structure: everything lives inline in one 185-line file with no progressive disclosure to reference material.

Suggestions

Move the per-trend layer decomposition maps (AI infrastructure example, plus templates for other trends) into references/layer-maps.md and link to it from Step 2, keeping only the layer taxonomy inline.

Extract the output artifacts — the ranking table schema, one-pager template, and signal-strength scale — into references/output-templates.md so they are loaded only at Step 6.

Trim the rhetorical framing in "Core Idea" and deduplicate the valuation principles in "Core Principles" against Step 4's valuation gate, which already states the same PS/PE rules.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly lean: dense criteria tables, numeric thresholds, and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Not 5 because the "Core Idea" section is partly rhetorical and "Core Principles" restates Step 4's valuation gates (e.g., "at PS>30x or still loss-making... not a buy" vs. the red-light rule).

4 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable instruction guidance: copy-paste search queries ("{trend} supply chain bottleneck", "{trend} sole source supplier"), named tool commands with parameters (financial_rigor command=verify_valuation / three_scenario, report_audit command=extract → verdict), numeric gates throughout (>30% revenue share, <$10B, PS>30x, <10%/yr), a one-pager template, and a save-path convention. Even fallback behavior is specified (missing financials → signal ≤★★).

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1–7 are explicitly sequenced with validation checkpoints: "Valuation Gate (mandatory, never skip)", a mandatory sanity check, a report_audit quality gate after drafting (extract → verify → verdict), and a bias self-check checklist. This is analysis (not destructive/batch) work, and the reverse-check (Munger inversion) step plus the audit loop provide feedback for error recovery.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized under ## Step N headings, but the skill is monolithic: no references/scripts/assets files exist, and domain reference material (the ~25-line AI-infra layer map, the one-pager template, the bias table) is inlined in SKILL.md where per-trend layer maps in a references/ file would keep the overview lean. Not 2 because it is clearly sectioned rather than a wall of text.

3 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

92%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A dense, specific description that clearly states the full workflow (decompose → score → valuation gate → reverse-validate → ranked output) and an explicit, differentiating 'Use when' trigger. Minor gap: a few natural synonyms users might say (picks and shovels, upstream suppliers) are missing.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions spanning the full pipeline: "decompose its physical supply chain down to Layer 2/3 choke points", "Scores each link on 6 scarcity criteria", "applies mandatory valuation gates (PS/PE/safety-margin) via the financial_rigor tool", "Outputs a ranked bottleneck opportunity board". Coverage is comprehensive, matching the top anchor; not scored 4 because no step of the workflow is missing.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (decompose, score, gate, reverse-validate, output a ranked board) and when ("Use when the user wants hidden beneficiaries of a structural trend rather than already-priced leaders") with a concrete, differentiating trigger phrase. Not 4 because the 'when' clause is fully explicit rather than merely present.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage: "supply-chain bottleneck", "hidden beneficiaries", "already-priced leaders", "structural trend", plus named super-trends (AI infra, energy transition, defense). Not 5 because common user synonyms like "picks and shovels", "upstream suppliers", or "shortage plays" are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (Layer 2/3 choke-point arbitrage) with triggers that explicitly contrast against generic leader-chasing research ("rather than already-priced leaders"), minimizing overlap with general stock-research skills. Voice is consistently third person ("decomposes", "Scores", "Outputs").

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
HKUDS/Vibe-Trading
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.