hedging-strategy

Hedging strategy design (beta hedge / option protection / tail risk / cross-asset hedging), including hedge-ratio calculation and cost evaluation.

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./agent/src/skills/hedging-strategy/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%

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

The body is highly actionable with executable code and worked examples, but it is a monolithic document over 50 lines with no progressive disclosure and only implicit workflow validation. Splitting reference material into bundle files and adding explicit validation checkpoints would raise the weaker dimensions.

Suggestions

Move the instrument reference tables (A-share futures/ETF codes, parameter-selection guides) and the output-format template into separate reference files linked from the overview, improving progressive disclosure.

Add an explicit validation/feedback checkpoint in the five-step process (e.g. 'recalculate hedge ratio and confirm cost ratio before executing; re-validate monthly as beta drifts').

Trim conceptual explanation Claude already knows (risk-exchange principle, basic option-spread mechanics) to tighten conciseness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Content is information-dense with tables and code, but includes explanatory material Claude already knows (e.g. 'hedging does not eliminate risk; it exchanges unknown losses for known costs', collar/protective-put mechanics, beta-estimation narrative), matching the 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation' anchor.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides fully executable numpy/scipy code (OLS, EWMA hedge ratios), concrete numeric worked examples, parameter-selection tables, and a copy-paste output template, matching the 'fully executable code; copy-paste ready' anchor.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A clear five-step sequenced process exists, but validation/checkpoint steps are only implicit ('monitor and adjust') with no explicit validate-then-proceed feedback loop, matching the 'steps listed but validation gaps' anchor.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	A single ~260-line monolithic SKILL.md with no bundle files and no external references; content that could be split (instrument reference tables, output templates) is inline, matching the 'content that should be separate is inline' anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

67%

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

The description is specific and well-scoped to a distinct niche, but it answers 'what' without an explicit 'when to use' trigger clause, capping completeness at 2. Adding a 'Use when...' clause with natural user phrasings would lift the weaker dimensions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user wants to hedge an existing position, reduce portfolio drawdown risk, or asks about beta/option/tail-risk hedging.'

Include natural user phrasings alongside the technical terms (e.g. 'protect my portfolio', 'hedge my position', 'drawdown protection') to improve trigger term quality.

Keep the concrete sub-domain list but ensure the 'when' guidance is as explicit as the 'what'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete sub-domains and actions — 'beta hedge / option protection / tail risk / cross-asset hedging', 'hedge-ratio calculation and cost evaluation' — matching the anchor that names several specific actions.	3 / 3
Completeness	The 'what' is clearly stated but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which the guidelines say caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant domain terms appear (beta hedge, option protection, tail risk) but common natural user phrasings ('hedge my position', 'protect my portfolio', 'drawdown protection') are missing, matching the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Hedging design is a clear, narrow niche with distinct sub-type triggers, unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, matching the 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: HKUDS/Vibe-Trading
Path: agent/src/skills/hedging-strategy/SKILL.md
Commit: 8643fcd

Reviewed: 2 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.