hedging-strategy

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

Quality

58%

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

63%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.

The content is highly actionable with concrete code, instrument tables, and a clear five-step workflow, but it is long and re-explains concepts Claude already knows, and inlines reference-grade material that belongs in separate bundle files.

Suggestions

Move the instrument/parameter/cost tables and the extended code examples into reference files (e.g. references/instruments.md, references/hedge_ratio_methods.md) and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with one-level-deep links.

Trim explanations of well-known concepts (OLS beta, EWMA/RiskMetrics, the 2022 60/40 failure) to one-line reminders, since Claude already knows these.

Add an explicit validation/verification checkpoint in the five-step process (e.g. 'Verify the hedge ratio covers the target risk and re-check cost against expected loss before executing').

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient and heavy on concrete tables and code, but it re-explains concepts Claude already knows (e.g. OLS beta regression, RiskMetrics EWMA, the 60/40 mix failing in 2022) and runs long, matching 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened'.	3 / 5
Actionability	It provides multiple executable Python snippets (hedge ratio, OLS/MV/EWMA, cost-benefit), concrete instrument tables with codes/multipliers, and parameter selection matrices, with only minor gaps (a few snippets are illustrative and assume undefined variables).	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The Five-Step Hedging Design Process and risk-scenario-to-instrument mapping give a clear sequenced workflow with monitoring/adjustment and a structured Output Format; it lacks explicit validate-then-retry feedback checkpoints, but hedging design is analytical rather than destructive, so the destructive-cap does not apply.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	There are no bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/ absent), and the SKILL.md inlines ~260 lines of reference-grade detail (instrument tables, parameter matrices, cost tables) that would be better split into separate files, matching 'some structure but could be better organized; content that should be separate is inline'.	3 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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.

The description is domain-specific and reasonably clear about what the skill covers, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, capping its completeness. Trigger phrasing leans on jargon rather than natural user language.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when designing a hedge for an existing position, calculating hedge ratios, or evaluating hedging costs.'

Include natural trigger phrases users would actually say, such as 'hedge my portfolio', 'protect against a drawdown', or 'how many futures contracts to short'.

Tighten the parenthetical list into concrete actions (e.g. 'Design beta, option, tail-risk, and cross-asset hedges; compute hedge ratios and estimate annualized costs').

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain (hedging strategy design) and lists several sub-types in parentheses (beta hedge / option protection / tail risk / cross-asset hedging), plus two concrete output actions (hedge-ratio calculation, cost evaluation), which matches 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'.	3 / 5
Completeness	It clearly states what the skill does (hedging strategy design including hedge-ratio calculation and cost evaluation) but contains no 'Use when...' clause or explicit trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It surfaces relevant terms like 'hedge', 'hedging', 'tail risk', and 'option protection', but it is heavy on domain jargon and lacks the common synonyms or phrases a user would naturally say (e.g. 'hedge my portfolio', 'protect against a crash'), matching 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The narrow finance hedging niche with specific instruments (beta/option/tail/cross-asset hedging) makes it largely distinct from other skills, with only minor overlap risk against a broader portfolio-management skill.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 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: 99e84ab

Reviewed: 1 day 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.