options-payoff

Option P&L analysis methodology: payoff diagrams, breakeven calculation, multi-leg strategy visualization, and Greeks-based scenario analysis.

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/options-payoff/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

50%

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

The skill delivers strong, copy-paste-ready code and a coherent methodology, but it is a verbose monolith that re-explains well-known option-pricing concepts and keeps everything inline with no bundle-file structure. Conciseness and progressive disclosure are the weakest dimensions.

Suggestions

Trim textbook explanations Claude already knows (BS assumptions, Greeks range behavior, the eight strategy reference tables) and keep only what is specific to this framework, to recover conciseness.

Move the strategy reference tables, full Black-Scholes formulae, and plotting code templates into references/ files (e.g. references/strategies.md, references/pricing.py) with one-level-deep links from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.

Add explicit validation checkpoints for the core workflow (e.g. assert put-call parity / cross-check break-evens against closed-form single-leg values before reporting) to raise workflow clarity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~700-line body is padded with textbook concepts Claude already knows — Black-Scholes assumptions, Greeks behavior ranges ('ATM ≈ ±0.5, deep ITM → ±1'), and eight reference strategy tables — matching the anchor for verbose content that explains concepts Claude knows. Not level 2 because the unnecessary explanatory bulk is substantial rather than incidental.	1 / 3
Actionability	Provides complete, executable, type-hinted, documented Python (bs_price, bs_greeks, implied_volatility, payoff, Plotly/Matplotlib plotting) plus a copy-paste Quick Usage Example — matching the 'fully executable, copy-paste ready' anchor.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Section 3 sequences the payoff analysis (expiry curve, theoretical value, break-even, max profit/loss, vol scenarios) and the practical-usage section offers decision trees, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops for the computation steps. Not level 3 for lacking checkpoints; not level 1 because a real sequence exists.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The body is well-sectioned but entirely monolithic — references/, scripts/, and assets/ are empty, so reference tables, full BS formulas, and code templates that should be split out are all inline. The >50-line guidance blocks a level-3 score; it is not level 1 because organization is clear rather than a disorganized wall.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 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 an options payoff-analysis niche, with low conflict risk. Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, which caps completeness and limits natural-term coverage.

Suggestions

Append a 'Use when...' clause naming natural user phrasings, e.g. 'Use when the user asks about option payoff diagrams, breakeven prices, strategy P&L, Greeks, or implied volatility.'

Add common-speech keyword variations ('option profit/loss', 'option strategy payoff', 'what-if scenarios') alongside the technical terms to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names multiple concrete actions — 'payoff diagrams, breakeven calculation, multi-leg strategy visualization, and Greeks-based scenario analysis' — rather than vague language, matching the anchor that lists several specific actions.	3 / 3
Completeness	Clearly states what the skill does, but there is no 'when should Claude use it' trigger clause, and the judging guideline caps completeness at 2 when explicit trigger guidance is missing.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Real domain keywords (payoff, breakeven, Greeks, multi-leg) are present, but the phrasing is professional/technical and lacks common user variations and any 'Use when...' trigger; not the level-3 'good coverage of natural terms users would say.'	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The options P&L / payoff-analysis niche is sharply scoped and unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills; not the level-2 'could still overlap with similar skills.'	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (861 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: HKUDS/Vibe-Trading
Path: agent/src/skills/options-payoff/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.