CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

position-check

Health-check crypto futures positions the user describes or pastes in chat ("I'm long ETH from 2,400 at 10x") with TraderSpy market data. TraderSpy cannot see anyone's account, so the position always comes from the user. Produces a structured risk report per position — distance to liquidation and to the stop, where price sits versus entry, the multi-timeframe technical read, funding cost or benefit and the open-interest regime, whether top traders are on the same or the opposite side, and what would invalidate the position's thesis. Use this whenever the user asks "how's my position", "am I in trouble", "how far am I from liquidation", "should I hold or close", "what do you think of my long / short", or pastes a position. It reports and explains; it never tells the user to close, add, hedge or move a stop, and it cannot trade.

74

Quality

93%

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

82%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 strong, dense instruction body: every tool call, formula, and the report template are concrete and executable, with conduct boundaries stated crisply. The only weakness is mild duplication between the inline math section and references/risk-math.md, and edge-case handling that is present but not framed as explicit workflow checkpoints.

Suggestions

Deduplicate the math: keep either the compact formulas and bands inline or in references/risk-math.md, not both — e.g. reduce 'The math' to the report-critical formulas and point to the reference for bands and worked examples.

Add explicit workflow checkpoints for data gaps, e.g. after the tool calls: 'if a symbol returns no data[] entry, report it as untracked and proceed with the rest' rather than only mentioning it in Conduct.

Surface the reference earlier with a markdown link (e.g. in the '## The math' heading) so navigation to the worked examples is available at the point of use, not only in the final line.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence (no concept explainers, no padding), but 'The math' section and the liquidation bands (≤ 5% / ≤ 15%) restate formulas and thresholds that references/risk-math.md also carries — a minor trim opportunity that keeps it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable instruction-only guidance: exact tool calls with parameter values ('intervals: ["1h","4h","1d"]', 'status: "open"', 'limit: 20'), batching limits ('up to three in ONE call'), concrete symbol-mapping examples (kPEPE → 1000PEPEUSDT), exact formulas, and a copy-paste report template covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear ordered sequence ('A position check answers, in order: ...') with an explicit call budget and quota-skip fallback, plus an untracked-coin case. It falls short of anchor 5 only because the error/edge cases are scattered in Conduct rather than framed as explicit checkpoints in the workflow itself.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized sections with a clearly signaled, verified one-level-deep reference ('Formulas and worked examples: references/risk-math.md'). The split is not fully clean — the body duplicates the reference's formulas and bands — leaving a minor organization gap versus anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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.

An exemplary description: it states scope, inputs, report contents, explicit triggers with natural user phrasing, and capability boundaries — all dense and in third person with no padding. Nothing material is missing and conflict risk with adjacent skills is minimal.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions with comprehensive coverage — 'distance to liquidation and to the stop', 'the multi-timeframe technical read', 'funding cost or benefit and the open-interest regime', 'whether top traders are on the same or the opposite side', 'what would invalidate the position's thesis' — plus explicit boundaries ('it never tells the user to close, add, hedge or move a stop'), all in third person.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both parts: what ('Produces a structured risk report per position' with enumerated components) and when ('Use this whenever the user asks ... or pastes a position') with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural phrasing: 'how's my position', 'am I in trouble', 'how far am I from liquidation', 'should I hold or close', 'what do you think of my long / short', plus a pasted-position example ('I'm long ETH from 2,400 at 10x') covering the long/short and hold/close synonyms users actually say.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (personal position health-check) with position-specific triggers that would not fire for general market-data or technical-analysis requests, and the 'it cannot trade' boundary explicitly separates it from execution skills.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

target1m/traderspy-mcp

Path

skills/position-check/SKILL.md

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.