deep-company-series✓ تایید شده

محتوای SKILL.md

---
name: deep-company-series
category: analysis
description: "Write a publication-grade 8-part deep-dive series on a single company (~120k words total): cognitive reset / moat / profit engine / hidden assets / era variable (e.g. AI) / financials Buffett-style / management / valuation+redlines. The core IP is NOT writing but REVISING — a strict fact-check checklist catches pseudo-precision (probability-weighted expectations, third-party MAU discrepancies, linear extrapolation), absolute language, and cross-article number inconsistencies that most finance long-forms violate. Each piece stands alone but shares one valuation/management/price framework. Use when the user wants textbook-level depth on one company for public publishing (a single research report or earnings note is NOT this — use investment-research / earnings-review instead)."
---

# Deep-Company Series: An 8-Part Deep Dive on One Company

Write an 8-part deep-dive series (~120k words total) on a single company, from cognitive reset to a decision framework. **The core IP is not "writing well" but "revising strictly" — most finance long-form violates this skill's fact-check standard.**

## 1. When to Use

The user wants "textbook-level" deep research on a company, published as a **series of long-form articles**. Distinct from a single research report:
- 8 parts, ~120k words, full loop from cognitive reset to a decision framework
- Each part stands alone (shareable singly) but shares one valuation / management / price framework
- Written for readers willing to spend 90 minutes understanding one company

**Not for**: a single research report, earnings note, sector study — use other skills (fundamentals / earnings / sector).

## 2. Series Template (8 Parts)

| # | Title template | Core question | Words |
|---|----------------|---------------|-------|
| 01 | You think you understand X — you don't | Cognitive reset: break 3 common illusions | 4,000-5,000 |
| 02 | X's moat — `{one-line business essence}` | Is the moat deep; will it be there in 5/10 years | 6,000-8,000 |
| 03 | X's biggest profit engine — `{most profitable business}` | What is the core business; why it persists | 6,000-8,000 |
| 04 | The other company hidden on X's balance sheet — `{hidden asset}` | Investment portfolio / subsidiary / hidden value | 8,000-10,000 |
| 05 | In the AI (or current narrative) era, is X a winner or loser | Era variable: decompose the impact by business | 8,000-10,000 |
| 06 | Reading X's financials the Buffett way | Financial depth: gross margin / FCF / ROE / SBC | 8,000-10,000 |
| 07 | `{management quote}` — is X's management worth entrusting | Capital-allocation discipline + integrity test + succession | 8,000-10,000 |
| 08 | At what price to buy, what signal to sell (finale) | DCF 3-scenario + red lines + position framework | 10,000-12,000 |

Plus `00-series-overview.md` as an index (unpublished).

## 3. Writing Style

### Voice
- **Direct, sharp, no filler** — open with a number or a counterintuitive claim
- **Value-investing frame** — Buffett/Munger/Duan Yongping/Li Lu lenses woven in (no name-dropping)
- **No preset stance** — data first, logic next, conclusion last
- **Show both sides** — every core judgment carries a "but on the other hand..."
- **Mobile preview** — the first 18-20 characters must stand alone

### Banned Words

| Banned | Why | Replace with |
|--------|-----|--------------|
| obviously / inevitably / certainly | Subjective absolutism | "the data shows" / "evidence suggests" |
| I think / I feel | Subjective tone | cut, or "under this framework" |
| textbook-level / brilliant | Hype adjectives | describe the concrete fact |
| severely mismatched / severely undervalued | Strong subjective | give the specific discount % |
| perfect / flawless | One-sided | add the counter-observation |

### Title Style
- Hook with a **contrast number** or a **counter-consensus claim** ("15 years, 7 failed challenges"; "salary 42.92M = 0.0017% of profit")
- Neutral subtitle summarizing content
- **Avoid hype metaphors**: "the next Buffett", "the X of China", "GOAT" — all banned

## 4. Strict Fact-Check Checklist (the Core IP)

### "Pseudo-precision" traps to watch for before writing

1. **Probability-weighted expected value**: `30% × A + 50% × B + 20% × C = expected +X%` is almost always garbage — the probabilities are pure subjective, giving readers false precision. **List scenarios + triggers + direction only; do not compute a weighted expectation.**
2. **Third-party MAU/share estimates**: QuestMobile / 七麦 / CBNData differ hugely (2-3× at the same point). **Use only the two most-credible as anchors; describe the rest qualitatively.**
3. **Linear extrapolation of historical growth**: `2025 +33% × 5y CAGR → 2030 X` is financial illiteracy. **Use scenario assumptions + high/low ranges; never a promise.**
4. **Undisclosed shareholding**: unlisted-company stakes are never publicly disclosed. **Give a range, mark "unknowable".**
5. **Strong attribution**: "competitor failed because of X." List multiple causes; **this article does no single attribution.**

### The 7 mandatory revision checks

```
□ 1. Cross-article number consistency: market cap, Non-IFRS net income, key holding % aligned across the series
□ 2. Caliber labeling: Non-IFRS / GAAP / Non-IFRS-SBC / FCF — which is used, clear throughout
□ 3. Double-counting scan: consolidated subs are NOT in the "investment portfolio"; SOTP doesn't count them twice
□ 4. Peer-comparison fairness: don't compare "core-business PE (cash + portfolio stripped)" with "peer PE (not stripped)"
□ 5. Probability-weighted expectations deleted (see above)
□ 6. Absolute language softened: grep "obviously|inevitably|severely|textbook|perfect"
□ 7. Third-party data sourced: every non-filing data point followed by "(source: X)"
```

### Known hard-error risks (list before writing)

- Historical return multiples: use cumulative-invested basis (e.g. Riot 33×, not 58×)
- Shareholding %: use the latest filing/financial-app basis (e.g. Tencent's Meituan stake changes with disposals)
- "Distribution accounting": treated as disposal gain under IFRIC 17, recognized on declaration date
- Share count rebounds: SBC granted in clusters at year-start can lift share count short-term

## 5. Execution

### Phase 1: Research (before writing 01-02)

1. `get_financial_statements` — last 5 years of annuals, latest quarterly
2. `get_research_reports` / `web_search` — at least 3 independent sell-side reports (find consensus + dissent)
3. Optional: `run_swarm` (e.g. equity_research_team or value_investing_committee) to generate an internal research draft
4. **Confirm the 8-part core theses with the user** (avoid writing the wrong direction)

### Phase 2: Writing (01→08 in order, no skipping)

- After each part, `write_file` to `reports/{company}/《Understanding {company}》/0X-XX.md`
- Don't publish immediately — wait for user review
- Revise on feedback

### Phase 3: Cross-Article Consistency Scan (after all 8)

This is the key differentiator. Use tools to scan:

1. `read_file` each part + `report_audit` (`command=extract`) to pull numbers (market cap, net income, holding %, PE) from each
2. **Cross-check the same number across parts** — use `financial_rigor` (`command=cross_validate`) to cross-validate the same metric's values across articles; flag >1% deviation as a caliber mismatch
3. `read_file` checks: is each term (FBS, SBC, Non-IFRS) defined at first use; do "see part 06" references actually resolve; do recaps match body numbers
4. Absolute-language scan: grep "obviously|inevitably|severely|perfect" and soften each

### Phase 4: Pre-publish Final Check

- `report_audit` (`command=verdict`) as a gate on each part: extract numbers → verify → PASS/FAIL
- Confirm all numbers are traceable, no pseudo-precision, no absolutism

## 6. Revision-Feedback Handling

### 1. Verify facts first (don't just change)
If the user says "X is wrong", use `get_financial_statements` / `web_search` to cross-check the original; present "user's number vs what I found vs what I used".

### 2. Grade the revision

| Grade | Type | Handle |
|-------|------|--------|
| 🔥 Hard error | wrong number / attribution / caliber | Must fix |
| ⚠️ Subjective | strong subjective word / hype metaphor | Soften or cut |
| 🔬 Granularity | source label, caliber refinement | Balance against readability |
| ❓ Unreliable | large third-party discrepancies | **Deleting is safer than editing** |

### 3. Cascade check after a fix
Before fixing one spot, think "where else is this number/concept referenced":
- Market cap changed → cascade to PE / core-business PE / discount / FCF yield
- Holding % changed → fix TOP-10 sort + historical holding table + disposal list
- Caliber changed → fix first definition + later references + recap

## 7. What This Skill Does NOT Do

- **Does not make investment decisions for the reader** — every part ends with "not investment advice"
- **Does not predict prices** — only "scenarios + triggers"
- **Does not compute a weighted "expected annualized return"** — subjective probability misleads
- **Does not write "famous investor X also holds"** — using someone else's holding to back your judgment is anti-value-investing
- **Does not force all 8 parts** — if a part lacks enough standalone content (e.g. management isn't distinctive), merge it or reduce the count

---

**One-liner**: writing an "Understanding X" series is about **revising strictly, not writing well** — most finance long-form dies from pseudo-precise numbers, subjective weighted expectations, and absolute language. This skill exists to flag all those traps before writing and sweep them clean after (`report_audit` + `financial_rigor.cross_validate`).

مجوز

مجوز اعلام‌شده: MIT

MIT License

Copyright (c) 2026 HKUDS

Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all
copies or substantial portions of the Software.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE
SOFTWARE.

مشاهدهٔ مجوز در مخزن منبع — نسخهٔ منتشرشده در آن‌جا مرجع است.