2c1cf693d3
- Orion repurposed: Chief Creative Officer -> Director of Market Intelligence - New template: market_intelligence (4-lens niche/gap analysis) - Removed: brand_audit, design_brief (commodity execution, unconstitutional) - New identity/system files reflect research + structural analysis posture - Vance: removed broken fund_tenant/allocate_resources refs; added financial_audit, retire_tenant - Silas: added write_charter to supported_templates - Sloane: added retire_tenant (DISSOLVE verdict execution) - Aris: portfolio_architectural_review (already updated) - New templates: market_intelligence, financial_audit, retire_tenant, write_charter, charter_audit, audit_tenant - Deleted 5 orphan charter templates (consolidated into write_charter): sovereign_tenant_charter, tenant_charter_drafting, tenant_charter_formalization, tenant_charter_standardization, tenant_charter_synthesis Charter domain coverage now complete: Market Intelligence -> Orion (market_intelligence) Corporate Architecture -> Aris + Silas Executive Recruitment -> Edgar (hire_agent) Capital Allocation -> Vance (capital_allocation_audit, financial_audit, retire_tenant) Portfolio Governance -> Sloane (audit_tenant, retire_tenant) + Valerius (charter_audit) Constitutional Enforcement -> Aris + Valerius (adjudicate_tenant, charter_audit) Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
95 lines
4.1 KiB
YAML
95 lines
4.1 KiB
YAML
name: market_intelligence
|
||
description: "Orion scans the macroeconomic landscape, identifies profitable niches and internal capability gaps, and produces a structured opportunity brief for the board."
|
||
debug: true
|
||
system: agent_prompt
|
||
|
||
agent_prompt:
|
||
- "= identity.md"
|
||
|
||
sections:
|
||
- agent
|
||
- project
|
||
- rag
|
||
- roster
|
||
- deliverables
|
||
- message
|
||
- instructions
|
||
|
||
steps:
|
||
- type: think
|
||
hint: |
|
||
You are {agent.name}, Director of Market Intelligence at Crimson Leaf LLC.
|
||
|
||
Your job is to find what nobody else has found yet. Not trends — vectors.
|
||
Not industries — the specific, underserved intersection where a sovereign company can own a niche.
|
||
|
||
Analyze the opportunity space across four lenses:
|
||
|
||
1. MACROECONOMIC SIGNAL
|
||
What large-scale forces (technology shifts, regulatory changes, platform consolidation,
|
||
demographic movement) are creating gaps in the B2B service landscape?
|
||
Identify the underlying structural cause, not just the surface symptom.
|
||
|
||
2. PORTFOLIO DEFICIT SCAN
|
||
What capabilities does the current Crimson Leaf portfolio lack?
|
||
What requests are being delegated externally that could be internalized?
|
||
What value is leaving the portfolio that a new Tenant could capture?
|
||
|
||
3. NICHE VALIDATION
|
||
For each identified opportunity:
|
||
- Is the niche narrow enough to be owned by one sovereign Tenant?
|
||
- Is there a clearly defined customer or internal requester?
|
||
- Is there a measurable value thesis (revenue, cost reduction, strategic leverage)?
|
||
- Can this be solved by extending an existing Tenant, or does it require a new company?
|
||
- Could a deterministic tool solve this instead of a sovereign company?
|
||
|
||
4. COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE
|
||
Who currently occupies this niche externally?
|
||
What would it take for a Crimson Leaf Tenant to displace or out-specialize them?
|
||
Is the barrier to entry structural (IP, relationships) or executional (just needs to be built)?
|
||
|
||
Rank opportunities by: niche_clarity × value_thesis_strength × portfolio_fit.
|
||
Output the top 1-3 opportunities with clear architectural recommendations.
|
||
|
||
- type: package
|
||
packet_type: MarketIntelligenceReport
|
||
hint: |
|
||
Serialize the intelligence findings into a structured brief.
|
||
Only what was established above — no new reasoning.
|
||
schema:
|
||
actions:
|
||
- type: quick
|
||
scan_summary: "string — one paragraph overview of the opportunity landscape"
|
||
opportunities:
|
||
- niche: "string — precise description of the market gap"
|
||
target_customer: "string — who specifically needs this"
|
||
value_thesis: "string — measurable value created"
|
||
portfolio_fit: "string — how this complements the existing Tenant ecosystem"
|
||
recommendation: "string — NEW_COMPANY | EXTEND_EXISTING | TOOL_REQUEST | MONITOR"
|
||
recommended_tenant_slug: "string — suggested slug if NEW_COMPANY, or existing tenant if EXTEND_EXISTING"
|
||
priority: "string — HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW"
|
||
rationale: "string — constitutional justification for the recommendation"
|
||
strategic_gaps: ["string — capability gaps in the current portfolio worth monitoring"]
|
||
next_action: "string — specific recommended next step for the board"
|
||
|
||
- type: close
|
||
rag_update: true
|
||
|
||
adjudication:
|
||
enabled: true
|
||
pass_threshold: 85
|
||
deliverable_type: coordination
|
||
criteria:
|
||
niche_precision:
|
||
weight: 35
|
||
description: "Opportunities are narrow, specific, and genuinely differentiated — not broad industry categories"
|
||
constitutional_discipline:
|
||
weight: 25
|
||
description: "Recommendations distinguish correctly between new company vs extend existing vs tool — no shortcuts"
|
||
evidence_quality:
|
||
weight: 25
|
||
description: "Findings are grounded in structural analysis, not trend-following or narrative flair"
|
||
portfolio_coherence:
|
||
weight: 15
|
||
description: "Opportunities strengthen the portfolio without creating overlap or recursive dependency"
|