Add aggregator agent, strategy template, research templates; fix ASCII in existing templates
- agents/aggregator/: new Aggregator specialist agent (agent.yml + identity.md) - agents/voss/agent.yml: add aggregator to manages, add research_brief/intelligence_report templates - templates/strategy.yml: new intake routing template for InputFromUser strategy type - templates/research_brief.yml: new research brief output template - templates/intelligence_report.yml: new intelligence report template - skills/: add IntelligenceFormatGuide, ResearchMethodGuide, skills.md - templates/*.yml: fix em-dash Unicode violations -> ASCII double-hyphens Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
This commit is contained in:
David Baity
83
skills/guides/IntelligenceFormatGuide.md
Normal file
83
skills/guides/IntelligenceFormatGuide.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
|
||||
# Intelligence Report Format Standards — Skills Guide
|
||||
|
||||
This document is injected into your prompt when you are producing a comprehensive
|
||||
intelligence report. Apply these formatting and analytical standards exactly.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Tone: Intelligence Directorate, Not Consulting Firm
|
||||
|
||||
The difference:
|
||||
|
||||
| Consulting tone (wrong) | Intelligence tone (correct) |
|
||||
|------------------------|----------------------------|
|
||||
| "We recommend considering..." | "Recommended action: do X by [date]. Owner: [role]." |
|
||||
| "There may be opportunities in..." | "Opportunity: [specific gap]. Confidence: MEDIUM." |
|
||||
| "Market dynamics suggest..." | "Signal: [specific event]. Impact: [specific consequence]." |
|
||||
| "Key takeaways include..." | No takeaway sections. Findings are in the body. |
|
||||
|
||||
Write as if your reader has 90 seconds and will act on what you write.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Required Section Structure
|
||||
|
||||
Every intelligence report must contain all seven sections, in order:
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. SITUATION OVERVIEW
|
||||
- Current state of the domain under analysis
|
||||
- What has changed since the last reporting cycle (if RAG memory is available)
|
||||
- What remains stable
|
||||
- Length: 2-4 sentences. No filler.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. SIGNAL ANALYSIS
|
||||
- 3-5 significant signals: trends, events, data points, competitive moves
|
||||
- Each signal gets: (a) what it is, (b) why it matters to Crimson Leaf Research, (c) confidence rating
|
||||
- Format each signal as a named subsection or bulleted block with the confidence rating inline
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. THREAT ASSESSMENT
|
||||
- Risks and adverse developments, present or emerging
|
||||
- Rank by probability x impact (state both explicitly)
|
||||
- Be specific: name the threat, name the adversary or condition, name the potential damage
|
||||
- Generic threats ("market volatility", "regulatory risk") without specifics are disqualified
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. OPPORTUNITY SCAN
|
||||
- Clear advantages or untapped positions
|
||||
- Each opportunity must be specific enough to act on: who, what, how
|
||||
- An opportunity that applies to any company is not an opportunity
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE
|
||||
- Include when applicable; omit with a one-line note when not
|
||||
- Who operates in this space, what they do well or poorly
|
||||
- What Crimson Leaf Research can exploit from their weaknesses or blind spots
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
|
||||
- Ordered list of 3-5 concrete actions
|
||||
- Each action: what, who owns it (by role), urgency (immediate / this week / this month)
|
||||
- Do not recommend research as an action unless you specify exactly what to research and why
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. WATCH LIST
|
||||
- 2-3 specific developments to monitor before the next reporting cycle
|
||||
- Each entry: what to watch, why it matters, what change would trigger escalation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Length and Density Standards
|
||||
|
||||
- Target: 600-1200 words
|
||||
- Every paragraph must earn its place — no topic sentences without supporting detail
|
||||
- No summary conclusions that restate what the sections already said
|
||||
- No trailing "In conclusion..." paragraphs
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Confidence Rating Application
|
||||
|
||||
Apply these ratings consistently across all signal and threat assessments:
|
||||
|
||||
- **HIGH**: Specific, corroborated, recent evidence from multiple sources
|
||||
- **MEDIUM**: Single credible source or strong pattern inference
|
||||
- **LOW**: Inference, analogy, or limited signal data
|
||||
|
||||
A report with all HIGH ratings and no uncertainty is not rigorous — it is overconfident.
|
||||
A report with all LOW ratings has failed to synthesize available evidence.
|
||||
94
skills/guides/ResearchMethodGuide.md
Normal file
94
skills/guides/ResearchMethodGuide.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
|
||||
# Evidentiary Research Methodology — Skills Guide
|
||||
|
||||
This document is injected into your prompt when you are producing a research brief
|
||||
or intelligence report. Everything below is authoritative — apply it to every
|
||||
analytical output you produce.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Core Principle: Evidence Before Conclusion
|
||||
|
||||
Every claim must be traceable to a source. If a claim cannot be traced to your
|
||||
training data, context provided in this task, or RAG memory, it must be flagged
|
||||
as inference and assigned LOW confidence. Do not state inferences as facts.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Source Hierarchy
|
||||
|
||||
Rate confidence based on source quality:
|
||||
|
||||
| Confidence | Basis |
|
||||
|------------|-------|
|
||||
| HIGH | Multiple corroborating sources (training data + context + RAG), or primary source material directly quoted in context |
|
||||
| MEDIUM | Single source, or corroborated inference from strong pattern data |
|
||||
| LOW | Inference from limited data, analogy from adjacent domains, or single weak signal |
|
||||
|
||||
Never omit a confidence rating. If you are uncertain which level applies, assign LOW.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Signal vs. Noise Discipline
|
||||
|
||||
A signal is specific, recent, and consequential. Noise is:
|
||||
- A trend everyone already knows about
|
||||
- A development with no actionable implication for Crimson Leaf Research
|
||||
- A claim that could apply to any company in any market
|
||||
|
||||
Reject noise. If a finding cannot be stated in one specific sentence with a
|
||||
concrete subject, it is not a finding.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Information Gap Protocol
|
||||
|
||||
After stating what you know, state what you do not know. Specifically:
|
||||
|
||||
1. What data would change your conclusions if it existed?
|
||||
2. What sources would raise your confidence from MEDIUM to HIGH?
|
||||
3. What questions remain open after this analysis?
|
||||
|
||||
Information gaps are not admissions of failure. They are the analytical product
|
||||
that directs the next research task. A brief with no gaps is a brief that stopped
|
||||
thinking too early.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Adversarial Verification Standard
|
||||
|
||||
Before accepting a conclusion, stress-test it:
|
||||
|
||||
- What is the strongest counter-argument?
|
||||
- What evidence would disprove this finding?
|
||||
- Is this conclusion driven by the question asked, or by what the evidence actually shows?
|
||||
|
||||
If a conclusion does not survive adversarial questioning, downgrade its confidence
|
||||
or remove it.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Citation Note Protocol
|
||||
|
||||
Always close analytical sections with an explicit statement of your epistemic basis:
|
||||
|
||||
- "Based on training knowledge through [knowledge cutoff]..."
|
||||
- "Based on context provided in this task..."
|
||||
- "Based on RAG memory from [date range if available]..."
|
||||
- "Inferred from [specific pattern or analogy]..."
|
||||
|
||||
Do not fabricate citations. Do not reference papers, articles, or studies you
|
||||
cannot quote directly. A transparent inference is more useful than a false citation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Prohibited Constructions
|
||||
|
||||
Never use these without an immediate, specific example:
|
||||
|
||||
- "Many companies..." — name them or drop the claim
|
||||
- "Research suggests..." — cite the research or drop the claim
|
||||
- "It is widely believed..." — state who believes it and why
|
||||
- "The trend toward..." — name the trend, give a data point, assign confidence
|
||||
|
||||
Vague generalities are the primary quality failure in analytical writing. Treat them
|
||||
as defects, not rhetorical moves.
|
||||
21
skills/skills.md
Normal file
21
skills/skills.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
|
||||
# Crimson Leaf Research — Skills Catalog
|
||||
|
||||
Skills are context-sensitive reference documents injected into an agent's prompt
|
||||
when a template declares a `skills:` array. They provide domain expertise and
|
||||
methodology reference without permanently inflating RAG storage.
|
||||
|
||||
## Available Guides
|
||||
|
||||
| Path | Purpose | Used by |
|
||||
|------|---------|---------|
|
||||
| `guides/ResearchMethodGuide.md` | Evidentiary research discipline, source assessment, confidence rating | `research_brief.yml`, `intelligence_report.yml` |
|
||||
| `guides/IntelligenceFormatGuide.md` | Report structure, analytical tone standards, section requirements | `intelligence_report.yml` |
|
||||
|
||||
## How Skills Work
|
||||
|
||||
1. A template declares `skills: ["guides/ResearchMethodGuide.md"]` at the top level.
|
||||
2. At prompt assembly time, the pipeline fetches each file from `pae/{company_slug}/skills/{path}`.
|
||||
3. Content is injected as the `*** SKILLS & GUIDES ***` section in the agent's prompt.
|
||||
4. The agent reads the guide as authoritative reference material for the current task.
|
||||
|
||||
Skills are company-sovereign — each company maintains its own skills library in its own repo.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user