2fe8364255
- 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>
84 lines
3.3 KiB
Markdown
84 lines
3.3 KiB
Markdown
# 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.
|