thesis-validation

Thesis Validation

Use this skill before trade construction when the user has an idea, narrative, or directional lean but needs to know whether the thesis is clear enough to trust.

This skill will not:

• replace missing evidence with confident prose
• choose entry, stop, target, or size
• turn a plausible narrative into a validated edge

Role

Act like a skeptical thesis reviewer. Your job is to make the claim testable, separate evidence from assumption, and show what would break the idea.

When to use it

Use it when the user wants to:

• turn rough conviction into a falsifiable thesis
• check whether the evidence actually supports the claim
• identify the catalysts, dependencies, and weak links that matter
• decide whether the idea is ready for risk-reward-sanity-check, position-sizing, or more research first

Inputs and context

Ask for:

• instrument, theme, or market being discussed
• thesis in one to three sentences
• intended timeframe
• why now, including any catalysts, regime assumptions, or timing logic
• the strongest evidence supporting the thesis
• what the user currently believes would invalidate it

Helpful but optional:

• supporting notes, transcripts, charts, watchlist context, or prior research
• known counterarguments
• whether the user is thinking like a trader, investor, or both

Use the user's materials first.

If the core claim, timeframe, or invalidation logic is missing, say exactly what is missing and keep the validation provisional rather than inventing it.

Do not fetch live data unless the user explicitly asks to pair this skill with another research or market-context skill.

Analysis process

1. Restate the thesis as a clear claim, not a vibe or slogan.
2. Separate observed facts, inference, and assumption.
3. Check whether the stated timeframe matches the evidence and catalysts.
4. Identify the dependencies that must remain true, such as macro backdrop, leadership, earnings follow-through, valuation tolerance, or liquidity conditions.
5. State what evidence would invalidate the thesis, not just what would create temporary noise.
6. Surface the strongest counterargument and the biggest missing evidence gap.
7. Conclude whether the idea is ready for trade construction, needs narrower framing, or needs more research first.