sawz/last30days-skill
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

feat(skill): scope narrative lens to first-party entities, gate on fetched positioning

Browse Source 
The lens criterion is now explicit: an identifiable first party with a
fetchable public pitch - companies, products, services. People NEVER
qualify, even founders whose companies would (MrBeast the company can
get the lens; Jimmy Donaldson the person cannot; "Garry Tan vs Sam
Altman" gets N/A across the row). Ownerless topics (Bitcoin) fail the
same test - a foundation or fan site is not an authoritative first
party. Comparison-row verdicts are also artifact-gated to match the
single-entity beat: a verdict requires positioning fetched THIS run;
if item 6 couldn't run (no WebSearch), the cell is Unclear - the pitch
is never supplied from memory.
This commit is contained in:
Trevin Chow
2026-06-09 16:33:29 -07:00
parent 4402dd317f
commit 57860aff1c
4 changed files with 15 additions and 8 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
CHANGELOG.md
+1 -1
View File
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ and this project adheres to [Semantic Versioning](https://semver.org/spec/v2.0.0
### Added
- **Narrative lens for company / product / service topics.** Comparison tables gain a `Setting the narrative?` axis that judges whether each entity's community conversation is actually about what the entity *pitches* (its first-party positioning) or about something else — pricing, rivals, an incident, a ToS change. A new mandatory research step captures each entity's current stated positioning from first-party sources (homepage, docs, pricing) rather than from memory, and single-entity company runs get a `narrative-check` synthesis beat surfacing the same signal. The mismatch is the point: companies usually don't control their own conversation.
- **Narrative lens for company / product / service topics.** Comparison tables gain a `Setting the narrative?` axis that judges whether each entity's community conversation is actually about what the entity *pitches* (its first-party positioning) or about something else — pricing, rivals, an incident, a ToS change. A new mandatory research step captures each entity's current stated positioning from first-party sources (homepage, docs, pricing) rather than from memory, and single-entity company runs get a `narrative-check` synthesis beat surfacing the same signal. The mismatch is the point: companies usually don't control their own conversation. The lens is scoped to entities with an identifiable first party (companies, products, services): people always get N/A — even founders whose companies would qualify — as do events, abstract concepts, and ownerless topics like Bitcoin, and verdicts require positioning fetched during the run, never from memory.
### Fixed