Individual skill
benchmark-due-diligence
Runs adversarial due-diligence on a benchmark the user envies — a founder, KOL, company, or product whose success looks inflated — splitting marketing bubble from real signal, then mapping the validated playbook onto the user's own resources. Use for 尽调/对标/拆解 a competitor, 抄/偷师 their playbook, or suspecting 水分/泡沫 in claims. Prefer over deep-research when debunking inflated claims, not a neutral briefing.
daymade-financial/benchmark-due-diligence/SKILL.md
Source commit 7c4d326ddd94d504e00e241ba49498e95160afbe
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- No
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- No
- Observed behavior
- Not checked yet
- Last checked
- Nov 4, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 1,522
- Repository last updated
- Nov 7, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 9,589 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 9,589 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 9,589 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 9,589 bytesreferences/attribution_and_resource_mapping.mddoc · 3,753 bytesreferences/evidence_discipline_traps.mddoc · 5,169 bytesreferences/evidence_grading_rubric.mddoc · 6,621 bytesreferences/workflow_orchestration_template.mddoc · 6,609 bytes
Read excerpt
# Benchmark Due Diligence
Take a benchmark the user envies — a founder, KOL, company, or product whose success looks suspiciously shiny — and produce a teardown that ends in **"what this means for ME"**, not a neutral report. The deliverable answers three questions a balanced briefing never does: *How much of this success is real vs marketing bubble? How much is replicable method vs luck/timing? And what, specifically, can the commissioner do with it?*
This is the adversarial, decision-oriented cousin of `deep-research`. Where deep-research builds a trustworthy picture of the world, this skill **assumes the picture is inflated until proven otherwise** and converts the survivors into the commissioner's own moves.
## CRITICAL: run inline, never `context: fork`
This skill is an **orchestrator** — it spawns parallel collection + verification agents (via the `Workflow` tool, or `Task` agents) and may invoke other skills (`deep-research`, `osint-investigate`, `qcc`). Subagents cannot spawn subagents or call skills. Setting `context: fork` would silently break the entire fan-out. **Do not add a `context` field.** (Same constraint osint-investigate documents — it's a hard runtime rule, not a preference.)
## The one rule that protects the commissioner: two injection channels
Everything the agents see flows through exactly two channels. Keeping them separate is the single most important discipline in this skill:
