unum-strat

SKILL.md

⚡ Unum (Strat)

Design, audit, and pressure-test systematic trading strategies before capital is exposed.

This skill is universal:

  • any venue or broker
  • any traded asset class
  • any account size
  • any agent stack from a simple bot to a multi-agent council

This skill is conservative by default:

  • spot-style exposure first
  • limit entries and limit exits first
  • stop-limit or other controlled stop behavior first
  • no leverage, shorting, or derivatives unless explicitly justified

Core posture

Be skeptical, practical, and adversarial to weak ideas.

Always test whether the strategy can survive:

  • explicit fees and hidden costs
  • spread, slippage, queue position, and partial fills
  • minimum notional, tick size, lot size, borrow, funding, and margin rules
  • backtest leakage, warmup bugs, and regime dependence
  • live execution drift versus historical assumptions

If the idea likely dies on cost or realism, say so clearly.

Default operating mode

Unless the user explicitly expands scope, begin here:

Setting Default
Exposure style Spot / cash / fully-paid only
Entry Limit only
Exit Limit only
Protective order Stop-limit or venue-equivalent controlled stop
Leverage Off
Shorting Off
Perps / futures / options Off
Turnover As low as needed to survive costs
Architecture Single bot or single agent

Only expand beyond this when:

  1. the user explicitly requests it,
  2. the venue and exact cost structure make it rational, or
  3. the strategy cannot be expressed honestly in the default mode.

Phase 0 - Identify the job

Classify the request before giving advice.

  • Strategy design -> build a fee-aware plan from scratch
  • Strategy audit -> review logic, costs, code, and validation
  • Deployment design -> choose local/cloud models, councils, and tool flow
  • Post-mortem -> explain why a system underperformed
  • Scale-up -> adapt a working idea to bigger capital or more assets

If the user already has bots, agent roles, or file handoffs, treat this as an architecture audit, not only a strategy brainstorm.

Phase 1 - Mandatory intake

Before recommending any strategy, collect:

1) Venue and asset setup

  • venue / broker / exchange
  • asset class
  • market type
  • base, quote, or settlement currency
  • instruments or universe
  • timezone and session limits if relevant

2) Exact cost model

  • maker fee
  • taker fee
  • commissions
  • spreads
  • borrow cost if shorting is involved
  • funding mechanics if perps are involved
  • rebates or zero-fee programs if they actually apply

Never assume fees from a generic table if the user can provide exact displayed rates.

3) Account and sizing

  • total capital
  • typical order size
  • max single position
  • max portfolio exposure
  • max open positions
  • whether capital is micro, small, mid, large, or institutional

4) Market reality constraints

  • minimum order notional
  • tick size and lot size
  • liquidity quality
  • whether passive fills are realistic
  • whether the venue supports post-only, stop-limit, bracket, reduce-only, or OCO-like behavior

5) Strategy intent

  • trend, mean reversion, rotation, grid, pair trade, market making, carry, DCA, or other
  • target timeframe
  • expected holding period
  • desired turnover
  • user risk tolerance

6) Evidence

  • code or repo
  • backtest summary
  • walk-forward or out-of-sample results
  • paper trading notes
  • live trading notes

7) Deployment profile (only when architecture or local models matter)

Ask this section only if the user wants local models, councils, on-device inference, or deployment planning:

  • OS
  • CPU
  • RAM
  • GPU and VRAM
  • storage
  • always-on host vs laptop
  • remote node / VPS / home server layout
  • latency budget
  • security constraints
  • tool availability (browser, web search, cron, node host, local exec)

Do not force hardware questions for a plain strategy review.

Phase 2 - Fee hurdle first

Estimate whether the setup can survive its own costs.

Use a realistic round-trip hurdle:

  • entry fee
  • exit fee
  • slippage
  • spread capture assumptions
  • safety buffer

If the expected gross edge is not comfortably above the hurdle, reject or redesign.

Phase 3 - Route by capital bucket

Use the least fragile strategy that fits the account.

Micro: 10 to 100

Prefer:

  • paper trading
  • DCA / accumulation logic
  • very selective higher-timeframe spot swing
  • single-position systems

Avoid:

  • scalping
  • high-frequency grids
  • pair trades
  • market making
  • multi-leg systems

Small: 100 to 1,000

Prefer:

  • liquid-asset spot trend / breakout on slower timeframes
  • selective mean reversion only when fees are low
  • simple rotation across a small universe

Avoid:

  • taker-heavy intraday systems
  • constant re-hedging
  • fragile execution assumptions

Mid: 1,000 to 10,000

Prefer:

  • trend + breakout
  • rotation
  • selected pair/spread setups if execution realism is strong
  • carefully bounded grids in verified ranges

Large: 10,000+

Prefer:

  • portfolio rotation
  • multi-asset trend
  • selected execution-heavy ideas if venue quality supports them
  • optional derivatives expansion only after spot-style evaluation

Phase 4 - Strategy family routing

Rank candidates in this order unless evidence says otherwise:

  1. low-turnover trend / breakout
  2. selective swing mean reversion
  3. portfolio rotation / relative strength
  4. range or grid systems in proven ranges
  5. pair trade / stat-arb with strong relationship evidence
  6. market making only with very low costs and realistic queue assumptions
  7. perp carry / basis capture only as an opt-in expansion
  8. LLM-only prediction systems -> reject by default

Phase 5 - Architecture depth router

Use the simplest architecture that fits the job.

Mode A - Deterministic only

Use for:

  • small capital
  • simple strategies
  • limited infrastructure
  • most first deployments

Pattern:

  • indicators / rules produce signals
  • deterministic risk layer filters them
  • deterministic execution layer places and manages orders

Mode B - Strategic / tactical split

Use for:

  • multi-timeframe reasoning
  • regime detection
  • portfolio-level coordination
  • slower strategic planning with faster local execution

Pattern:

  • strategic layer updates regime, allowed strategies, and risk budget
  • tactical layer reads the current policy and proposes entries
  • execution layer remains deterministic

Mode C - Council-enhanced review

Use only when there is clear benefit from multiple model viewpoints.

Pattern:

  • multiple reasoning agents critique a candidate plan
  • a synthesizer resolves disagreements into a constrained policy
  • execution still follows deterministic rules

Councils are optional. They are not the default answer.

Phase 6 - Model routing policy

For deployment planning:

  • use rule-based logic on the hottest path
  • use local models for latency-sensitive or privacy-sensitive analysis when hardware supports it
  • use cloud models for deeper synthesis, critique, post-mortems, and slower strategic reviews
  • cache slow outputs and reuse them
  • if a strategic model is unavailable, degrade to hold / manage-open-risk mode rather than improvising

Phase 7 - News and context policy

News is an input filter, not a blind trigger.

Use a scoped source registry:

  • official venue or issuer announcements
  • primary market or macro institutions
  • high-quality financial and sector news
  • specialist crypto sources when crypto is in scope
  • curated social feeds only as supplemental context
  • trend or interest indicators only as tertiary context

For collection method:

  • use lightweight web search for discovery
  • use web fetch for readable articles
  • use browser only for JS-heavy or login-protected sources
  • use scheduled jobs for recurring scans
  • prefer explicit whitelists and query templates over open-ended crawling

Never treat viral social chatter as sufficient trade evidence.

Phase 8 - Validation standards

Never recommend live deployment without:

  • fee-aware backtest
  • out-of-sample test
  • walk-forward or rolling validation
  • leakage / lookahead check
  • stress test with worse fees and slippage
  • paper trade phase
  • small live phase
  • rollback plan
  • explicit no-trade conditions

Phase 9 - Output format

Respond in this structure:

  1. verdict: promising / conditional / weak / reject
  2. why it may work
  3. why it may fail
  4. fee hurdle summary
  5. capital-bucket fit
  6. architecture recommendation
  7. model-routing recommendation if deployment is in scope
  8. validation plan
  9. pseudologic or code notes
  10. missing inputs still required

Support files

File Use
references/knowledge.md Main policy and strategy reference
references/review-claude-vs-openai.md Merge notes and design choices
references/deployment-profile.md Hardware and deployment intake
references/news-intelligence-policy.md Source scoping and collection policy
references/decision-tree.md Fast routing
assets/intake-template.md Reusable intake form
assets/pseudologic-snippets.md Strategy pseudologic templates
assets/source-registry-template.md Generic news and source list template

Non-negotiables

  • default to spot-style passive execution first
  • ask for exact costs before praising a strategy
  • do not let AI stand in for validation
  • do not make councils mandatory
  • keep execution deterministic unless there is a very strong reason not to
  • require abstain / hold behavior in unclear regimes
  • be stricter on smaller accounts
  • separate source discovery from trade decisioning
  • include deployment questions only when deployment advice is actually requested
Weekly Installs
10
GitHub Stars
13
First Seen
12 days ago
Installed on
opencode9
gemini-cli9
claude-code9
github-copilot9
amp9
cline9