Thesis Tracker — Write It Down, Then Check It

⚠️ Data Verification — Do This Before Any Analysis

Before running any analysis, always retrieve the latest market data for the ticker:

1. Fetch current price — use web search or ask the user for the live price, 52-week range, and market cap. Never assume a price from training data.
2. Confirm key figures — the current value of every KPI the thesis names (revenue growth, margin, FCF, net debt, subscriber count, …). A thesis check against stale KPIs is worse than no check: it produces false confidence.
3. State your data source — fill in the Data & Sources header (next section) so the origin, as-of date, retrieval path, and confidence of every figure are explicit at the top of the output.
4. Flag stale data explicitly — if live data is unavailable, display this warning before proceeding:

⚠️ Live data unavailable. The following analysis uses training-data estimates which may be significantly out of date. Verify all prices and metrics before making any decisions.

Never silently substitute training-data estimates for current prices. When in doubt, ask the user to paste the latest quote.

📋 Data & Sources Header — Open Every Output With It

The first thing in the output is this provenance block, filled in — never left as placeholders. It is the standard documented on the Data & Accuracy page and the first thing result-validator looks for:

Data & Sources
  As of:      <date the figures represent, e.g. 2026-06-30>
  Source:     <primary docs — SEC EDGAR 10-K/10-Q, company IR, FRED, exchange data …>
  Retrieval:  <pasted by user | web/tool retrieval | model memory>
  Confidence: <HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW>

• Retrieval: model memory must be paired with Confidence: LOW — memory is a placeholder until confirmed against a primary source.
• Mixed sources: list each with its own as-of date rather than blending them.
• Data the user pasted is reported as pasted by user; do not upgrade its confidence beyond what the user’s own source supports.

Overview

Every other framework in the catalog answers a question today: is it cheap, is the moat real, is the chart constructive, what does the bear say. None of them remembers the answer. Three months later the investor is left with a position, a vague feeling, and no record of what they expected to happen — which is exactly the state in which people average down on a broken story or sell a working one on a bad week.

This skill turns an analysis into a contract with your future self. It produces a single saved file per ticker that states, in falsifiable terms, why the position exists, which numbers have to keep being true, what would prove the idea wrong, and when the next check is due. Then, on --update, it re-reads that file against current data and hands back one word — INTACT, WEAKENED, or BROKEN (or INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE when the data to decide is not there) — together with the specific line that changed.

It fills the gap between Playbook steps 1 (write the thesis), 9 (monitor), and 10 (know when to sell) in the Learning track, which today have no skill behind them.

What it is not. It is not a valuation, a screen, or a timing tool. It imports its KPIs and triggers from the other skills (stock-eval for quality metrics, stock-valuation for the fair-value range, bear-case for the thesis-killers, catalyst-calendar for dates, position-ladder for the share-count ceiling) and holds them to account. Run the analysis skills first; run this one to write down what they concluded.

1. Modes

If the environment cannot write files, output the complete thesis file as a fenced block and tell the user to save it at the stated path — the contract matters, not the storage.

2. Inputs

The user writes the thesis; the skill sharpens it. If the stated thesis is not falsifiable (“great company, will go up”), push back with the three questions in Phase 1 until it is. A thesis that cannot be wrong cannot be tracked.

3. Framework

Phase 1 — Sharpen the thesis (Open)

Reduce the thesis to one paragraph that answers, in order:

1. What has to happen to the business for this to work (the mechanism — not “the stock goes up”)
2. Why the market is wrong today — what is mispriced, and why the user sees it and the marginal buyer does not
3. Why now — the catalyst, the regime, or the price that makes this a decision today instead of in a year

Reject any paragraph that only restates the company description. Test: could a reasonable bear read this and know exactly what to disagree with?

Phase 2 — Pick the KPIs (3–5, no more)

Each KPI is a number the thesis depends on, with a threshold below or above which the thesis is in trouble, and a source that can be checked next quarter.

Rules:

• Prefer KPIs from the financial statements over sentiment or price-based ones. Price is the output, not an input to the thesis.
• One valuation KPI is allowed (e.g. forward P/E ≤ 35 or price within stock-valuation’s fair-value range) so that “the thesis is right but fully priced” is a detectable state.
• If a KPI has no threshold, it is a curiosity, not a KPI. Remove it.
• Import thresholds from the analyses that produced them when available (stock-eval quality gates, dividend-analysis payout ceiling, short-interest squeeze levels).

Phase 3 — Write the invalidation triggers

Triggers are events, not feelings. Each one names the observation and the action it obliges:

Triggers   | if <observable event or KPI breach>        → <action: review / trim / exit>

Draw them from three places, in this order of authority:

1. The Thesis Invalidation sections of every analysis skill already run on the ticker — copy them in verbatim, they were written for exactly this
2. The bear-case Thesis-Killers — the bear’s best arguments become the bull’s triggers
3. The user’s own “I would sell if…” — written down while calm

A KPI breach is a review trigger by default; two simultaneous breaches, or any breach of the thesis’s core mechanism (Phase 1, item 1), is an exit trigger. Price alone is never an exit trigger unless the user is explicitly running a stop-loss discipline — write that down too, so it is a rule and not a reaction.

Phase 4 — Catalysts and the next check

List the dated events that will produce new evidence for or against the thesis (earnings, product cycles, regulatory decisions, lock-up expiries, FOMC when the thesis is rate-sensitive). Import from catalyst-calendar when available. The next-check date is the earliest of: the next catalyst, the next earnings release, or 90 days.

Phase 5 — The pre-mortem

One paragraph, written in the past tense, dated twelve months out:

“It is <date + 12 months>. The position lost 40%. Looking back, the reason was…”

This forces the most probable failure path into the open while it can still be wired into a trigger. If the pre-mortem names a cause that no trigger would catch, add the trigger.

Phase 6 — Update: re-test everything (--update)

On every update:

1. Refresh the Current / Date columns of every KPI from the newest data the user supplies or the assistant can retrieve. Never carry a stale value forward silently — mark it stale with its date.
2. Re-test every trigger: fired / not fired / cannot assess (say why).
3. Re-read the thesis paragraph against what actually happened. Did the mechanism play out, stall, or go the other way?
4. Return exactly one status. Apply the rules top-down; the first that matches wins:

An INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE status does not change the file’s last confirmed status line; it is recorded in the decision log (checked — insufficient evidence — <KPIs missing>) and the next-check date is moved to when the data will exist (usually the next filing).

5. Name the specific line that changed — the KPI, its old value, its new value, and the threshold. A status without a line is an opinion.
6. Append a decision log row. The log records what the user did and why, priced and dated, and names the skill that informed it. It is the raw material for trade-postmortem.

Status is not a signal. WEAKENED does not mean sell; it means the next check moves up and the position should not be added to. BROKEN means the reason for owning it is gone — what to do about that is a position-ladder / tax question, but adding is off the table. INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE means the honest answer is “I don’t know yet” — treat it like WEAKENED for position management (no adding) until the data arrives.

Phase 7 — Thesis Health Score (0–10)

The headline number, used for the signal block. It measures how well the thesis is holding up against its own tests, not how attractive the stock is.

Map — the same bands as the standard Score Guide: ≥ 6.0 → INTACT · 4.0–5.9 → WEAKENED · < 4.0 → BROKEN. INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE is not scored from the table above — report the score as n/a in the file and use 5.0 in the signal block (NEUTRAL, Confidence LOW) so it stays comparable across skills. If the rule table in Phase 6 and the score disagree, the rule table wins and the score is adjusted to match — the score summarizes the rules, it does not override them.

4. The Saved File — Contract

output/thesis/<TICKER>.md. Keep the section order and the pipe tables exactly; --update and --review parse them.

# Thesis · <TICKER> · opened YYYY-MM-DD · status INTACT | WEAKENED | BROKEN | INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE | CLOSED
Data & Sources · as of YYYY-MM-DD · <sources> · <retrieval> · <confidence>

## Thesis
<one paragraph: what has to happen · why the market is wrong · why now>
Horizon: <n> months   Entry: $<price> on YYYY-MM-DD   Size: <shares or % of portfolio>   Ceiling: <from position-ladder, if any>

## KPIs
| KPI | Threshold | Source | Current | Date | Status |
|-----|-----------|--------|---------|------|--------|
| … | … | … | … | … | ✓ / ✗ / stale |

## Triggers
| If | Then | Source | Status |
|----|------|--------|--------|
| … | review / trim / exit | bear-case · stock-eval · user | not fired / FIRED YYYY-MM-DD |

## Catalysts
| Date | Event | Expected impact | Evidence for / against |
|------|-------|-----------------|------------------------|

## Pre-mortem
"It is YYYY-MM-DD. This lost 40% because …"

## Next check
YYYY-MM-DD — <reason: earnings / catalyst / 90-day>

## Decision log
| Date | Action | Price | Reason | Informed by |
|------|--------|-------|--------|-------------|
| YYYY-MM-DD | opened | $… | … | stock-eval, bear-case |

5. Output Format

Open mode

1. Data & Sources header
2. The sharpened thesis paragraph, with a one-line note on what was changed from the user’s draft and why
3. The KPI table, the trigger table, the catalyst list, the pre-mortem, the next-check date
4. The complete saved file in a fenced block (and confirmation of the path it was written to)
5. Thesis Invalidation and the Investment Signal block

Update mode

1. Data & Sources header
2. Status line first: NVDA · WEAKENED · 2026-08-29 — Gross margin 68.1% (was 75.5%) breached the ≥ 70% threshold
3. KPI table with old → new values and ✓/✗; trigger table with fired/not fired
4. What the change means for the Phase 1 mechanism, in three sentences
5. The updated file (fenced) with the new decision-log row
6. Thesis Invalidation and the Investment Signal block

Review mode — one table: ticker · status · score · next check · overdue? · last decision.

Example

User: thesis-tracker NVDA — I bought at $118 on 2026-05-30. Thesis: data-center demand
      compounds for at least two more years and the market is still pricing a one-off cycle.
      Here are my stock-eval and bear-case outputs. [pasted]

The assistant sharpens the paragraph (adds "why now": hyperscaler FY27 capex guides due in
the next two prints), sets four KPIs (DC revenue growth ≥ 40%, gross margin ≥ 70%, net cash > 0,
forward P/E ≤ 35), imports three triggers from the bear-case Thesis-Killers (a top-3 customer
announcing in-house silicon at scale; export-control expansion to a second major market;
inventory days > 120), lists the next two earnings dates and one export-policy decision as
catalysts, writes the pre-mortem ("…because the 2027 capex guides came in flat and the
multiple compressed before revenue did"), and saves output/thesis/NVDA.md with status INTACT
and a next check on the August print.

User: thesis-tracker NVDA --update [pastes the August 10-Q highlights]

The assistant returns: NVDA · WEAKENED · 2026-08-29 — Gross margin 68.1% (was 75.5%) breached
the ≥ 70% threshold; the other three KPIs hold; no trigger fired. Notes that the pricing-power
leg of the thesis is the one under pressure, moves the next check to the October analyst day,
and appends the log row "2026-08-29 · hold, no add · $131 · margin breach under review".

Notes

• Run the analysis skills first. This skill is a notebook with rules; it is only as good as the analyses it summarizes. Open with at least stock-eval and bear-case in hand.
• Never write the thesis for the user. Sharpen, question, and structure — but the conviction has to be theirs or the file will not be believed when it says BROKEN.
• Hold the KPI count at five. More KPIs means more noise and a guaranteed breach every quarter; the thesis becomes permanently WEAKENED and the status stops carrying information.
• A WEAKENED status blocks adding, not holding. Pair with position-ladder, whose thesis-break gate is meant to read this status.
• Closed files are inputs to trade-postmortem. Do not delete them.
• File paths and the output/ convention follow full-report. Where the environment cannot write, print the file.

Thesis Invalidation

After delivering the analysis signal, specify what would reverse it:

If signal is BULLISH (thesis INTACT) — it turns WEAKENED or BROKEN if:

• Any KPI in the file crosses its threshold at the next check (name the KPI closest to its threshold today and by how much)
• Any trigger in the file fires — the trigger table is the invalidation list for this thesis
• The core mechanism stalls for two consecutive checks even with KPIs technically inside threshold (the numbers hold but the story does not)

If signal is BEARISH (thesis BROKEN) — the verdict is wrong if:

• The breached KPI was a one-off (a charge, a reclassification, a timing shift) and reverts within one quarter — say what evidence would show that
• The fired trigger was mis-specified (it caught a symptom that turned out not to matter to the mechanism) — rewrite the trigger rather than ignore it
• The user’s original thesis was narrower than the one written down — re-open with the honest, narrower version

Re-run this analysis when:

• [ ] The next-check date in the file arrives
• [ ] Any catalyst in the file occurs
• [ ] Price moves ±20% from the entry or the last check (a check, not a reaction)
• [ ] A new bear-case or stock-eval run produces triggers the file lacks
• [ ] 90 days have elapsed since the last update

Standard Signal Output

This skill measures thesis health, not stock direction, so state the mapping: Signal: BULLISH means the thesis is INTACT (the reason for owning it holds); NEUTRAL means WEAKENED (hold, do not add, check sooner) — or INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE, in which case Confidence: LOW and Action: HOLD are mandatory; BEARISH means BROKEN (the reason for owning it is gone). Action: BUY here means “the thesis supports continuing to hold or ladder within the stated ceiling” — never “buy without limit.” Read the direction of the stock from stock-eval or bear-case, not from this block.

All analysis concludes with this standardized block:

╔══════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║              INVESTMENT SIGNAL               ║
╠══════════════════════════════════════════════╣
║ Signal:      BULLISH / NEUTRAL / BEARISH     ║
║ Confidence:  HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW             ║
║ Horizon:     SHORT / MEDIUM / LONG-TERM      ║
║ Score:       X.X / 10                        ║
╠══════════════════════════════════════════════╣
║ Action:      BUY / HOLD / SELL               ║
║ Conviction:  STRONG / MODERATE / WEAK        ║
╚══════════════════════════════════════════════╝

Score Guide: 8.0–10.0 Strongly Bullish | 6.0–7.9 Moderately Bullish | 4.0–5.9 Neutral | 2.0–3.9 Moderately Bearish | 0.0–1.9 Strongly Bearish Confidence: HIGH (strong data, clear signals) | MEDIUM (mixed signals) | LOW (limited data, conflicting signals) Horizon: SHORT-TERM (1 week–3 months) | MEDIUM-TERM (3 months–1 year) | LONG-TERM (1+ years)

Note: The Score above is the Thesis Health Score, mapped onto the standard scale for cross-skill comparability. It rates how well the written thesis is surviving its own tests — not how attractive the stock is.

Disclaimer: Educational analysis only. Not financial advice. A thesis file is a record of the user’s reasoning, not a recommendation to hold, add to, or sell any position.