Install
openclaw skills install @superior-ai/trade-thesisStructured pre-trade thesis builder — bull/bear cases, invalidation criteria, and sizing rationale before any live deployment. Read this page when a user proposes a trade idea, says 'should I trade X', asks for a bull/bear case, wants a pre-trade analysis, or before the agent deploys a new strategy live for the first time.
openclaw skills install @superior-ai/trade-thesisA structured framework the agent produces before any live deployment of a new strategy idea. Forces two-sided analysis and a measurable invalidation level so every trade has a thesis that can be killed.
Produce all six sections below. Each section is 2-4 bullet points max. This is a pre-trade checklist, not a research paper.
One sentence: what is the bet, which direction, what timeframe.
Force clarity. "Long ETH perp on a funding squeeze setup, targeting a 3-5% move over 24-48h" is a thesis. "ETH looks bullish" is not.
2-3 concrete reasons this trade works. Every reason must reference observable, checkable data:
price_check (e.g., "price reclaimed the 4h EMA-50 and is holding above")volume_momentum_check (e.g., "RVOL is 2.3x on the breakout candle")No vague claims like "market sentiment is improving" or "BTC looks strong." If it cannot be checked with a tool call, it does not belong in the bull case.
2-3 concrete reasons this trade fails. Same data-grounding rules as the bull case.
The agent must argue AGAINST the trade honestly. This is adversarial analysis, not a strawman disclaimer. Examples of real bear points:
A specific, measurable condition that kills the thesis. This becomes the logical stoploss anchor.
Acceptable invalidation criteria:
The stoploss in the deployment config should be anchored to this level, not an arbitrary percentage.
Which agent tools to call right now to verify the thesis before proceeding:
| Check | Tool | What to look for |
|---|---|---|
| Current price and recent structure | price_check | Is price where the thesis assumes it is? Has structure changed since the idea was formed? |
| Volume and momentum | volume_momentum_check | RVOL level, momentum acceleration/deceleration, any divergence |
| Available capital | balance_check | Main wallet balance on Hyperliquid — enough for the proposed stake? |
| Pair ranking | alpha_scan | Where does this pair sit in the current scan? Is the setup confirmed or fading? |
| Pair tradability | pair_validate | Is the pair active on Hyperliquid? What are the margin requirements and minimum order size? |
Run these checks and update the bull/bear case with the results before proceeding. If the data contradicts the thesis, say so.
stake_amount and max_open_trades)max_open_trades — if multiple positions may be open, total portfolio risk = risk per trade x max open tradesSetup: Funding squeeze on ETH perps, 1h timeframe.
1. Thesis statement
Long ETH/USDC:USDC on a funding squeeze — shorts are deeply underwater with funding APR at -22%, price has reclaimed the 4h EMA-21 with rising volume, targeting a 4-6% forced-unwind move over 24-48h.
2. Bull case
3. Bear case
4. Invalidation level
Below $3,420 (the pre-breakout consolidation low). If ETH gives back the entire reclaim candle, the squeeze is not catching and shorts are right. Stoploss anchored at -0.045 from entry to cover this level plus slippage.
Time stop: if the move hasn't produced +2% within 24h, the catalyst is stale. Exit via custom_exit timeout.
5. Data check
price_check ETH/USDC:USDC — confirm price is still above $3,540 and the reclaim is intactvolume_momentum_check ETH — confirm RVOL is still > 1.5xbalance_check — confirm at least $150 USDC available (stake $100 + buffer)alpha_scan — confirm ETH ranks in the squeeze-fuel bucket with score > 0.7pair_validate ETH/USDC:USDC — confirm pair is active, check margin requirements6. Position sizing rationale
Wallet balance: $1,200 USDC. Using stake_amount: 100 with max_open_trades: 1. Invalidation at $3,420 with expected entry near $3,560 = 3.9% downside. Stoploss at -0.045 covers the invalidation level. Risking ~$4.50 on a $1,200 wallet = 0.375% account risk. Conservative sizing — appropriate for a first deployment of this setup. Room to scale up on the next squeeze if this one validates.