Skill 詳細
pulse
Recency and sentiment research can support investment research, but it is not equity-specific.
使用前に確認
自動レビューは関連性のみを確認し、安全性や推奨を保証しません。使用前に出典の説明を読んでください。
SKILL.md
これはレビュー時に保存された抜粋です。完全で最新の内容は外部ソースを確認してください。
--- name: pulse description: "Multi-source recency research skill that takes the pulse of any topic across Reddit, Hacker News, the open web, and optionally X/Twitter within a configurable recent window (default 30 days). Forcing intake clarifies topic specificity, angle (trend/sentiment/problems/opportunities/comparison), time window, and platform scope before searching. Returns a synthesized briefing with citations, engagement metrics, and cross-platform pattern analysis. Use when the user requests multi-source recency intelligence on a topic (e.g., 'pulse on [topic]', 'what's happening with [topic]', 'what are people saying about [topic]', 'current conversation about [topic]', 'take the pulse of [topic]', 'trending: [topic]', 'find me info on [topic]'), and for competitor research, trend discovery, tool comparisons, and audience sentiment analysis." license: MIT metadata: source_spec: "megaprompts/01-pulse-megaprompt.md" build_pattern: "Path B (direct conversion)" research_pack_convention: "Agent Integrity Rules block preserved verbatim per PR #657 audit" version: 1.0.0 --- # Pulse — Multi-Source Recency Research > **Portability:** Works in both Claude Code CLI and Claude.ai. The optional X/Twitter phase requires browser automation and is skipped automatically if unavailable. A recency-oriented research skill that synthesizes what people are saying about a topic across Reddit, Hacker News, the open web, and (optionally) X/Twitter — within a configurable time window. Output is a single coherent briefing with citations, engagement signals, and cross-platform pattern analysis. The skill captures the **current conversation**, not the canonical reference. ## Invocation **Explicit trigger phrases:** - "pulse on [topic]" - "what's happening with [topic]" - "what are people saying about [topic]" - "current conversation about [topic]" - "take the pulse of [topic]" - "trending: [topic]" - "find me info on [topic]" Also covers: competitor research with recency flavor, trend discovery, tool comparisons, audience sentiment analysis. ## Agent Integrity Rules (Research-Pack Convention) The following rules apply throughout the run. They are inherited from the research-pack convention and locked down by PR #657's cross-skill consistency audit. - **Execution discipline.** Phases 1–3 run in parallel (Reddit + HN + Web are independent). Within each phase, sequential calls only. **1 q/sec rate limit per platform.** Confirm response received before next call within the same phase. - **Source discipline.** Cite only sources returned by **this session's tool calls.** Training knowledge is labeled `[Background — not from search]` and excluded from primary findings count. - **Three-count tracking.** Queries sent / sources received (shown) / sources cited. Surfaced in the audit log inline in the synthesis section. Use `scripts/citation_tracker.py` for the deterministic count. - **Retry policy.** On failure → wait 3s → retry once → log. After **3 consecutive failures across all sources:** stop, alert user, share what was collected. Never deliver an empty file. - **Plan-tier detection.** Reddit + HN are unauthenticated public JSON APIs (rate-limited per IP, not per plan). Surface rate-limit signals from response headers when available; degrade gracefully otherwise. See `references/research_pack_conventions.md` for the canon and `references/parallel_execution_discipline.md` for the rate-limit rationale. ## Phase 0: Grill-Me Intake (2–4 forcing questions, one at a time) Dependency-ordered. Each question carries explicit "why I'm asking". Stop condition: max 4. ### Q1 (root) — Topic Specificity > **What's the topic? State it in 1–2 sentences — be specific. "AI" or "tech" will get you a vague survey; "self-hosted LLM deployment for small teams" or "Claude Code adoption among enterprise engineering orgs" will get you a useful answer.** > > *Why I'm asking:* Specificity dictates search quality. Vague topics produce vague briefings. If yGitHub で全文を読む (外部ページ)