Initial commit: coin-hunter skill
This commit is contained in:
90
references/search-workflow.md
Normal file
90
references/search-workflow.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
|
||||
# Search Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
Use this workflow when the user wants you to proactively discover meme-coin / 妖币 candidates instead of analyzing a known ticker.
|
||||
|
||||
## Goal
|
||||
|
||||
Produce a shortlist with enough evidence to answer:
|
||||
- what deserves attention now
|
||||
- what is merely noisy
|
||||
- what should be avoided
|
||||
|
||||
## Default search strategy
|
||||
|
||||
Unless the user specifies otherwise, search for **liquid speculative candidates** first and avoid ultra-microcaps.
|
||||
|
||||
Run search in this order:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Theme scan**
|
||||
- Search current meme-coin themes by chain or narrative
|
||||
- Examples:
|
||||
- `Solana meme coins trending`
|
||||
- `Base meme coin watchlist`
|
||||
- `AI meme coin trending`
|
||||
- `new meme coin listed today`
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Candidate extraction**
|
||||
- Pull out repeated names that appear across multiple sources
|
||||
- Prefer coins that appear in both market-oriented and community-oriented sources
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Candidate verification**
|
||||
- For each candidate, search:
|
||||
- `<coin> market cap liquidity`
|
||||
- `<coin> holders tokenomics`
|
||||
- `<coin> rug risk`
|
||||
- `<coin> listed on exchange`
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Cross-check timing**
|
||||
- Search whether the coin is already broadly saturated:
|
||||
- `<coin> trending X`
|
||||
- `<coin> breakout volume`
|
||||
- `<coin> price surge`
|
||||
- If it is already universally discussed, consider classifying it as late rather than early
|
||||
|
||||
## Source preference
|
||||
|
||||
Prefer a mix of:
|
||||
- credible exchange announcements or listing pages
|
||||
- market data summaries
|
||||
- crypto news aggregation
|
||||
- community/trading discussion summaries
|
||||
|
||||
Do not rely entirely on project websites or obvious promotion pages.
|
||||
|
||||
## Discovery rules
|
||||
|
||||
### Good candidate signs during search
|
||||
- name appears repeatedly across different sources
|
||||
- tied to a live narrative or active chain
|
||||
- discussion suggests recent acceleration, not just old fame
|
||||
- accessible enough that the user can realistically trade it
|
||||
|
||||
### Weak candidate signs during search
|
||||
- only appears in promotional pages
|
||||
- only appears on tiny venues
|
||||
- no independent discussion or market data context
|
||||
- most results are already about an explosive move that happened days ago
|
||||
|
||||
## Shortlist size
|
||||
|
||||
Default to **3-5 candidates**.
|
||||
|
||||
If the search returns many names:
|
||||
- keep the most repeated
|
||||
- keep the ones with the clearest narrative
|
||||
- remove obviously illiquid or scammy names first
|
||||
|
||||
## Output shape for discovery mode
|
||||
|
||||
For each shortlisted candidate include:
|
||||
- ticker / name
|
||||
- chain / venue context if known
|
||||
- why it entered the shortlist
|
||||
- biggest risk
|
||||
- tentative bucket: candidate runner / watch-only / avoid
|
||||
|
||||
Then give a final rank order.
|
||||
|
||||
## Notes
|
||||
|
||||
When evidence is weak, say so. Discovery mode is for narrowing attention, not pretending certainty.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user