Investment Decision

clawock investment-decision

You are the model side of a clawock decision run. Your runtime (OpenClaw) owns conversation, memory and tools; clawock owns the decision contract. Your entire job is one file in, one file out.

When to run

A run prepare has written a request file (the request_file path it printed, e.g. .clawock/work/<run_id>/request.json). Open it first; it tells you. On a fresh machine the workspace must be created once first: clawock init book --workflow investment-decision (see ../../README.md — "From zero").

• task — the decision contract (evidence, opposing case, bounded action, reconciled amounts)
• context.documents — the certified context, with per-file sha256 fingerprints
• workflow.parameters — gates like min_supporting_evidence, min_opposing_evidence, max_confidence_without_primary_source

What to produce

Write decision.json at the workspace root — artifact paths are resolved against the workspace root, not the request directory. The schema is the package's investment-decision workflow; when in doubt, keep the fields minimal and explicit:

{
  "schema_version": 1,
  "workflow": {"id": "investment-decision", "version": "1.1.0"},
  "decision_id": "example-2026-08-08",
  "as_of": "2026-08-08T08:00:00+00:00",
  "subject": {"ticker": "EXAMPLE", "market": "US", "currency": "USD"},
  "evidence": [
 {"id": "filing-growth", "stance": "supporting",
  "summary": "The latest filed revenue figure grew year over year.",
  "source": "issuer filing", "source_class": "primary",
  "observed_at": "2026-08-08T07:30:00+00:00"},
 {"id": "valuation-risk", "stance": "opposing",
  "summary": "The current market multiple is above its stated range.",
  "source": "market data snapshot", "source_class": "market",
  "observed_at": "2026-08-08T07:45:00+00:00"}
  ],
  "debate": {
 "bull_case": {"summary": "Filed growth supports continued monitoring.",
"evidence_ids": ["filing-growth"]},
 "bear_case": {"summary": "Valuation leaves insufficient margin of safety.",
"evidence_ids": ["valuation-risk"]}
  },
  "thesis": {
 "statement": "Momentum is constructive, but price does not compensate for valuation risk.",
 "confidence": 0.7,
 "invalidation_conditions": ["Filed growth reverses"]
  },
  "decision": {
 "action": "watch",
 "rationale": "The opposing valuation evidence blocks an entry.",
 "evidence_ids": ["filing-growth", "valuation-risk"],
 "order": null
  }
}

Rules that are enforced by clawock run publish, not by this file:

1. debate.bull_case and debate.bear_case are both required and each cites evidence; the bear case must cite opposing-stance evidence — publish refuses without it. Python checks that linkage, not sincerity: make the bear case a genuine counterargument, never a strawman — that honesty is the model's contract.
2. Every evidence row needs a stance (supporting | opposing | context), a source_class (primary | secondary | market | agent) and an observed_at no later than as_of.
3. All evidence_ids references must exist (decision and both debate cases); conclusions in thesis.statement and decision.rationale should be backed by cited evidence.
4. If you propose an order, the currency amounts must reconcile to the cent; let the numbers come out of the context, never invent them.
5. Confidence above max_confidence_without_primary_source requires a cited primary source.

After writing

Run the publish step (normally via clawock run publish in the workspace) and report the receipt's status and run_id to the user. Never edit the receipt. Never re-grade your own decision — Python settles.

Record conversation verdicts

A verdict you give in this chat (加仓/减仓/建仓/清仓/观望) is a decision — write it to the shared decision-mind ledger, the same memory/decisions.jsonl the daily brief and the DSH plugin read. Never edit that file by hand: clawock record is the only writer for conversation verdicts, from any harness. It validates (bear case + invalidation mandatory), freezes the mind/emotion snapshot, and appends atomically.

clawock record --source openclaw \
  --subject 00100 --market HK --currency HKD \
  --action reject --confidence 0.65 --driven-by fundamental \
  --bull "营收 +159% YoY,入通/海外霸榜催化" \
  --bear "净利率 -2368%,资不抵债,z+2.8σ 反转" \
  --thesis "高增长救不了资不抵债,先活下来" \
  --invalidation "站回 340" --invalidation "缩量企稳" \
  --emotion averaging_down --note "浮亏 -40% 的摊本冲动被压过,忍住没加"

--source tells the ledger which harness produced the verdict (openclaw here; DSH passes conversation, other harnesses pass their own). The rule is the same as the DSH plugin's: one ledger, one record command, every harness calls it — nobody writes JSON directly.