Masih-0x3 X Opportunity Reality Check
Use this skill to separate signal from hype when the user sends an X post, repo, article, or money-making claim.
Default Outcome
Answer the real question: "Should I spend time or money on this?"
Give a direct verdict, realistic success probability, key evidence, hidden blockers, and the safest next step. Keep legal/financial risk visible without turning the answer into generic disclaimers.
Workflow
Capture the claim.
- Identify the promised outcome, required capital/time, repo/tool/article, platform, and proof offered.
- Distinguish "can be built", "can run", "can profit", and "can profit for this user".
Verify primary sources.
- Browse current sources when claims involve money, markets, platform rules, APIs, repositories, pricing, laws, or live availability.
- Prefer primary sources: GitHub repo, official docs, claim platform, market API, exchange/platform rules, archived package status, maintainer comments, commit history.
- For X posts, resolve linked
t.coURLs and check the linked article/repo directly.
Inspect the implementation.
- If a repo is attached, check files, install docs, dependencies, recent commits, issues, tests, license, API usage, and whether advertised files/commands exist.
- Look for real execution paths: wallet signing, order placement, authenticated API calls, persistence, risk controls, logging, retries, simulation vs live mode.
- For trading bots, separate scanners, paper trading, backtests, and live execution.
Check economics and constraints.
- Estimate fees, spread/slippage, latency, minimum capital, liquidity, rate limits, API access, geofencing, tax/legal constraints, and operational maintenance.
- For US-based usage, explicitly check platform availability and restrictions when relevant.
- For "risk-free" claims, identify the residual risk: counterparty, settlement, account ban, execution, borrow/funding, bridge, oracle, legal, liquidity, or model risk.
Score the opportunity.
Realness: is the post/repo/project real?Reproducibility: can the user reproduce the advertised setup?Profit realism: can it realistically make money after costs?User fit: does it fit the user's capital, location, skills, and time?Risk: what can go wrong and how expensive is failure?
Recommend next action.
- Choose one:
skip,watch,paper-test,small experiment,build only as research, orpursue. - Define the smallest non-destructive validation step and the stop condition.
- Choose one:
Output Shape
Verdict: direct answer.Probability: rough ranges for reproduction and profit, with confidence.What is real: verified facts.What is hype or missing: mismatches, unsupported claims, missing files, fake proof, or bad assumptions.Blockers: legal/platform/access/capital/API/liquidity/time constraints.Recommended next step: one practical action.
Red Flags
- Missing repo files that the post tells users to run.
- Simulation or paper-trading code presented as live profit.
- No real order placement, private-key flow, wallet signing, broker integration, or settlement path.
- Archived or deprecated SDKs used as if current.
- Screenshots of profit without reproducible trades, wallet history, or verifiable IDs.
- "Risk-free", "guaranteed", "passive", "delta neutral", or "arbitrage" claims with no fee/slippage/funding/liquidity math.
- Requires platform access the user likely does not have.
- Depends on private alpha, invite-only APIs, or TOS violations.
Guardrails
- Do not encourage illegal platform access or evasion of geofencing/KYC.
- Do not treat financial claims as stable; verify current platform rules and docs.
- Do not call an opportunity profitable only because the repo runs.
- Do not spend user money or submit trades/orders.
- Do not over-research low-value ideas after the decisive blocker is found.