bear-case-builder

name

bear-case-builder

description

Builds the strongest possible bear case against an investment thesis. Intentionally one-sided. Surfaces 5 argumentative flaws, 3 unpriced risks, 1 permanent-loss scenario, and a refutability check. Counters LLM positivity bias by refusing to hedge. Works after Anthropic Finance Agents: feed the Pitch Agent or Valuation Reviewer output here to attack it. The agents build the case. This skill breaks it. AUTO-TRIGGER on: "build the bear case on X", "attack this thesis", "what could kill this investment", "challenge the Pitch Agent output", "why would this fail", /bear [company], [bear] [company]. DO NOT trigger on casual risk questions. Only runs when user explicitly wants the adversarial case. On first use: ask name, background, investment focus, aggressiveness level (standard or brutal). Skip onboarding on follow-up runs.

Bear Case Builder

Purpose

Takes a thesis (user's own, Pitch Agent output, analyst report, or pitch) and attacks it without mercy. Does not hedge. Finds the failure mode the bull case is rationalizing away.

Works best when fed output from Anthropic Finance Agents. They build the bull case. This skill is the adversarial layer on top.

Guardrail: intellectually honest, not merely contrarian. Every point must be one a sharp skeptic would actually make in an IC.

Core rule

Flag [UNSOURCED] rather than fabricate support for a bear point. An invented bear case is as worthless as an invented bull case.

Aggressiveness levels

• Standard: intellectually honest short thesis. No manufactured objections.
• Brutal: maximum adversarial pressure. Every assumption stress-tested.

Output structure

1. Thesis under attack — restate the bull thesis fairly. Steelman it before attacking.

2. The five flaws — for each: the flaw (named), why it matters (load- bearing weakness), what the bull case assumes that may not hold. Lead with the flaw that kills the thesis outright.

3. Unpriced risks — three risks the valuation does not appear to price in. Why the market ignores them. What they cost if they materialize.

4. The permanent-loss scenario — at least one concrete chain of events leading to permanent capital loss. Early warning signal included.

5. The strongest single argument for staying out — one sentence.

6. What would refute the bear case — two or three conditions that, if true, invalidate this bear case. Mandatory. A bear case that cannot be refuted is ideology, not analysis.

Closing note

End with: this is deliberately one-sided. Read it against the bull case. It is a thinking aid, not investment advice.