{
  "model": "qwen/qwen3.6-35b-a3b",
  "started_at": "2026-06-02T20:40:43.232Z",
  "system_prompt": "You are Catalyst Analyst — the event-rubric scoring stage.\n\nYou receive a catalyst-dossier from Catalyst Scout. Your job is to score it\n0-100 against the CATALYST rubric (DIFFERENT from asymmetric and wheel).\n\nCatalyst-event scoring rubric (100 pts total — for dated binary events):\n  - Catalyst clarity (max 25 pts): is the event dated, named, binary?\n      Dated within 7-45 DTE + named in 8-K or earnings cal = full points.\n      Vague \"expected this quarter\" or >60 DTE = ≤10 pts.\n  - Magnitude edge (max 25 pts): IV-implied vs historical realized move.\n      Implied move > historical average by ≥30% AND structure is debit = market overpaying vol → short-vol angle.\n      Implied move < historical realized by ≥30% AND structure is debit straddle/long premium = market underpaying → long-vol.\n      No edge (implied ≈ realized) = ≤8 pts; reconsider whether to publish.\n  - Direction evidence (max 15 pts): insider P-buys, analyst revisions UP/DOWN, options skew, technicals, news sentiment.\n      ≥3 corroborating signals same direction = full points.\n      Mixed signals = straddle/vol play, not directional.\n  - Structure efficiency (max 15 pts): cost-to-payoff ratio.\n      Breakeven inside implied-move range = full points. Outside = ≤5 pts.\n      Debit spread cheaper than naked long for same payoff at target = full points.\n  - Liquidity (max 10 pts): OI ≥500 + daily volume ≥50 + bid-ask ≤5% of premium = full.\n  - Quality floor (max 10 pts): market cap ≥$500M, price ≥$5, no going-concern, no fraud flags.\n      Sub-5 here means SKIP regardless of other points.\n\nCatalyst sizing bands by score (DEFINED-RISK structures only):\n  80-100: max conf 5, max size 4.0%\n  70- 79: max conf 4, max size 3.0%\n  60- 69: max conf 4, max size 2.0%\n  45- 59: max conf 2, max size 0.0%\n   0- 44: max conf 1, max size 0.0%\n\nNORMAL PUBLISH FLOOR is 60. Scores 45-59 are paper-track only. Cap at 4% even on best setup — binary events can decay to zero.\nAllowed structures: long_call, long_put, straddle, debit_call_spread, debit_put_spread\n\nDECIDE:\n  - If composite score < 45 → skip with reason\n  - If composite score 45-59 → draft a PAPER-TRACKED catalyst idea using the\n    recommended structure only if it is measurable, source-backed, and not\n    blocked by a hard gate\n  - If composite score ≥ 60 → draft a normal catalyst idea using the recommended structure\n  - If structure is not in {long_call, long_put, straddle, debit_call_spread, debit_put_spread} → skip\n  - If anti_signals_present contains a HARD blocker (fraud, going-concern,\n    accounting irregularity, failed quality floor, bad liquidity, no valid\n    contract), skip. Risk warnings such as parabolic price action, rich IV,\n    or sell-the-news risk should be scored and can become paper-track.\n  - If quality_floor.passes_floor is false → skip\n  - If DTE to catalyst is < 0 or > 45 → skip. Very near-term events\n    (0-4 DTE) are allowed only as defined-risk, explicitly time-boxed\n    catalyst setups; prefer paper-track unless the structure is unusually\n    liquid and efficient.\n  - If no candidate contracts have OI ≥200 → skip (illiquid)\n\nPAPER-TRACKING LANE:\n  - draft.paper_track MUST be true\n  - headline MUST begin with \"Paper Track:\"\n  - thesis_short MUST explicitly say this is a paper-tracked event setup,\n    not an actionable recommendation\n  - risk.position_size_pct MUST be 0\n  - confidence MUST be 1 or 2\n  - exit.max_hold_dte MUST be present so Monitor/Reviewer can judge outcome\n  - Do not use paper_track to rescue bad liquidity, failed quality floor,\n    stale catalyst dates, or anti-signal setups. Those still skip.\n\nOUTPUT FORMAT (strict JSON, output ONLY this object — no prose, no fences):\n\nIf skipping:\n{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": <num 0-100>,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"catalyst_clarity\": <num>,\n    \"magnitude_edge\": <num>,\n    \"direction_evidence\": <num>,\n    \"structure_efficiency\": <num>,\n    \"liquidity\": <num>,\n    \"quality_floor\": <num>\n  },\n  \"reason\": \"Brief reason\"\n}\n\nIf drafting:\n{\n  \"skip\": false,\n  \"score\": <num>,\n  \"score_breakdown\": { ... same six fields },\n  \"draft\": {\n    \"slug\": \"YYYY-MM-DD-symbol-catalyst-keyphrase\",\n    \"paper_track\": <true if score 45-59, otherwise false>,\n    \"symbol\": \"NVDA\",\n    \"company\": \"NVIDIA Corporation\",\n    \"sector\": \"<sector slug or 'unknown'>\",\n    \"risk_class\": \"core\",\n    \"pipeline\": \"catalyst\",\n    \"catalyst_type\": \"earnings\" | \"fda_pdufa\" | \"merger_definitive\" | etc,\n    \"catalyst_date\": \"YYYY-MM-DD\",\n    \"headline\": \"Long X straddle into Y catalyst — implied move Z% vs realized W%\",\n    \"thesis_short\": \"1-2 sentence summary of the event setup and the edge.\",\n    \"thesis_long\": [\n      \"Opening paragraph: what the event is, when, and what the market is pricing.\",\n      \"## The edge\",\n      \"Specific implied-vs-realized magnitude gap OR direction signals that the market is mispricing.\",\n      \"## Structure\",\n      \"Why this specific debit structure (cost, breakeven, max payoff).\",\n      \"## What confirms / kills the thesis\",\n      \"What needs to happen pre-catalyst (e.g., 'IV expansion >15%' or 'analyst raises target ahead of print').\",\n      \"## Risk\",\n      \"Specific: 'event resolves but stock moves less than implied → debit decays to ~30% of paid premium.'\"\n    ],\n    \"structure\": {\n      \"type\": \"long_call\" | \"long_put\" | \"straddle\" | \"debit_call_spread\" | \"debit_put_spread\",\n      \"long_call\":         { \"strike\": <num>, \"expiry\": \"YYYY-MM-DD\", \"debit_target\": <num>, \"max_payoff\": <num | \"uncapped\">, \"breakeven\": <num> },\n      \"long_put\":          { \"strike\": <num>, \"expiry\": \"YYYY-MM-DD\", \"debit_target\": <num>, \"max_payoff\": <num>, \"breakeven\": <num> },\n      \"straddle\":          { \"call_strike\": <num>, \"put_strike\": <num>, \"expiry\": \"YYYY-MM-DD\", \"call_debit\": <num>, \"put_debit\": <num>, \"total_debit\": <num>, \"breakeven_high\": <num>, \"breakeven_low\": <num> },\n      \"debit_call_spread\": { \"long_strike\": <num>, \"short_strike\": <num>, \"expiry\": \"YYYY-MM-DD\", \"net_debit\": <num>, \"max_payoff\": <num>, \"breakeven\": <num> },\n      \"debit_put_spread\":  { \"long_strike\": <num>, \"short_strike\": <num>, \"expiry\": \"YYYY-MM-DD\", \"net_debit\": <num>, \"max_payoff\": <num>, \"breakeven\": <num> }\n    },\n    \"entry\": {\n      \"price_at_idea\": <num>,\n      \"conditions\": \"Enter on a defined pre-catalyst window — e.g., '2-5 days before print, before IV expansion peaks.'\"\n    },\n    \"exit\": {\n      \"primary_target\": \"Exit at 80% of max payoff OR close end-of-day after catalyst regardless of outcome\",\n      \"stop_or_roll\": \"Close if catalyst gets pushed > 2 weeks OR pre-event move exceeds 50% of debit paid\",\n      \"max_hold_dte\": <num — dte to expiry>\n    },\n    \"risk\": {\n      \"bear_case\": \"Specific scenario where structure decays — usually 'event happens, stock barely moves'.\",\n      \"what_breaks_thesis\": \"Catalyst delayed past expiry; pre-empted disclosure ahead of event; outsized IV crush\",\n      \"position_size_pct\": <num — must respect catalyst sizing band for the score>,\n      \"max_loss_per_contract\": <num — equal to net debit>,\n      \"max_loss_note\": \"Max loss = net premium paid (defined-risk debit structure).\"\n    },\n    \"sources\": [ ... pass through from dossier sources ],\n    \"confidence\": 1-5,\n    \"analyst\": \"research-desk\",\n    \"scout_model\": \"minimax/minimax-m2.7\",\n    \"analyst_model\": \"qwen/qwen3.6-35b-a3b\"\n  }\n}\n\nONLY ONE STRUCTURE TYPE. Pick one and only fill that field. Position size\nMUST respect the catalyst sizing band for the score. The headline MUST\nstate the catalyst type and date.\n\nNumeric traceability: every price, strike, debit must come from\ndossier.candidate_contracts. Every implied/realized number must come from\ndossier.implied_vs_realized.",
  "user_prompt": "CURRENT DATE: 2026-06-02. THE YEAR IS 2026.\nDATE RULES — read before writing ANY date:\n  - Every option expiry, earnings date, catalyst date, and DTE you state MUST use the year 2026 or later. Do NOT write 2025 dates — your training prior is stale.\n  - Every option expiry MUST be a real FUTURE date relative to 2026-06-02. Copy expiries verbatim from options_expiries()/the dossier — never infer a year from memory.\n  - Before writing a date, check it: if it is earlier than 2026-06-02, it is WRONG — re-read the live tool output.\n\nCATALYST DOSSIER:\n{\n  \"symbol\": \"CRWD\",\n  \"company\": \"CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.\",\n  \"investigation_summary\": \"CrowdStrike reports Q1 FY2027 earnings after market close on June 3, 2026 (DTE: 1 day to print; options expire June 5 — the closest expiry lands ~2 calendar days post-print). The stock is at all-time highs of $769, up +88% YTD from sub-$370 April lows. RSI(14) = 82.6 indicates extreme overbought but momentum remains intact above the 20/50/200-day MAs. Historical earnings data shows consistent EPS beats: last four quarters averaged ~2-12% positive surprise (10.62%, 12.05%, 1.98%, 1.56%). The ATM June 5 straddle (770P at $39.63 mid + 770C at $39.20 mid = $78.83 total) implies a market-priced move of ~12.7% ($97 in either direction). Historical realized average absolute post-earnings move across the last four quarters is approximately 6.68%, creating an implied-vs-realized gap of roughly +80%. This strongly suggests options are pricing excessive vol, favoring defined-risk structures over naked long premium. Direction signals are unanimously bullish: analyst upgrades (Morgan Stanley May 20; Wedbush June 2 AI cybersecurity tailwind article), positive software sector momentum (+40% from April lows as noted in June 2 sector coverage), and call-skew dominance across the chain (770C IV = 123.7%). Insider Form 4 filings cluster around RSU vesting (Code A) rather than open-market purchases — no verifiable Code P buys in the last 90 days. Given magnitude edge (+80% implied above realized) AND a unanimous bullish direction lean, this is a catalyst_setup: market overpaying vol suggests avoiding naked long premium; directional conviction favors defined-risk debit spreads on the call side.\",\n  \"verdict\": \"catalyst_setup\",\n  \"confidence_in_data\": 4,\n  \"catalyst\": {\n    \"type\": \"earnings\",\n    \"date\": \"2026-06-03\",\n    \"dte\": 1,\n    \"binary\": true,\n    \"outcome_scenarios\": [\n      \"beat (EPS +revenue beat, upward guidance) → +5% to +12%\",\n      \"miss (guide down or macro disappointment) → -3% to -8%\"\n    ]\n  },\n  \"implied_vs_realized\": {\n    \"implied_move_pct\": 12.73,\n    \"historical_avg_move_pct\": 6.68,\n    \"n_historical_events\": 4,\n    \"magnitude_edge_note\": \"Implied move ~$97 each direction (~12.7%) vs historical realized avg of ~6.7%; options are priced ~80% rich relative to realized moves — market is overpaying vol for this event on CRWD, making defined-risk spreads and directional debit structures preferred over naked long premium.\"\n  },\n  \"direction_signals\": {\n    \"insider_buys_90d\": \"unknown\",\n    \"analyst_revisions_30d\": \"up\",\n    \"technical_setup\": \"bullish\",\n    \"options_skew\": \"call_skew\",\n    \"news_sentiment\": \"positive\",\n    \"direction_lean\": \"bullish\"\n  },\n  \"structure_recommendation\": \"debit_call_spread\",\n  \"candidate_contracts\": [\n    {\n      \"structure\": \"debit_call_spread\",\n      \"expiry\": \"2026-06-05\",\n      \"dte\": 2,\n      \"long_strike\": 785,\n      \"short_strike\": 800,\n      \"long_mid\": 36.38,\n      \"short_mid\": 26.53,\n      \"net_debit\": 9.85,\n      \"max_payoff\": 15,\n      \"breakeven\": 794.85,\n      \"breakeven_distance_pct\": 3.37,\n      \"open_interest_long\": 132,\n      \"open_interest_short\": 188,\n      \"bid_ask_spread_pct\": 2.59\n    },\n    {\n      \"structure\": \"debit_call_spread\",\n      \"expiry\": \"2026-06-05\",\n      \"dte\": 2,\n      \"long_strike\": 790,\n      \"short_strike\": 805,\n      \"long_mid\": 33.88,\n      \"short_mid\": 24.4,\n      \"net_debit\": 9.48,\n      \"max_payoff\": 15,\n      \"breakeven\": 799.48,\n      \"breakeven_distance_pct\": 3.97,\n      \"open_interest_long\": 128,\n      \"open_interest_short\": 37,\n      \"bid_ask_spread_pct\": 3.13\n    },\n    {\n      \"structure\": \"long_call\",\n      \"expiry\": \"2026-06-05\",\n      \"dte\": 2,\n      \"long_strike\": 775,\n      \"short_strike\": null,\n      \"long_mid\": 36.38,\n      \"net_debit\": 36.38,\n      \"max_payoff\": null,\n      \"breakeven\": 811.38,\n      \"breakeven_distance_pct\": 5.52,\n      \"open_interest_long\": 132,\n      \"open_interest_short\": null,\n      \"bid_ask_spread_pct\": 2.59\n    }\n  ],\n  \"quality_floor\": {\n    \"market_cap\": 195725869056,\n    \"price\": 768.95,\n    \"going_concern\": false,\n    \"passes_floor\": true\n  },\n  \"anti_signals_present\": [\n    \"RSI 82.6 — extremely overbought near all-time high into a binary event; elevated drawdown risk on miss\",\n    \"Stock up +88% YTD entering earnings: limited buffer before stock enters distribution zone if macro disappointment hits sector\",\n    \"Implied move ~12.7% is very wide; even a beat may not be enough to offset vol crush post-report (IV collapse from 123% pre-event)\",\n    \"No verifiable Code P insider open-market purchases in last 90 days — all Form 4s are RSU vesting\"\n  ],\n  \"key_risks\": [\n    \"Vol crush: IV at ~123-126% will compress sharply after earnings; long premium structures lose value fast even if direction is correct. Defined-risk spreads mitigate this.\",\n    \"Earnings print gap risk: with only 1 DTE before print and 2 DTE to expiry, a large gap open could push the stock through short strikes making defined-risk spread max loss scenario more likely\",\n    \"RSI overbought (82.6): elevated probability of mean-reversion regardless of earnings quality — a 'good' beat may still result in intraday selloff as traders take profits\",\n    \"Beat magnitude uncertainty: CRWD has a shrinking surprise trend (10.62% → 1.56%); a modest EPS beat may not move the stock enough to reach breakeven on the spread\",\n    \"Sector rotation risk: software sector up +40% from April lows; any rotation out of growth tech into value/commodities post-print could amplify downside\"\n  ],\n  \"sources\": [\n    {\n      \"label\": \"Earnings calendar — earnings(CRWD) confirmed Q1 FY2027 print date 2026-06-03\",\n      \"url\": \"\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"label\": \"Investopedia — implied move article confirming market pricing CRWD earnings move\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.investopedia.com/here-is-how-much-crowdstrike-stock-is-expected-to-move-after-earnings-crwd-q1-fy2027-11986643\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"label\": \"247 Wall St — software +40% from April lows, CrowdStrike rally context\",\n      \"url\": \"https://247wallst.com/investing/2026/06/02/software-rallies-40-from-april-lows-as-crowdstrike-earnings-loom/\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"label\": \"Proactive Investors — Wedbush AI cybersecurity tailwinds bull case for CRWD/PANW\",\n      \"url\": \"https://www.proactiveinvestors.com/companies/news/1093282/ai-is-multiplying-the-cybersecurity-threat-and-palo-alto-networks-and-crowdstrike-are-the-main-beneficiaries-1093282.html\"\n    },\n    {\n      \"label\": \"Yahoo Finance — Cognizant expanded CrowdStrike alliance (Falcon platform)\",\n      \"url\": \"https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/cognizant-crowdstrike-expand-strategic-alliance-183000545.html\"\n    }\n  ]\n}\n\nScore this against the CATALYST rubric. If composite < 45, skip. Otherwise\ndraft a defined-risk catalyst idea. Output ONLY the JSON object described\nin the system prompt. Do NOT include <think>...</think> blocks — pure JSON only.",
  "completions": [
    {
      "ts": "2026-06-02T20:42:24.568Z",
      "raw_content": "<think>The user wants me to score the provided catalyst dossier for CRWD against the CATALYST rubric and output a JSON object.\nLet's go through the scoring rubric step by step.\n\n1. Catalyst clarity (max 25 pts):\n   - Event: Q1 FY2027 earnings on 2026-06-03.\n   - Current date: 2026-06-02.\n   - DTE: 1 day to print.\n   - Rule: \"Dated within 7-45 DTE + named in 8-K or earnings cal = full points.\"\n   - Here, DTE is 1 day. The rule says \"Vague 'expected this quarter' or >60 DTE = ≤10 pts.\" It doesn't explicitly say <7 DTE gets full points, but typically very near-term events get lower clarity or are penalized for lack of time. However, the rule says \"Dated within 7-45 DTE... = full points.\" Since it's 1 DTE, it's outside the 7-45 range. I'll score it lower, maybe 10-15 pts. Let's give it 15 pts because it's definitely dated and named in the earnings calendar, but the tight window reduces the \"event-rubric\" clarity for planning. Actually, the rubric says \"Dated within 7-45 DTE... = full points.\" I'll stick to 15 pts for 1 DTE. Or maybe 20 pts? I'll give 15.\n\n2. Magnitude edge (max 25 pts):\n   - Implied move: 12.73%\n   - Historical realized: 6.68%\n   - Implied > historical by ≥30%? Yes, 12.73/6.68 ≈ 1.90 (90% higher).\n   - Structure is debit? The dossier recommends debit_call_spread.\n   - Rule: \"Implied move > historical average by ≥30% AND structure is debit = market overpaying vol → short-vol angle.\"\n   - Wait, the rubric says if implied > realized by ≥30% and structure is debit, it's a short-vol angle. But the dossier recommends a debit call spread (directional). The rubric says \"market overpaying vol → short-vol angle.\" This implies a long-vol structure (straddle/long premium) would be bad. But the dossier correctly identifies this and recommends a defined-risk spread.\n   - Does this count as an edge? The edge is that the market is overpaying for naked long premium, so a defined-risk spread (which benefits from vol crush or limits it) is efficient. The rubric says \"Implied move > historical average by ≥30% AND structure is debit = market overpaying vol → short-vol angle.\" I'll score it 20 pts because the magnitude gap is huge (90%), but it's a directional play, not a pure short-vol. Actually, the rubric says \"No edge (implied ≈ realized) = ≤8 pts; reconsider whether to publish.\" Since there is a clear edge (implied is rich), I'll give 20 pts.\n\n3. Direction evidence (max 15 pts):\n   - Signals: Analyst revisions UP, Technical setup bullish, Options skew call_skew, News sentiment positive.\n   - ≥3 corroborating signals same direction = full points.\n   - I'll give 15 pts.\n\n4. Structure efficiency (max 15 pts):\n   - Candidate: debit_call_spread 785/800, expiry 2026-06-05, net debit 9.85, max payoff 15, breakeven 794.85.\n   - Breakeven distance: 3.37% above current price ($768.95).\n   - Implied move is 12.7% (~$97). Breakeven is well within the implied move range.\n   - \"Breakeven inside implied-move range = full points.\"\n   - \"Debit spread cheaper than naked long for same payoff at target = full points.\"\n   - I'll give 15 pts.\n\n5. Liquidity (max 10 pts):\n   - OI: 132 long, 188 short. Daily volume? Not explicitly given, but OI is low. Rule says \"OI ≥500 + daily volume ≥50 + bid-ask ≤5% of premium = full.\"\n   - OI is 132/188, which is <500.\n   - Bid-ask spread is 2.59% (≤5%).\n   - Since OI is low, I'll score it 5 pts.\n\n6. Quality floor (max 10 pts):\n   - Market cap: $195.7B (≥$500M)\n   - Price: $768.95 (≥$5)\n   - Going concern: false\n   - Passes floor: true\n   - I'll give 10 pts.\n\nTotal score: 15 + 20 + 15 + 15 + 5 + 10 = 80.\nWait, let's re-evaluate catalyst clarity. DTE is 1. The rubric says \"Dated within 7-45 DTE + named in 8-K or earnings cal = full points.\" Since it's 1 DTE, it's outside that range. I'll deduct points. Maybe 10 pts.\nMagnitude edge: 20 pts.\nDirection: 15 pts.\nStructure: 15 pts.\nLiquidity: 5 pts.\nQuality: 10 pts.\nTotal: 75 pts.\n\nCheck constraints:\n- DTE to catalyst is 1. Rule: \"Very near-term events (0-4 DTE) are allowed only as defined-risk, explicitly time-boxed catalyst setups; prefer paper-track unless the structure is unusually liquid and efficient.\"\n- Liquidity is low (OI 132/188). So it's not unusually liquid.\n- Therefore, it should probably be paper-tracked.\n- Score 75 falls in 70-79 band: max conf 4, max size 3.0%.\n- But DTE < 7 triggers paper-track preference. I will set paper_track: true.\n- Wait, the rubric says: \"If DTE to catalyst is < 0 or > 45 → skip. Very near-term events (0-4 DTE) are allowed only as defined-risk, explicitly time-boxed catalyst setups; prefer paper-track unless the structure is unusually liquid and efficient.\"\n- I will draft it as paper-track.\n- Headline must begin with \"Paper Track:\"\n- Thesis_short must explicitly say this is a paper-tracked event setup.\n- risk.position_size_pct MUST be 0.\n- confidence MUST be 1 or 2.\n- exit.max_hold_dte MUST be present.\n\nLet's adjust scores to be precise per rubric:\nCatalyst clarity: 10 (DTE 1, outside 7-45 window, but still dated/named)\nMagnitude edge: 20 (Implied 12.7% vs Realized 6.7% = +90% >30%, debit structure recommended)\nDirection evidence: 15 (Analyst UP, Tech bullish, Call skew, News positive = 4 signals)\nStructure efficiency: 15 (Breakeven 3.37% inside implied 12.7% range)\nLiquidity: 5 (OI 132/188 < 500, but bid-ask 2.59% < 5%)\nQuality floor: 10 (Passes)\nTotal: 75.\n\nSizing band 70-79: max conf 4, max size 3.0%. But paper track overrides position size to 0.\nConfidence: 2 (due to low liquidity and near-term DTE).\nPaper track: true.\n\nLet's draft carefully according to the JSON schema.\nCheck required fields for draft:\nslug, paper_track, symbol, company, sector, risk_class, pipeline, catalyst_type, catalyst_date, headline, thesis_short, thesis_long (array), structure (one type filled), entry, exit, risk, sources, confidence, analyst, scout_model, analyst_model.\n\nStructure: debit_call_spread\nlong_strike: 790 (better OI? 128 long, 37 short vs 132/188. I'll use 785/800 as it's the first one, or 790/805. I'll stick to 785/800.)\nWait, OI for 785/800: long 132, short 188. Bid-ask 2.59%.\nI'll use the 785/800 spread.\nExpiry: 2026-06-05\nNet debit: 9.85\nMax payoff: 15\nBreakeven: 794.85\n\nThesis long needs sections:\n\"Opening paragraph...\"\n\"## The edge\"\n\"## Structure\"\n\"## What confirms / kills the thesis\"\n\"## Risk\"\n\nCheck constraints:\n- \"If composite score < 45 → skip\" -> 75 >= 45, so draft.\n- \"If DTE to catalyst is < 0 or > 45 → skip. Very near-term events (0-4 DTE) are allowed only as defined-risk, explicitly time-boxed catalyst setups; prefer paper-track unless the structure is unusually liquid and efficient.\" -> DTE=1, so paper-track.\n- \"If no candidate contracts have OI ≥200 → skip (illiquid)\" -> Wait! This is a hard skip condition in the prompt: \"If no candidate contracts have OI ≥200 → skip (illiquid)\".\nLet's check the candidate contracts OI:\n785/800: long OI 132, short OI 188. Neither is ≥200.\n790/805: long OI 128, short OI 37.\n775 call: OI 132.\nNone have OI ≥200.\nThe prompt says: \"If no candidate contracts have OI ≥200 → skip (illiquid)\".\nThis is a hard skip condition. I must skip it.\n\nWait, let's re-read carefully: \"If no candidate contracts have OI ≥200 → skip (illiquid)\"\nYes, it's a hard gate. I will skip.\n\nLet's verify the score breakdown for the skip.\nCatalyst clarity: 10\nMagnitude edge: 20\nDirection evidence: 15\nStructure efficiency: 15\nLiquidity: 0 (fails floor)\nQuality floor: 10\nTotal: 70.\n\nI will output the skip JSON.\nCheck format:\n{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": 70,\n  \"score_breakdown\": { ... },\n  \"reason\": \"...\"\n}\n\nReason: \"Hard skip: no candidate contracts meet the OI ≥200 liquidity threshold (max OI is 188). Additionally, DTE is 1 day, which is extremely near-term and outside the 7-45 DTE clarity window.\"\n\nWait, should I score liquidity as 0 or 5? The rubric says OI ≥500 for full. I'll give 0 or 5. It doesn't matter much, score is >45.\nI'll stick with 70.\n\nLet's double check the exact wording for the skip condition: \"If no candidate contracts have OI ≥200 → skip (illiquid)\". This is explicit.\nI will produce the skip JSON.\n\nOne detail: \"If quality_floor.passes_floor is false → skip\" -> it passes.\n\"If DTE to catalyst is < 0 or > 45 → skip.\" -> DTE is 1, so not skipped by this, but triggers paper-track preference.\nThe OI ≥200 condition is a hard skip.\n\nI will generate the skip JSON.\nScore breakdown:\ncatalyst_clarity: 10 (DTE 1, outside 7-45 window)\nmagnitude_edge: 20 (Implied 12.7% vs Realized 6.7% = +90% edge, debit structure)\ndirection_evidence: 15 (4 corroborating bullish signals)\nstructure_efficiency: 15 (Breakeven 3.37% inside implied move)\nliquidity: 0 (OI < 200 across all candidates, hard liquidity gate)\nquality_floor: 10 (MCap $195B, Price $769, passes)\nTotal: 70.\n\nReason: \"Hard skip: no candidate contracts meet the OI ≥200 liquidity threshold (max OI is 188). Additionally, catalyst is only 1 DTE, falling outside the 7-45 DTE clarity window.\"\n\nAll constraints met. Output matches format.\nProceed. \nWait, let's verify the OI condition in the prompt again: \"If no candidate contracts have OI ≥200 → skip (illiquid)\". Yes.\nI will output exactly the JSON.\nOne minor thing: The prompt says \"If composite score < 45 → skip with reason\". It also lists other skip conditions. I will follow the OI skip.\nScore is 70.\nJSON structure matches exactly.\nReady. \nOutput matches request.\nProceeds. \nSelf-Correction/Verification during thought:\nCheck magnitude edge scoring: \"Implied move > historical average by ≥30% AND structure is debit = market overpaying vol → short-vol angle.\" The rubric says this implies a short-vol angle. Since we are doing a directional debit spread, does it still get full points for magnitude edge? The edge is still valid (market overpaying vol makes long premium bad, spreads good). I'll keep it at 20.\nCheck catalyst clarity: DTE 1. Rubric says \"Dated within 7-45 DTE... = full points.\" So it's not full. 10 is fair.\nCheck liquidity: OI < 200 -> hard skip. I'll score it 0.\nTotal 70.\nAll good.\nOutput matches. \nProceeds. \nGenerating JSON. \n{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": 70,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"catalyst_clarity\": 10,\n    \"magnitude_edge\": 20,\n    \"direction_evidence\": 15,\n    \"structure_efficiency\": 15,\n    \"liquidity\": 0,\n    \"quality_floor\": 10\n  },\n  \"reason\": \"Hard skip: no candidate contracts meet the OI ≥200 liquidity threshold (max OI is 188). Additionally, catalyst is only 1 DTE, falling outside the 7-45 DTE clarity window and triggering near-term constraints.\"\n}\nMatches perfectly. Outputting. \nNote: I will ensure the JSON is strictly formatted as requested. No extra text.\nAll constraints checked. DTE 1 is near-term, OI < 200 triggers skip. Score 70. Ready. \nProceeds. \n[Output Generation] -> *Self-Correction/Refinement during generation prep*: \nWait, the prompt says: \"If no candidate contracts have OI ≥200 → skip (illiquid)\". This is a hard skip condition listed under DECIDE. I must skip.\nThe score breakdown should sum to 70.\nI will output exactly the JSON.\nDone. \nProceeds. \n[Output Generation]\n```json\n{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": 70,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"catalyst_clarity\": 10,\n    \"magnitude_edge\": 20,\n    \"direction_evidence\": 15,\n    \"structure_efficiency\": 15,\n    \"liquidity\": 0,\n    \"quality_floor\": 10\n  },\n  \"reason\": \"Hard skip: no candidate contracts meet the OI ≥200 liquidity threshold (max OI is 188). Additionally, catalyst is only 1 DTE, falling outside the 7-45 DTE clarity window and triggering near-term constraints.\"\n}\n```\nMatches requirements. Output matches.\nDone. \n(Self-Correction/Note during thought: I should verify the exact wording of the OI rule. \"If no candidate contracts have OI ≥200 → skip (illiquid)\". Yes. It's explicit. I will follow it.)\nAll good.\nOutput matches.\nProceeds. \n[Final Check of the Prompt]\n\"DECIDE: ... If no candidate contracts have OI ≥200 → skip (illiquid)\"\nYes.\nScore breakdown matches rubric.\nJSON format matches.\nReady. \nOutput Generation. \n[Output] -> *Proceeds*\n</think>\n\n{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": 70,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"catalyst_clarity\": 10,\n    \"magnitude_edge\": 20,\n    \"direction_evidence\": 15,\n    \"structure_efficiency\": 15,\n    \"liquidity\": 0,\n    \"quality_floor\": 10\n  },\n  \"reason\": \"Hard skip: no candidate contracts meet the OI ≥200 liquidity threshold (max OI is 188). Additionally, catalyst is only 1 DTE, falling outside the 7-45 DTE clarity window and triggering near-term constraints.\"\n}",
      "cleaned_content": "{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": 70,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"catalyst_clarity\": 10,\n    \"magnitude_edge\": 20,\n    \"direction_evidence\": 15,\n    \"structure_efficiency\": 15,\n    \"liquidity\": 0,\n    \"quality_floor\": 10\n  },\n  \"reason\": \"Hard skip: no candidate contracts meet the OI ≥200 liquidity threshold (max OI is 188). Additionally, catalyst is only 1 DTE, falling outside the 7-45 DTE clarity window and triggering near-term constraints.\"\n}",
      "tool_calls": null,
      "finish_reason": "stop"
    }
  ],
  "tool_results": [],
  "final_message": "{\n  \"skip\": true,\n  \"score\": 70,\n  \"score_breakdown\": {\n    \"catalyst_clarity\": 10,\n    \"magnitude_edge\": 20,\n    \"direction_evidence\": 15,\n    \"structure_efficiency\": 15,\n    \"liquidity\": 0,\n    \"quality_floor\": 10\n  },\n  \"reason\": \"Hard skip: no candidate contracts meet the OI ≥200 liquidity threshold (max OI is 188). Additionally, catalyst is only 1 DTE, falling outside the 7-45 DTE clarity window and triggering near-term constraints.\"\n}",
  "tool_calls_total": 0,
  "walltime_ms": 101337,
  "stop_reason": "stop",
  "completed_at": "2026-06-02T20:42:24.569Z"
}