map-value-chain-profit-pools — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited map-value-chain-profit-pools (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
For a defined industry, decompose the value chain (Porter) and overlay absolute economic profit (Bain / Gadiesh-Gilbert) by stage. Output: value-chain-profit-pools.md with stage-by-stage profit map and identification of where structural profit concentration sits.
The discipline: profit and revenue are frequently inverted along the value chain. Mapping revenue without economic profit produces a misleading picture. Use EBIT or economic profit (not gross margin, not revenue share).
Iron rules:
working/five-forces.md if present (the governing force should correctly predict the profit-pool location).next_skills: YAML block at end of file for orchestrator hand-off.Confirm: industry slug, geographic scope, value-chain definition (which stages — use a sector-appropriate template from references/value-chain-templates.md, including the vertical-integration and platform Z-shape notes). Read references/profit-pool-methodology.md.
List 5-9 stages from raw inputs to end customer. For each: brief description, 2-3 representative players, estimated revenue contribution to total industry revenue as a range (low–base–high), V/C/A/I-tagged.
For each stage, estimate EBIT in absolute dollars, normalised over 3-5 years, expressed as a range. If stage capital intensity is disclosed and max/min ratio >2×, you MUST use economic profit (EP / NOPAT minus capital charge) — not EBIT — see `references/economic-profit.md`. If capital intensity is not disclosed, EBIT is acceptable but the validator will warn you to disclose it. Method: listed-comparable triangulation — see references/listed-comparable-triangulation.md for the 5-step protocol (pure-play ≥70% revenue concentration; GAAP EBIT including SBC; 3-year average; median across n≥3 comparables; disclose dispersion). Document method + comparables per stage.
Use the template in assets/profit-pool-template.md. Produces a horizontal-bar markdown table where bar width is proportional to absolute EBIT (base case). Optional executive river-chart variant for orchestrator hand-off.
Name the stage with highest absolute profit concentration. Then answer: why does profit concentrate here? The answer must name a Helmer 7 Power — scale economies / network economies / counter-positioning / switching costs / branding / cornered resource (incl. regulatory) / process power. Apply the per-power diagnostic questions in references/structural-protections.md — do not just assert the label. If no structural reason is identifiable, state: "not structurally protected — expect arbitrage by [named entrant] within [horizon]."
If working/five-forces.md exists, reconcile: does the named governing force correctly predict the profit-pool location? E.g., "buyer power high" should NOT coexist with "the customer-facing stage captures the most profit." If contradictory, flag for orchestrator Gate 2 reconciliation.
Run python scripts/validate_profit_pools.py --output-path <path> — checks: EBIT or EP used, absolute $ figures, bar visualisation, named Helmer power (or explicit unstable-finding), V/C/A/I tag coverage ≥5, anti-pattern protections rejected ("adds value", "critical", "differentiation", etc.), capital-intensity >2× requires EP, structured next_skills: YAML block present. Soft warnings on missing normalisation disclosure, false precision, flat pools, and missing capital-intensity disclosure. Write to working/value-chain-profit-pools.md (orchestrator) or standalone/map-value-chain-profit-pools-YYYY-MM-DD.md (standalone).
HTML on request (standalone only): markdown is the default and the only format the validator and the orchestrator consume. If the user explicitly asks for an HTML version of a standalone run, then after validation passes, also render the output via the html-output skill and review it per ../_shared/output-conventions.md § "HTML deliverables and quality review". Never produce HTML automatically.
next_skills YAML blockAt the very end of the output file, append a fenced YAML frontmatter block declaring next recommended skills for orchestrator Phase 2 automation. Minimum one entry. Example:
---
next_skills:
- assess-moat-sources # to assess durability of the structural protection identified
- map-five-forces # if Five Forces not yet present, for cross-reference reconciliation
---references/structural-protections.md for the full anti-pattern list and per-power diagnostics.references/economic-profit.md when capital intensity varies >2×.encoding='utf-8'.v1.2 (2026-05-18) added hard rule: capital-intensity >2× forces EP (not just EBIT); validator parses capital-employed columns and inline numbers. Added structured next_skills: YAML block for orchestrator Phase 2 hand-off. v1.1 hardened Helmer-power vocabulary, added economic-profit + listed-comparable + structural-protections references, strengthened validator with anti-pattern rejection and quality warnings.
<!-- Built with Agent Engineer Master — get your own production-ready skill: www.agentengineermaster.com/skill-engineer -->
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.