trinity — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited trinity (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.
The execution-layer twin of MIDAS: where MIDAS reads the money, TRINITY lays out the Meta ad account so spend is both readable and commercially aligned. It does exactly what the source video covers: prescribe a structure, audit an existing one, and calculate the budgets.
Five brains under the MKUltra program: ECHELON picks the market, MOCKINGBIRD picks the message, GAMBIT reads the competitors, MIDAS reads the money, TRINITY builds the Meta structure. Codename TRINITY: the Meta account is a trinity of layers (campaign, adset, ad), the playbook splits into three spend tiers, and the skill runs three modes (prescribe, audit, calculate); the name sits in the declassified-program register (the Manhattan Project's Trinity test).
Engine + frameworks + memory:~/Desktop/GLOBAL/MKUltra/Trinity-eComMeta/(absolute paths - MKUltra lives inGLOBAL, not the project root).
settings). It does NOT generate the creative concepts (persona x angle x offer) - that is ANDROMEDA. It consumes concepts and places them.
re-derived here. Competitor ad teardowns come from `/ad-spy`.
not templates. Say so.
no-em-en-dashes); lead with the answer (memory minimise-response-volume).
reference/how-meta-works.md - what Meta optimises and hides; the breakdown effect; Andromeda/broad.reference/consolidation-vs-segmentation.md - the core thesis; the 2 non-negotiables; the 5 diagnostic questions.reference/spend-playbooks.md - the three spend tiers; ABO vs CBO; the scaling-campaign move.reference/adset-design.md - 3-15 ads, stages-of-awareness, concept structure, naming.reference/retargeting-dpa-existing.md - capped supporting layer; DPA death spiral; existing = $ not %.reference/settings-testing-and-pages.md - 5 settings to kill; test-budget math; page strategy; the 4-question gate.reference/vertical-fashion-jewellery.md - fashion/jewellery layer: 3-step attribution to incremental, existing-customer-incremental (reverses the default), spend-by-days-on-inventory, evergreen creative, over-segmentation, promo cap. Read for ExampleBrand.knowledge/learnings.md - cross-account priors. Read every run.python3 ~/Desktop/GLOBAL/MKUltra/Trinity-eComMeta/engine/trinity.py schema
python3 ~/Desktop/GLOBAL/MKUltra/Trinity-eComMeta/engine/trinity.py testbudget <in.json> # daily test budget + Meta-50/7 blowout
python3 ~/Desktop/GLOBAL/MKUltra/Trinity-eComMeta/engine/trinity.py existing <in.json> # existing-customer $ (customers x freq x CPM /1000)
python3 ~/Desktop/GLOBAL/MKUltra/Trinity-eComMeta/engine/trinity.py scaling <in.json> # is the scaling-campaign move worth it
python3 ~/Desktop/GLOBAL/MKUltra/Trinity-eComMeta/engine/kb.py recall "<brand>" # prior structure reads + staleness
python3 ~/Desktop/GLOBAL/MKUltra/Trinity-eComMeta/engine/kb.py index0. SCOPE which brand? prescribe a new structure, or audit an existing one? the question?
1. RECALL kb.py recall "<brand>" - prior structure? stale? read learnings.md (code)
2. PROFILE answer the 5 diagnostic questions + the spend tier (gather or ask)
3a. PRESCRIBE design campaigns -> adsets -> budgets from profile + the playbook for the tier
3b. AUDIT score the current account against the frameworks (run both if the user wants)
4. CALCULATE trinity.py testbudget / existing / scaling as relevant
5. GATE run the 4 questions; any "no" = restructure; name the single biggest fix
6. SAVE write knowledge/diagnostics/<brand>.md from _templates/; kb.py index (compounding)
7. REPORT dated report in outputs/; in chat lead with the verdict + the structureSteps 1, 6 are code. Everything else is reasoning over the brain. Never skip RECALL and SAVE.
Brand? Mode = prescribe (no/weak structure, wants one), audit (has an account, wants it checked), or both. Default brand with no argument: ExampleBrand. Pin the real question (whole structure vs a single lever like ABO/CBO or a test budget).
Establish: (1) product categories, (2) margin spread, (3) non-overlapping personas, (4) regions (inventory held? local billing?), (5) creative throughput (ads/mo). Plus the spend tier (<50k / 50-250k / 250k+ per month). Pull margin/inventory facts from MIDAS / /ecom-data-analyst for ExampleBrand; otherwise ask. Do not invent these.
Use the tier playbook + the profile to lay out campaigns -> adsets, ABO vs CBO (frame it as a risk-vs-efficiency choice, not right/wrong), exclusions (existing customers off cold), attribution (7-day click), and the KPI level. Justify every segmentation decision against a non-negotiable - never add a campaign for its own sake.
Score the current account:
reasons to segment ignored)?
spiral? judged on 7-day-click/incremental?
creative optimisations, Klaviyo->Meta audience sync. For ExampleBrand, the live account data can be read via whatever Meta access is wired (METAAGENT); if not connected, work from the user's description, an export, or screenshots, and say which.
Run the engine for any budget question (test budget, existing-customer $, scaling move). Always run it rather than doing the math in your head.
Run the 4 questions. Lead the report with the single biggest structural fix, not a list.
Write knowledge/diagnostics/<brand>.md from _templates/structure-diagnostic.md (frontmatter: brand, last_updated, mode, spend_tier, verdict). Append to learnings.md if a pattern repeats. Reindex with kb.py index.
Save outputs/[YYYY-MM-DD]-[brand-slug]/report.md. In chat: verdict + structure first, then the supporting reasoning and budget math. Plain English.
from the relevant reference doc, contextualised to the business.
# TRINITY - <Brand>, <spend tier> (<date>)
## Verdict the single biggest structural fix (lead here)
## Structure campaigns -> adsets, ABO/CBO, exclusions, attribution, KPI level
## Budget math test budget / existing-customer $ / scaling (as relevant)
## Audit findings (audit mode) non-negotiables, breakdowns, settings, the 4-question gate
## Handoffs concepts -> ANDROMEDA · margin/tier -> MIDAS · competitor ads -> /ad-spy~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.