chenjunfengandClaude Opus 5 ff663aa3b9 fix(holder-analysis): a missing buy count was read as proof of zero-cost chips ...

`buy_tx_count_cur == 0` was taken to mean "these chips were transferred or
airdropped in, the holder paid nothing". Measured data refutes that inference.

On musebook (robinhood) 38 wallets read `buy_tx_count_cur: 0` and
`avg_cost: null`, but 34 of them carry a finite `unrealized_pnl` ratio — +2.7%,
+76.5%, +546% — and a chip with no cost cannot produce a finite PnL ratio; a
+2.7% ratio is only possible against a cost basis near the current price. 32 of
the 38 also carry a `fomo` frontend tag and 2 a `gmgn` tag, which is the trace of
active trading, the opposite of receiving an airdrop. What is actually missing is
buy-transaction indexing on that chain, while the PnL fields come from a separate
computation and arrive populated.

The error was systematic per chain rather than per token. Never-bought share of
supply across one batch: robinhood 27.0% and 41.2%, arc 26.3%, sol 4.8%. The 20%
airdrop warn gate therefore fired on essentially every robinhood and arc token and
essentially never on a sol token — a difference in index coverage, not in chip
structure. Reporting an unpopulated field as a risk conclusion is what this skill
explicitly forbids elsewhere.

So zero cost now requires positive evidence of no cost:

    def has_cost_basis(h):
        return (h.get('avg_cost') or 0) > 0 or h.get('unrealized_pnl') is not None

Six consumers of the old predicate move to it, all the same root cause:

  - the `airdrop` cohort and its >20% warn gate, plus the chip-quality buckets and
    the exit-signal line that read it
  - `diamond`, whose own stated rationale is "a wallet that never paid has no cost
    to hold through" — a proven cost basis satisfies that, and requiring an indexed
    buy count discarded most real diamond hands (JOLLY: 34 → 75 wallets,
    21.1% → 55.7% of float)
  - `idle_airdrop`, whose "zero cost" caption was a false statement for those rows
  - Top5 sell-risk classification, which labelled a wallet sitting at +6.6x as
    "zero-cost airdrop — can dump anytime" and simultaneously dropped it from the
    trapped and in-profit counts

Wallets with no indexed buy count but a real cost basis are not dropped from the
report — they get their own neutral line, `买入未记录 / Buy count unindexed`, with
their float share. That upstream did not index their buys is true and stays
visible; it just no longer drives a zero-cost gate.

Known limit, stated in SKILL.md: a genuine airdrop wallet whose `unrealized_pnl`
is a huge ratio computed against a dust-level cost is missed here. No second ratio
threshold is added — there is no measured sample to calibrate one on.

Also in the Advice section: a ⚠️ Caution rating needs two or more warns by
definition, but only `warns[0]` was printed, so a reader could never see why the
rating was what it was. Every triggered reason is now listed.

Ratings, up/main → this branch, measured end to end:

  musebook robinhood  🔴 Not Recommended → 🟡 Light Position
  JOLLY    robinhood  🟡 Light Position  → ✅ Normal
  ARGUS    arc        ⚠️ Caution         → 🟡 Light Position
  SI       sol        🟡 Light Position  → 🟡 Light Position   (control)

SI is the control: sol indexes buy counts normally, so it barely moves and its
🔴 risk-wallet reading of 45.36% is untouched. This is not a blanket loosening —
it only takes effect where the index is thin.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

2026-09-23 16:06:23 +08:00

..

analyze.py

fix(holder-analysis): a missing buy count was read as proof of zero-cost chips

2026-09-23 16:06:23 +08:00

SKILL.md

fix(holder-analysis): a missing buy count was read as proof of zero-cost chips

2026-09-23 16:06:23 +08:00