@baojie/comparative-state-analysis
BUse when comparing competing states or explaining why weaker parties prevail. Analyzes material resources, leadership quality, and intangible factors like popular support, governance quality, moral legitimacy, and application of benevolence (仁义).
Install
agr install @baojie/comparative-state-analysis --target claudeWrites 2 files into .claude/skills/, pinned to git-9258dc93.
- .claude/skills/comparative-state-analysis/SKILL.md
- .claude/skills/comparative-state-analysis/header.md
Document
name: comparative-state-analysis description: "Use when comparing competing states or explaining why weaker parties prevail. Analyzes material resources, leadership quality, and intangible factors like popular support, governance quality, moral legitimacy, and application of benevolence (仁义)."
Overview
A method for analyzing why outcomes differ from what raw power comparisons would predict, focusing on intangible factors.
Steps
1. Material Comparison
Compare quantifiable resources:
- Territory size
- Population/military numbers
- Geographic advantages
- Equipment quality
- Wealth
2. Leadership Comparison
Evaluate:
- Strategic ability
- Reputation and prestige
- Access to talented advisors
3. Identify Discrepancies
When outcomes contradict material predictions, investigate:
- Popular support levels
- Governance quality
- Moral legitimacy
- Unity vs. fragmentation
4. Root Cause Analysis
Key question: Why did the weaker party succeed?
- Examine treatment of subjects/people
- Assess whether governance style matches current phase
- Check for application of benevolence (仁义)
Expected Outcomes
- Understanding that power is not purely material
- Recognition that governance quality determines outcomes
- Identification of critical intangible factors
Validation
- Verify that both material (territory, population, wealth) and intangible (popular support, governance quality) factors were assessed
- Confirm that discrepancies between material predictions and actual outcomes were investigated for root causes
- Check that the analysis addresses whether governance style matches the current phase and whether benevolence (仁义) was applied
Trustgrade B
- passBody integrity
Whether the stored document is plausibly the kind of file the artifact declares, rather than something fetched by mistake.
- passType matchnot applicable to this artifact type
Whether the artifact is really the kind of thing its metadata claims it is.
- passFreshness
How long since the source repository was last pushed to.
- passPrompt injection
Scans the artifact's own text for instructions aimed at your agent rather than at you.
- warnLicenseno SPDX license detected
Whether the source repository declares an SPDX license permissive enough to redistribute.
How the grade is calculated
Each check contributes 0 points when it passes, 1 when it warns, and 2 when it fails. The total maps to a letter:
- Aevery check passed
- Bone warning
- Ctwo warnings
- Dprompt injection or body integrity failed, or three warnings
- Fone of those failed, and something else is wrong
These are automated hygiene checks, not a security audit, and not a dependency or vulnerability scan. A grade of A means nothing was flagged — not that the artifact is safe.
Versions
git-9258dc9346782026-07-31