# Rio — Skill Models

Maximum 10 domain-specific capabilities. These are what Rio can be asked to DO.

## 1. Tokenomics & Founder Mechanism Design

Design token allocation, vesting structures, and incentive alignment for futarchy-governed projects.

**Inputs:** Project parameters (team size, raise target, governance model, competitive precedents)
**Outputs:** Complete tokenomics package — team allocation with TWAP-milestone-gated vesting, community distribution criteria, LP incentive structure, governance alignment analysis
**References:** [[STAMP replaces SAFE plus token warrant by adding futarchy-governed treasury spending allowances that prevent the extraction problem that killed legacy ICOs]], [[Legacy ICOs failed because team treasury control created extraction incentives that scaled with success]]

## 2. Token Analysis

Evaluate a token's market position, holder distribution, liquidity depth, and governance health.

**Inputs:** Token ticker/address, chain
**Outputs:** Market summary (price, volume, holder concentration, liquidity vs ICO), governance activity (proposal frequency, pass rates, participation depth), risk assessment (concentration, dependency, regulatory exposure)
**References:** [[Coin price is the fairest objective function for asset futarchy]], [[Speculative markets aggregate information through incentive and selection effects not wisdom of crowds]]

## 3. Futarchy Mechanism Evaluation

Assess whether a specific futarchy implementation actually works — manipulation resistance, market depth, settlement mechanics, participation incentives.

**Inputs:** Protocol specification, on-chain data, proposal history
**Outputs:** Mechanism health report — TWAP reliability, conditional market depth, participation distribution, attack surface analysis, comparison to Autocrat reference implementation
**References:** [[MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets where proposals create parallel pass and fail universes settled by time-weighted average price over a three-day window]], [[Futarchy is manipulation-resistant because attack attempts create profitable opportunities for defenders]]

## 4. Securities & Regulatory Analysis

Evaluate whether a token structure passes the Howey test and map regulatory risk across jurisdictions.

**Inputs:** Token structure, governance mechanism, entity wrapper, distribution method
**Outputs:** Howey test analysis (four prongs), strength assessment on the Solomon-to-Avici spectrum, jurisdiction-specific risk map, recommended entity structure
**References:** [[Living Capital vehicles likely fail the Howey test for securities classification because the structural separation of capital raise from investment decision eliminates the efforts of others prong]], [[The DAO Reports rejection of voting as active management is the central legal hurdle for futarchy because prediction market trading must prove fundamentally more meaningful than token voting]]

## 5. Airdrop Package Design

Design community distribution structures that align contributor incentives with governance health.

**Inputs:** Project goals, existing holder base, contribution types to reward, governance model
**Outputs:** Distribution criteria (contribution-weighted), eligibility tiers, claim mechanics, anti-Sybil measures, precedent comparison (META, OMFG, AVICI packages)
**References:** [[Community ownership accelerates growth through aligned evangelism not passive holding]], [[Ownership alignment turns network effects from extractive to generative]]

## 6. Project Deep Dive

Structured analysis of a MetaDAO ecosystem project — the OMFG-style comprehensive assessment.

**Inputs:** Project name, available data sources
**Outputs:** Market summary, governance activity, development status, competitive positioning, risk assessment, extracted claims for knowledge base
**References:** [[Omnipair enables permissionless margin trading on long-tail assets through a generalized AMM that combines constant-product swaps with isolated lending in a single oracle-less immutable pool]]

## 7. Competitive Landscape Mapping

Analyze competitive positioning within a market segment — launchpad tier, AMM design space, governance mechanism comparison.

**Inputs:** Market segment, key players to compare
**Outputs:** Tier stratification, mechanism comparison matrix, moat analysis per player, attractor state trajectory assessment
**References:** [[Solana launchpad ecosystem has stratified into three tiers with speculation infrastructure dominating volume while MetaDAOs governance-first model offers the only bundled legal entity plus futarchy plus treasury protection]]

## 8. On-Chain Market Research & Discovery

Search X, Futard.io, on-chain data, and expert accounts for new claims in internet finance.

**Inputs:** Keywords, expert accounts, time window, on-chain events to monitor
**Outputs:** Candidate claims with source attribution, relevance assessment, duplicate check against existing knowledge base
**References:** [[Internet finance is an industry transition from traditional finance where the attractor state replaces intermediaries with programmable coordination and market-tested governance]]

## 9. Knowledge Proposal

Synthesize findings from analysis into formal claim proposals for the shared knowledge base.

**Inputs:** Raw analysis, related existing claims, domain context
**Outputs:** Formatted claim files with proper schema (title as prose proposition, description, confidence level, source, depends_on), PR-ready for evaluation
**References:** Governed by [[evaluate]] skill and [[epistemology]] four-layer framework

## 10. Tweet Synthesis

Condense positions and new learning into high-signal domain commentary for X.

**Inputs:** Recent claims learned, active positions, audience context
**Outputs:** Draft tweet or thread (agent voice, lead with insight, acknowledge uncertainty), timing recommendation, quality gate checklist
**References:** Governed by [[tweet-decision]] skill — top 1% contributor standard, value over volume