Benchmark Filter#

Overview#

Use this skill when the user needs help choosing who to study, who to copy from, or whether an existing benchmark is actually useful.

This skill does not do a full case study. It filters first.

The core job is to answer:

• is this benchmark worth learning from
• what exactly is worth learning
• what should not be copied
• should we stop here or move into deeper case research

Quick Start#

1. Clarify whether the user needs a shortlist or a judgment on one existing benchmark.
2. Identify the user's real learning target: content, offer, channel, conversion, positioning, or business model.
3. Run the five filters before talking about taste or preference.
4. Separate copyable mechanism from non-copyable surface traits.
5. End with one concrete first imitation or research move.

Default Contract#

Assume the following unless the user says otherwise:

• write in Chinese
• creator, OPC, one-person-business, or content-led business context
• filter first, deep-research later
• look for operating signal, not just personal charisma
• do not let "this doesn't feel like me" override mechanism analysis too early

Workflow#

Phase 1: Clarify the Learning Target#

Ask what the user is really trying to learn:

• content system
• offer design
• channel growth
• conversion path
• brand or positioning
• overall business model

If the learning target is fuzzy, the benchmark choice will be fuzzy too.

Phase 2: Run the Five Filters#

Judge each benchmark through these filters:

1. Economic signal
   • Is there evidence of a real business, not just attention?
2. Model legibility
   • Can we roughly understand how this person gets attention, trust, money, and delivery done?
3. Copyable mechanism
   • What part is learnable process, and what part is likely talent, timing, capital, or reputation advantage?
4. Stage relevance
   • Is the benchmark too far ahead or operating in a structurally different game?
5. Ego-noise control
   • Is the user rejecting the benchmark because it truly cannot be learned from, or because it feels unglamorous, repetitive, or not self-expressive enough?

Read references/filter-framework.md when the judgment is mixed.

Phase 3: Name the Layer to Study#

Do not say only "study this person."

Say which layer is worth studying:

• content angle
• packaging
• offer ladder
• conversion path
• audience selection
• operating rhythm

And say which layer should not be copied blindly.

Phase 4: Check Copy Granularity#

If the user already has a benchmark and says they are "learning from" it, verify the level of imitation.

Read references/copy-granularity.md when doing a copy check.

Common failure:

• copying the vibe but not the mechanism
• copying the topic but not the offer structure
• copying the output but not the cadence or conversion path

Phase 5: Recommend the Next Move#

Choose the smallest next step:

• shortlist 1-3 worthy benchmarks
• copy one specific layer first
• or escalate one benchmark into $opc-case-research

Output Format#

Default to assets/benchmark-card-template.md.

At minimum, include:

• one-line judgment
• five-filter result
• worth-learning layers
• do-not-copy layers
• first move
• whether deeper research is recommended

Hard Rules#

Do not:

• use follower count as the main proof of worth
• confuse charisma with business model
• say "learn from them" without naming what to learn
• let personal taste override mechanism analysis too early
• turn a quick filter into a fake full case study

Always:

• clarify the learning target
• separate signal from surface
• mark copyable versus non-copyable parts
• give one concrete next move
• recommend $opc-case-research only when deeper case study would materially help

Resource Map#

• references/filter-framework.md
  • Read for the five filters, signal examples, and mixed-case judgment rules.
• references/copy-granularity.md
  • Read for how to test whether the user is copying at a useful level of detail.
• assets/benchmark-card-template.md
  • Use for the standard output structure.