guidance_change_impact_skill

Guidance Change Impact Skill

Data Dependencies and Execution Prerequisites

It is recommended to use Wind wind-mcp-skill to obtain the underlying data. Before execution, first check whether wind-mcp-skillis already available locally; if not, prompt the user to install:

# GitHub
npx skills add Wind-Information-Co-Ltd/wind-skills --skill wind-mcp-skill -g -y

# Gitee 镜像（国内）
npx skills add https://gitee.com/wind_info/wind-skills.git --skill wind-mcp-skill -g -y

Skill Positioning

This skill is used to interpret changes in company management's guidance for future operations, focusing on answering "what exactly does this upward or downward revision mean, how credible is it, and will the impact remain at the sentiment level or penetrate to the valuation and logic level." The output focus is not merely translating the guidance text, but clearly explaining the magnitude of the change, changes in measurement basis, the underlying drivers, and the subsequent impact chain.

Execution Process

Step 1: Confirm the object of change and the original measurement basis

First confirm which type of guidance is being changed this time, and what the baseline measurement basis is. Prioritize clarifying:

• Whether it is revenue, profit, profit margin, cash flow, capital expenditure, or order guidance
• Whether it is full-year guidance, quarterly guidance, or a stage-specific operating outlook
• Whether this is a formal adjustment or a marginal revision of wording by management during communication
• Whether the old and new measurement bases are directly comparable

If the measurement basis has changed, comparability must be explained first before discussing direction.

Step 2: Measure the magnitude of change and the gap versus market expectations

View the guidance change in the correct coordinate system, focusing on:

• Absolute and relative magnitude of the change
• Whether it is above, in line with, or below the market's original expectations
• Whether it is aggressive, normal, or conservative compared with the company's historical communication style
• Whether the current valuation has already partially priced in such an adjustment

The goal of this step is to judge "whether the change itself is large" and "whether the market has already reacted in advance."

Step 3: Break down the driving factors behind the change

Further determine where this guidance change comes from. Common sources include:

• Changes in demand, prices, or order pace
• Disturbances from costs, expenses, supply chains, or exchange rates
• Fulfillment or delay of new products, new projects, or expansion into new regions
• Changes in management's risk appetite or communication strategy
• One-off items affecting the short-term measurement basis

Prioritize identifying the main drivers; do not distribute weight evenly across all possible factors.

Step 4: Assess the credibility and sustainability of the guidance

The same upward or downward revision may have completely different quality. Key judgments include:

• Whether management has been stable and credible in giving guidance in the past
• Whether this change is supported by sufficient operating evidence
• Whether it is based on confirmed orders or on forward-looking assumptions
• Which key variables remain fragile and may lead to another revision

Step 5: Map to valuation, expectations, and investment logic

Translate the guidance change from a "measurement basis change" into "investment implications," answering at least:

• Which part of the market's judgment on growth, profit, or quality this will change
• Whether the valuation anchor needs to be adjusted accordingly
• Which side of the original bullish or bearish logic is strengthened
• Whether this change looks more like confirmation of an inflection point, noise disturbance, or a one-off revision

Step 6: Integrate into a finished interpretation of the change

The final output should help the user quickly understand whether this guidance adjustment has substantive significance, without showing the intermediate collection process or internal drafts.

Output Structure

---

{Stock Name} Guidance Change Interpretation ({YYYY-MM-DD})

I. 30-Second Conclusion

• Direction of Change: {Raised / Lowered / Maintained}
• Meaning of Change: {One sentence}
• Credibility Assessment: {High / Medium / Low}
• Impact on Thesis: {Strengthened / Neutral / Weakened}

II. Summary of Guidance Changes

Item	Original Guidance	New Guidance	Magnitude of Change	Preliminary Interpretation
{Item 1}	{Content}	{Content}	{Content}	{Explanation}
{Item 2}	{Content}	{Content}	{Content}	{Explanation}

III. Core Reasons Behind the Change

• Reason 1: {Content}
• Reason 2: {Content}
• Reason 3: {Content}

IV. Why the Market Cares

• {Impact Chain 1}
• {Impact Chain 2}
• {Impact Chain 3}

V. Credibility and Sustainability Assessment

• Supporting Evidence: {Content}
• Uncertainty: {Content}
• Risk of Further Revision: {Content}

VI. Follow-up Tracking Checklist

• {Tracking Item 1}
• {Tracking Item 2}
• {Tracking Item 3}

---

Quality Requirements

1. First explain the basis and magnitude of the change, then draw conclusions; avoid skipping steps.
2. Must distinguish between "wording changes" and "operating trend changes".
3. Credibility assessment cannot be omitted, otherwise the interpretation will lose its judgment value.
4. If the old and new bases are not comparable, this should be clearly stated, and no forced comparison should be made.
5. Conclusions must land on investment implications, rather than remaining at the level of management rhetoric.