Requirements
- Target platform
- OpenClaw
- Install method
- Manual import
- Extraction
- Extract archive
- Prerequisites
- OpenClaw
- Primary doc
- SKILL.md
Advanced game theory analysis for crypto protocols, DeFi mechanisms, governance systems, and strategic decision-making. Use when analyzing tokenomics, evaluating protocol incentives, predicting adversarial behavior, designing mechanisms, or understanding strategic interactions in web3.
Advanced game theory analysis for crypto protocols, DeFi mechanisms, governance systems, and strategic decision-making. Use when analyzing tokenomics, evaluating protocol incentives, predicting adversarial behavior, designing mechanisms, or understanding strategic interactions in web3.
Hand the extracted package to your coding agent with a concrete install brief instead of figuring it out manually.
I downloaded a skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder and install it by following the included instructions. Tell me what you changed and call out any manual steps you could not complete.
I downloaded an updated skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder, compare it with my current installation, and upgrade it while preserving any custom configuration unless the package docs explicitly say otherwise. Summarize what changed and any follow-up checks I should run.
Strategic analysis framework for understanding and designing incentive systems in web3. "Every protocol is a game. Every token is an incentive. Every user is a player. Understand the rules, or become the played."
Analyzing tokenomics for exploits or misaligned incentives Evaluating governance proposals and voting mechanisms Understanding MEV and adversarial transaction ordering Designing auction mechanisms (NFT drops, token sales, liquidations) Predicting how rational actors will behave in a system Identifying attack vectors in DeFi protocols Modeling liquidity provision strategies Assessing protocol sustainability
For any protocol or mechanism, ask: Who are the players? (Users, LPs, validators, searchers, governance token holders) What are their strategies? (Actions available to each player) What are the payoffs? (How does each outcome affect each player?) What information do they have? (Complete, incomplete, asymmetric?) What's the equilibrium? (Where do rational actors end up?)
DocumentUse CaseNash EquilibriumFinding stable outcomes in strategic interactionsMechanism DesignDesigning systems with desired equilibriaAuction TheoryToken sales, NFT drops, liquidationsMEV Game TheoryAdversarial transaction orderingTokenomics AnalysisEvaluating token incentive structuresGovernance AttacksVoting manipulation and captureLiquidity GamesLP strategies and impermanent lossInformation EconomicsAsymmetric information and signaling
A state where no player can improve their payoff by unilaterally changing strategy. The "stable" outcome of a game. Crypto application: In a staking system, Nash equilibrium determines the stake distribution across validators.
A strategy that's optimal regardless of what others do. Crypto application: In a second-price auction, bidding your true value is dominant.
An outcome where no one can be made better off without making someone worse off. Crypto application: AMM fee structures try to be Pareto efficient for traders and LPs.
"Reverse game theory" - designing rules to achieve desired outcomes. Crypto application: Designing token vesting schedules to align long-term incentives.
A solution people converge on without communication. Crypto application: Why certain price levels act as psychological support/resistance.
When truthful behavior is optimal for participants. Crypto application: Oracle designs where honest reporting is the dominant strategy.
Everyone knows X, everyone knows everyone knows X, infinitely recursive. Crypto application: Public blockchain state creates common knowledge of balances/positions.
Structure: Shared resource, individual incentive to overuse, collective harm. Crypto examples: Gas price bidding during congestion Governance token voting apathy MEV extraction degrading UX Solution approaches: Harberger taxes Quadratic mechanisms Commitment schemes
Structure: Individual rationality leads to collective irrationality. Crypto examples: Liquidity mining mercenaries (farm and dump) Race-to-bottom validator fees Bridge security (each chain wants others to secure) Solution approaches: Repeated games (reputation) Commitment mechanisms (staking/slashing) Mechanism redesign
Structure: Multiple equilibria, players want to coordinate but may fail. Crypto examples: Which L2 to use? Token standard adoption Hard fork coordination Solution approaches: Focal points (Schelling points) Sequential moves (first mover advantage) Communication mechanisms
Structure: One party acts on behalf of another with misaligned incentives. Crypto examples: Protocol team vs token holders Delegates in governance Fund managers Solution approaches: Incentive alignment (token vesting) Monitoring (transparency) Bonding (skin in game)
Structure: Information asymmetry leads to market breakdown. Crypto examples: Token launches (team knows more than buyers) Insurance protocols (risky users more likely to buy) Lending (borrowers know their risk better) Solution approaches: Signaling (lock-ups, audits) Screening (credit scores, history) Pooling equilibria
Structure: Hidden action after agreement leads to risk-taking. Crypto examples: Protocols with insurance may take more risk Bailout expectations encourage leverage Anonymous teams may rug Solution approaches: Monitoring and transparency Incentive alignment Reputation systems
Players: Users, searchers, builders, validators Key insight: Transaction ordering is a game; users are often the losers See: MEV Strategies
Players: LPs, traders, arbitrageurs Key insight: Impermanent loss is the cost of being adversely selected against See: Liquidity Games
Players: Token holders, delegates, protocol team Key insight: Rational apathy + concentrated interests = capture See: Governance Attacks
Players: Stakers, validators, delegators Key insight: Security budget must exceed attack profit See: Tokenomics Analysis
Players: Data providers, consumers, attackers Key insight: Profit from manipulation must be less than cost See: Mechanism Design
Insiders can sell before others (vesting asymmetry) Inflation benefits few, dilutes many No sink mechanisms (perpetual selling pressure) Rewards without risk (free money = someone else paying)
Low quorum thresholds (minority capture) No time delay (flash loan attacks) Token voting only (plutocracy) Delegates with no skin in game
First-come-first-served (bot advantage) Sealed bids without commitment (frontrunning) Rebates/refunds (MEV extraction) Complex formulas (hidden exploits)
Single-shot games often have bad equilibria. Repetition enables cooperation through: Trigger strategies (cooperate until defection) Reputation building (costly to destroy) Future value (patient players cooperate more) Crypto application: Why anonymous actors behave worse than doxxed teams.
Strategies that survive competitive selection. Relevant for: Which protocols survive long-term Memetic competition between narratives Bot strategy evolution
Games with incomplete information. Players have beliefs about others' types. Crypto application: Trading with unknown counterparties, evaluating anonymous teams.
When players can form binding coalitions. Crypto application: MEV extraction coalitions, validator cartels, governance blocs.
Computational aspects of game theory. Crypto application: On-chain game computation limits, gas-efficient mechanism design.
Identify all players (including those not obvious) Map complete strategy spaces Define payoff functions precisely Specify information structure
Check for dominant strategies Compute Nash equilibria Identify Pareto improvements Consider trembling-hand perfection
What if players collude? What if new players enter? What if information leaks? What if parameters change?
Mechanism changes to improve equilibrium Monitoring to detect deviations Parameter bounds to maintain stability
"Theory of Games and Economic Behavior" - von Neumann & Morgenstern "A Beautiful Mind" (Nash's life, accessible intro) "The Strategy of Conflict" - Schelling "Mechanism Design Theory" - Myerson (Nobel lecture)
"Flash Boys 2.0" - MEV paper "SoK: DeFi Attacks" - Systemization of DeFi exploits "Clockwork Finance" - MEV and mechanism design Paradigm research blog
Nashpy (Python game theory library) Gambit (game theory software) Agent-based modeling frameworks
Agent frameworks, memory systems, reasoning layers, and model-native orchestration.
Largest current source with strong distribution and engagement signals.