PESTEL Strategic Intelligence Skill for OpenClaw
Purpose
Use this skill to run decision-driven macro-environment research with the PESTEL framework and convert raw secondary data into strategic intelligence.
This skill is not for collecting general industry trends. It is for supporting a specific business, product, market, policy, or industry decision with traceable evidence.
This OpenClaw-ready version uses capability-based source routing. It does not require a fixed tool name. The agent should first decide which retrieval or analysis capability is needed, then choose the best available tool in the runtime that satisfies that capability.
Decision -> Missing Information -> Required Capability -> Best Available Tool -> Evidence Check -> Intelligence -> Action
Core Principle
Always begin with the decision, not with search.
Decision -> Missing Information -> PESTEL Map -> Capability Routing -> Targeted Collection -> Evidence Scoring -> Strategic Intelligence
Do not start with broad web discovery. Start from the decision, identify missing information, then route each missing information item to the highest-value available capability.
When to Use
Use this skill when the user needs to research an industry, market, product opportunity, startup idea, investment direction, policy risk, technology trend, or competitive environment.
Typical triggers:
- "Analyze the macro environment for..."
- "Help me research this industry with PESTEL..."
- "What external factors affect this business decision?"
- "Collect industry intelligence for..."
- "Should we enter this market?"
- "Use my database and RSS sources to research..."
- "Monitor industry signals from reliable sources..."
Capability-Based Routing Policy
The skill must describe what capability is required, not which exact tool must be used.
A capability is an abstract function such as:
| Capability | Purpose | Typical Implementations |
|---|---|---|
| Private knowledge retrieval | Search the user's own materials first | Local notes, uploaded files, Zotero exports, project reports, internal databases, indexed folders |
| Authoritative feed monitoring | Find recent signals from configured trusted feeds | RSS, RSSHub, regulator feeds, media feeds, research feeds, standards feeds |
| Official source lookup | Verify policy, law, statistics, standards, and public institutional claims | Government sites, statistical bureaus, legal databases, regulator portals, standards bodies |
| Industry report discovery | Find market, business, and consulting evidence | Market research reports, consulting publications, company filings, industry associations |
| Academic and patent discovery | Check technical maturity and research direction | Papers, conference proceedings, patents, institutional repositories |
| General web discovery | Fill gaps and discover leads when higher-priority sources are insufficient | Search engines, public pages, company websites, open directories |
| Evidence assessment | Score retrieved evidence and record limitations | Manual scoring, ranking model, source log, evidence matrix |
| Intelligence synthesis | Convert evidence into implications and actions | PESTEL matrix, decision options, recommendation report |
The agent should inspect available tools in its runtime and choose the tool that best provides the required capability. If multiple tools provide the same capability, choose based on source authority, freshness, user authorization, precision, and ability to return citations or metadata.
Mandatory Source Priority Order
For every research task, follow this source order:
-
User-owned knowledge base / private database
- Local Markdown notes
- Zotero exports
- Project reports
- Previous research database
- Internal CSV / JSON / SQLite records
- User-uploaded documents -
Configured authoritative feeds
- For China-domestic research, prefer
cn_*source groups inconfig/rss_sources.yml: official statistics, central government/ministry/regulator pages, central state media RSS, major news agency RSS, and reputable domestic finance/technology media feed routes. - The skill specifies feed capabilities and source requirements only; the runtime chooses the concrete RSS/feed retrieval tool or service.
- If a feed is generated through RSSHub or another feed service, the original publisher and original URL remain the evidence source.
- Government announcements
- Industry regulators
- Reputable financial and technology media
- University or research institution updates
- Standards organizations
- Think tanks and international organizations
-
Official and institutional sources
- Government departments
- Statistics bureaus
- Regulatory bodies
- Legal and standards databases
- International organizations -
Industry reports and market research
- Consulting firms
- Market research platforms
- Industry associations
- Company annual reports and filings
- Academic papers and conference papers -
General web discovery fallback
- Use only when higher-priority sources are insufficient
- Must be cross-checked with at least one stronger source when used for important claims -
LLM internal knowledge
- Use only to explain frameworks or generate hypotheses
- Never use as the sole factual basis for strategic conclusions
If higher-priority sources provide sufficient evidence, do not over-collect from lower-priority sources.
Runtime Tool Selection Rule
Before using any tool, the agent must state the required capability and selection reason.
Use this planning format:
decision_to_support:
key_pestel_dimensions:
missing_information:
required_capability:
source_tier_to_check_first:
tool_selection_criteria:
- authority
- freshness
- relevance
- user_authorization
- citation_or_metadata_support
fallback_capability:
cross_validation_plan:
sufficient_evidence_threshold:
The agent should not hard-code a tool name in the plan. It should choose from whatever tools are available in the runtime.
Fallback Rule
If a capability is unavailable, move to the next suitable capability in the source priority order. If no retrieval capability is available, ask the user to provide sources or clearly mark the result as framework-only and not evidence-based.
Required Inputs
Before research, identify these fields. If the user does not provide them, infer a reasonable draft and clearly mark assumptions.
industry:
target_market:
decision_to_support:
time_horizon:
geography:
business_type:
known_constraints:
preferred_source_types:
private_knowledge_scope:
feed_scope:
output_depth:
| Field | Meaning |
|---|---|
| industry | Sector or product category being researched |
| target_market | Country, region, city tier, or customer segment |
| decision_to_support | Strategic decision that research should support |
| time_horizon | Short-term, 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, etc. |
| geography | Where the decision applies |
| business_type | Startup, coursework project, corporate strategy, product launch, etc. |
| known_constraints | Budget, regulation, technical capability, team capability, etc. |
| preferred_source_types | Government, consulting reports, academic papers, market platforms, news, RSS, private notes |
| private_knowledge_scope | Which internal folders, notes, documents, exports, or databases should be searched first |
| feed_scope | Which configured feed groups to monitor, such as government, regulator, media, research, technology |
| output_depth | Quick brief, detailed report, source log only, evidence matrix, or full strategic recommendation |
PESTEL Missing Information Map
Break the decision into missing information questions.
| Dimension | Key Questions |
|---|---|
| Political | Government priorities, subsidies, industrial policy, trade barriers, city pilots, public procurement |
| Economic | Market size, purchasing power, cost structure, inflation, pricing, funding, investment signals |
| Social | Demographics, lifestyle change, user acceptance, trust, cultural norms, public concerns |
| Technological | Technical maturity, adoption rate, automation, AI, patents, standards, infrastructure readiness |
| Environmental | Carbon goals, resource constraints, climate risk, ESG pressure, energy usage, sustainability claims |
| Legal | Regulation, compliance, consumer protection, data privacy, labor law, safety standards, liability |
Each missing information item must include:
id:
pestel_dimension:
research_question:
decision_relevance:
source_tier_to_check_first:
required_capability:
expected_evidence:
priority:
validation_requirement:
Evidence Scoring
Score each evidence item from 0 to 25.
| Criterion | Score Range | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Source authority | 0-5 | Official, institutional, reputable, transparent source |
| Recency | 0-5 | Fresh enough for the decision time horizon |
| Decision relevance | 0-5 | Directly answers the decision or missing information question |
| Cross-source confirmation | 0-5 | Supported by independent sources |
| Data specificity | 0-5 | Concrete, quantitative, legally binding, case-specific, or methodologically clear |
| Total Score | Tag | Usage |
|---|---|---|
| 21-25 | Strong Evidence | Can support main recommendation |
| 16-20 | Medium Evidence | Can support secondary judgement |
| 12-15 | Weak Signal | Mention with caution; not enough alone |
| 0-11 | Insufficient | Do not use as basis for recommendation |
High-impact recommendations require at least one strong evidence item or two independent medium evidence items. Legal and policy claims should be verified with official or regulatory evidence whenever possible.
Information-to-Intelligence Conversion
Do not stop at summarizing information. Convert information into intelligence.
For every important finding, produce:
raw_information:
source_type:
source_tier:
evidence_score:
limitation:
strategic_meaning:
decision_implication:
recommended_action:
confidence_level:
Example logic:
Information: A city released a pilot policy supporting autonomous delivery in semi-closed campuses.
Intelligence: This lowers regulatory uncertainty for campus-first MVP testing.
Action: Prioritize pilot cities with explicit smart logistics or robotics policy support.
Required Output Structure
For full tasks, output the following sections:
- Decision Context
- Assumptions and Constraints
- PESTEL Missing Information Map
- Capability Routing Plan
- Evidence Scorecard
- PESTEL Intelligence Matrix
- Source Log
- Strategic Options
- Recommended Action
- Remaining Unknowns and Next Data Collection Plan
For quick tasks, output:
- Decision being supported
- Top 3 missing information items
- Source/capability plan
- Key evidence found
- Strategic implication
- Next action
Capability Routing Plan Template
| Missing Info ID | PESTEL | Required Capability | First Source Tier | Fallback Capability | Selection Criteria | Validation Plan |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MI-001 | Legal | Official source lookup | Official / institutional sources | General web discovery | Authority, recency, citation support | Verify with regulator or legal source |
| MI-002 | Technological | Academic and patent discovery | Industry reports / academic sources | General web discovery | Technical specificity, recency | Cross-check with product or paper evidence |
| MI-003 | Social | Private knowledge retrieval | User-owned knowledge base | Authoritative feed monitoring | Project relevance, source date | Compare with external survey/report evidence |
Source Log Template
| Source | Source Type | Tier | Date | Access Capability | Key Use | Evidence Score | Limitation | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Use capability names in the Access Capability column, not specific tool names.
Guardrails
- Do not produce strategic conclusions from a single weak or low-authority source.
- Do not treat news signals as verified facts unless corroborated.
- Do not use LLM memory as factual evidence.
- Do not hide uncertainty. Mark assumptions, limitations, and confidence.
- Do not over-search if enough high-priority evidence already exists.
- Do not hard-code tool names; route by capability and let the runtime choose the implementation.
Suggested Skill Pack Files
SKILL.md
README.md
config/source_policy.yml
config/rss_sources.yml
config/evidence_scoring.yml
capabilities/private_knowledge_retrieval.md
capabilities/authoritative_feed_monitoring.md
capabilities/evidence_assessment.md
templates/pestel_brief_template.md
templates/intelligence_matrix.md
templates/search_task_template.md
templates/source_log.csv
templates/openclaw/retrieval_plan.md
templates/openclaw/source_router_task.md
templates/openclaw/evidence_scorecard.md
templates/openclaw/openclaw_prompt.md
examples/quadruped_robot_delivery_example.md
One-Shot Prompt Template
Act as my PESTEL Strategic Intelligence Agent.
Decision to support: [decision]
Industry: [industry]
Geography: [geography]
Time horizon: [time horizon]
Available source categories: [private knowledge, authoritative feeds, official sources, reports, academic sources, general web]
Rules:
1. Start from the decision.
2. Identify missing information using PESTEL.
3. For each missing information item, choose the required capability first, not a fixed tool.
4. Let the runtime select the best available tool for that capability.
5. Prioritize user-owned knowledge and authoritative feeds before general web discovery.
6. Verify legal, policy, statistical, and market-size claims with high-authority sources when possible.
7. Score evidence before making recommendations.
8. Convert raw information into strategic implications and recommended actions.
Output:
- Decision Context
- Capability Routing Plan
- PESTEL Intelligence Matrix
- Evidence Scorecard
- Source Log
- Strategic Options
- Recommended Next Step