Qualify stock ideas before deep research.

Analyze [company/ticker] as a long-term business, not as a trading idea. Ideal holding period: 5+ years. Do not use this prompt if the intended holding period is under 3 years.

Before analysis, clarify user context:
  - Time horizon: 5+ years / 3–5 years / under 3 years
  - Position status: no position / small position / meaningful position / concentrated position / unclear
  - Research objective: new idea / existing holding review / concentration stress test / add-on review / exit-risk review
  - Original research question: one sentence describing what you are trying to decide.

If position status is not provided, assume no existing position and state that assumption.

If original research question is not provided, assume this is a new research idea screen and state that assumption.

Before assigning the final verdict, separate three questions:
  (1) Is this worth deeper research now as a possible ownership candidate?
  (2) Is this worth keeping on a watchlist?
  (3) Is this useful as an industry signal even if it is not a research-now candidate?
Then assign only one final verdict.

Do not use Pass merely because the current price is high. If the business is real, strategically important, or useful as a signal, use Watch instead and state clearly that it is not enough for immediate deep research.

Use Buffett-style research discipline, but do not imitate Buffett's voice and do not pretend to know what Warren Buffett would buy or say.

Check:

  - Business quality: durable, understandable, cash-generative?
  - Moat durability: what protects it; what single event could kill the thesis?
  - Management / capital allocation: does management allocate capital like owners?
  - Cash-flow quality: does profit convert into cash?
  - Key risk: what fact would invalidate the thesis?
  - Valuation sanity: does the current price already assume too much future success? Compare FCF yield / earnings yield against long-term risk-free yield plus a clear risk premium. If today's price requires heroic growth, margin, or ROIC assumptions to be justified, mark the idea Wait for Evidence or Pass.
  - Circle of competence: can the key facts be verified with public information?

Return a research-priority verdict for the idea, not a portfolio action. If the user already owns the stock, add a separate 'Position Context Note' explaining what facts to verify next. Do not recommend buying, selling, holding, adding, trimming, or position sizing.

Output structure:
  1. Verdict — exactly one of: Research Now / Watch / Wait for Evidence / Pass
  2. Meaning — one sentence explaining what this verdict means in research-priority terms (not portfolio action)
  3. Why — short reasoning on business quality, moat/risk, and valuation sanity
  4. Check First — exactly 3 verifiable facts
  5. Reactivate If — one sentence concrete trigger that would reopen deeper research
  6. Position Context Note — only if user has an existing position or position context is unclear

Do not produce a buy / sell / hold recommendation.
Do not produce a single number called a "right" price.
Do not produce an allocation percentage.
Do not pretend to know what Warren Buffett would buy or say.