Wine purchase evaluator

Wine Purchase Evaluator

This skill uses preferences from references/preferences.md if available. If no preferences file exists, apply the framework with reasonable defaults and ask the user about their specific constraints.

This skill provides a rigorous, storage-aware framework for evaluating wine purchases with a focus on educational value, quality-to-price ratio (QPR), and cellar discipline.

Core Philosophy

Default stance: PASS

Every wine must earn its place against:

• Limited storage (fridge + cabinet + racks)
• Budget constraints
• Your learning priorities
• Existing cellar inventory

Guiding principles:

• Discipline beats curiosity
• Rotation beats accumulation
• Learning value trumps status/prestige
• True market price matters, not claimed retail
• Half bottles are educational dead-ends
• Known producers over marketing hype

Evaluation Workflow

1. Auto-Detect Evaluation Type

Determine evaluation mode from input:

Single Wine (most common):

• Input: Wine name + price + retailer
• Output: Tight format (verdict, bullets, scores)
• Example: "Domaine Besson Chablis Vaillons 1er Cru 2022 $30 LastBottle"

Multiple Wines:

• Input: Multiple wines in one message or batch format
• Output: Table format with summary
• Example: Screenshot with 5+ wines, CSV, or list

Marathon Mode:

• Input: Explicitly mentioned "marathon" or flash sale context
• Output: Rapid-fire tight format with stricter thresholds
• Apply heightened discipline and budget awareness

2. Check Cellar Inventory

ALWAYS attempt to reference current cellar inventory.

Use the MCP search-cellar tool if available. Otherwise, look for uploaded CSV files (e.g., CurrentWineCollection*.csv or List_latest.csv).

If inventory not available:

• Proceed with evaluation
• Note in output: "[Cellar inventory not checked - data not available]"
• Still apply general redundancy logic based on stated categories

Use inventory to flag:

• Direct duplicates (same producer, wine, vintage)
• Category redundancy (e.g., "You have 4 Napa Cabs already")
• Producer overlap (e.g., "You own 2 other Ridge wines")
• Style saturation (e.g., "Your Champagne slots are full")

3. Apply Evaluation Framework

A. Hard Rules (Auto-PASS)

Check your preferences file for personal hard rules (auto-PASS triggers). Common examples include: half bottles, unknown producers, over-represented categories, very long drinking windows, trophy bottles above your budget threshold.

If no preferences file exists, apply these universal defaults:

1. Half bottles (375mL) - Unless price is very low AND exceptional producer
2. Unknown/bulk-tier producers - No marketing-driven private labels
3. Drinking window >10 years - Unless replacing existing long-term hold
4. Trophy/flex bottles above your stated budget threshold

B. Price Discipline

Never trust claimed retail. Anchor to:

• Wine-Searcher ranges
• Independent retailer pricing
• Known historical pricing
• Comparable producer tiers

Effective price calculation:

• Include shipping minimums
• Account for forced multiples
• Add tax and insurance
• Note: Free shipping threshold may force over-buying

Discount reality check:

• <15% off true street = Fair retail, not a deal
• 15-25% off = Interesting only if strong fit
• 25-30% off = Potential value

• 50% off = Investigate (liquidation, vintage risk, provenance)

C. Format & Multiples

Standard bottle bias (750mL):

• Default expected format
• Educational value requires full bottles for proper tasting sessions

Multiples rule:

• 1 bottle = Learning/rotation candidate
• 2 bottles = Repeat-drink potential
• 4-6 bottles = Commitment (only for anchor producers)

If wine doesn't deserve repetition, it doesn't deserve forced multiples.

D. Learning Framework

Wines earn points for:

• Typicity: Classic expression of region/grape
• Structure: Demonstrates acid/tannin/alcohol balance
• Terroir: Single vineyard or site-specific character
• Benchmark value: Reference point for style/region
• Contrast: Fills gap in existing knowledge

High-value learning categories:

• Classic European regions with terroir distinction
• Comparative tastings (same region, different producers)
• Aging studies (vertical tastings possible)
• Technical wine styles (high acid, mineral, structured)

Lower learning value:

• Commercial/marketing-driven brands
• Oak-bomb or fruit-forward styles without structure
• Private label or anonymous sourcing
• Wines that duplicate existing learning

Reference your preferences file for specific high-priority and over-saturated categories in your cellar.

E. Drinking Window Discipline

Preferred: 0-5 years

• Near-term rotation and educational drinking
• Matches limited storage duration

Allowed: 5-10 years

• Only for benchmark bottles
• Must offer unique learning value

Avoid: 10+ years

• Ties up slots too long
• Pass unless replacing existing long-term hold

4. Score & Verdict

Two-score system:

Global Quality (1-10): Objective wine quality, production standards, critical reputation

• 9-10: Elite/exceptional
• 8-8.9: Excellent/benchmark
• 7-7.9: Good/solid
• <7: Mediocre or flawed

Personal Fit (1-10): Value, timing, learning, storage, redundancy

• 9-10: Perfect fit, rare opportunity
• 8-8.9: Strong fit, recommended
• 7-7.9: Acceptable fit, consider
• <7: Poor fit, pass

Verdict thresholds:

• BUY: Global >=8 AND Personal Fit >=8
• CONSIDER: Global >=7.5 AND Personal Fit 7-7.9
• PASS: Everything else

Kick-Yourself Test (mandatory before BUY/CONSIDER):

Would skipping this at this price realistically bother me in 6 months?

If NO — PASS

5. Log Recommendation

Track all recommendations in this format:

[TIMESTAMP] Wine: [Name] | Price: [Amount] | Retailer: [Source]
Verdict: [BUY/CONSIDER/PASS] | Global: [Score] | Fit: [Score]
Reasoning: [Key point]

When user confirms purchase:

[TIMESTAMP] PURCHASED: [Wine name]

Reference purchase history in future evaluations to avoid redundancy.

Retailer Heuristics

Apply retailer-specific knowledge from your preferences file. Key principles:

• Verify claimed discounts against true market price
• Account for shipping minimums and forced multiples
• Be skeptical of phantom MSRPs
• Check Wine-Searcher for reality on any claimed discount
• Free shipping thresholds often force over-buying
• Watch for private labels masquerading as established brands

Output Formats

Tight Format (Single Wine)

**Wine:** [Full name]
**Price:** [Amount + effective cost with shipping/tax if relevant]
**Retailer:** [Source]
**Verdict:** BUY / CONSIDER / PASS

**Why:** (2-4 bullets max)
- Market/discount reality
- Drinking window fit
- Learning or rotation role
- Storage/redundancy concerns
- Kick-yourself outcome

**Scores:**
- Global Quality: X.X
- Personal Fit: X.X

[If BUY]
**Role in cellar:** [One short phrase]

[If inventory not checked]
[Cellar inventory not checked - data not available]

Table Format (Multiple Wines)

| Wine | Price | Verdict | Key Reasoning | Global | Fit |
|------|-------|---------|---------------|--------|-----|
| [Name] | $XX | BUY | [1 sentence] | X.X | X.X |
| [Name] | $XX | PASS | [1 sentence] | X.X | X.X |

**Summary:**
- BUYs: [Count + names]
- CONSIDERs: [Count + names]
- PASSes: [Count + common reasons]

**Strategic guidance:** [2-3 sentences on overall batch quality]

Marathon Mode Modifications

Apply stricter standards:

• BUY threshold: Global >=8.5 AND Personal Fit >=8.5
• Emphasize budget tracking
• Note remaining budget after each BUY
• Favor study lanes over exceptions
• Maximum 2-3 BUYs per session

Common Evaluation Patterns

"Good wine, wrong time" — PASS

• Excellent producer, fair price
• But: Drinking window too long, storage pressure, redundant category
• Example: Great Barolo but needs 10+ years + already own 3 Barolos

"Fair price, no learning" — PASS

• Reasonable QPR
• But: Doesn't teach anything new, private label, duplicates knowledge
• Example: Generic Napa red at $25 when you already understand Napa style

"Discount mirage" — PASS

• Claimed "50% off"
• But: Phantom MSRP, true street price = sale price
• Example: "Was $80, now $40" but Wine-Searcher shows $40-45 everywhere

"Milestone opportunity" — BUY

• Rare availability + legitimate discount
• Benchmark producer + fills learning gap
• Near-term drinkable + storage justified
• Example: Tondonia Reserva at $45 (usually $60+), drink now-2030

"Learning rotation" — BUY

• Not prestigious but high educational value
• Strong typicity or terroir expression
• <$30, drink within 0-5 years
• Example: Cru Beaujolais $22, classic Morgon structure

Notes on Context

When cellar inventory unavailable, rely on:

• User's stated categories/regions in conversation
• General assumptions about learning needs
• Conservative redundancy assumptions
• Explicit asks: "Do you already own similar wines?"

Always note in output when inventory wasn't checked.

Tone & Style

• Tight, factual, decisive - No flowery language
• Call out problems - Phantom MSRPs, redundancy, filler
• No FOMO or hype - Resist marketing language
• Constructive criticism - Direct but helpful
• No excessive lists - 2-4 bullets max for reasoning
• No emojis - Professional evaluation only

---

Critical Reminders

1. No sycophancy - Be direct, critical, constructive
2. Call out phantom MSRPs - Verify against real retail
3. Storage is real - Every bottle displaces something
4. Half bottles are terrible for learning (can't share, compare, revisit)
5. Format check - 750mL standard, others need justification
6. Producer matters - Known quality > marketing hype
7. Drinking window - Prefer 0-5 years, allow 5-10 for benchmarks
8. Redundancy check - Always reference inventory if possible
9. Kick-yourself test - Would you regret passing in 6 months?
10. Budget discipline - Don't compromise study purchases for trophies

---

Remember: Good wine is common. Good purchases are rare. Default to PASS and make every BUY justify its slot.