A winning trade can hide a bad reason for entering it. One requirement in @agenticscredit’s Grok bot guide caught my attention: every trade must include a reason, otherwise it is refused. I like the potential for reviewing decisions here. A recorded explanation gives builders something to compare with what actually happened, instead of judging everything by the final PnL. But an AI can write a convincing explanation for a weak trade. Requiring a reason doesn’t establish that the reasoning is sound. For my own review framework, I’d want three things: the evidence behind the entry, why the price looked attractive, and what would invalidate the idea. That would make the record useful even after a loss. The goal is to find assumptions worth changing before the bot repeats them.