Drafts a fee letter for a leveraged acquisition financing, reconciling fee economics across deal documents and flagging cross-document inconsistencies in a separate issues memo.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add sunyifeisb-art/legalwork --skill draft-fee-letter --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Draft Fee Letter?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/sunyifeisb-art-draft-fee-letter)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: draft-fee-letter
task_id: banking-finance/draft-fee-letter
description: Drafts a fee letter for a leveraged acquisition financing, reconciling fee economics across deal documents and flagging cross-document inconsistencies in a separate issues memo.
activates_for: [planner, solver, checker]
---
# Skill: Fee Letter Drafting with Issues Memo (Senior Secured Credit Facility)
## 1. Subject-matter triage
- Treat the fee letter as the operative economics document, not a summary of deal terms.
- Draft the fee letter first; draft the issues memorandum only after the fee letter text is complete and internally coherent.
- If the source set contains both a draft fee letter and related financing documents, identify whether the task is a single-document drafting exercise or a cross-document reconciliation exercise; if multiple fee concepts appear, enumerate them before drafting.
## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting
- Treating a fee as merely payable at closing when the operative documents indicate a different timing concept, such as earned status upon signing or another triggering event.
- Omitting a regulatory disclosure carve-out from the confidentiality provision, creating a compliance problem for regulated entities.
- Failing to reconcile ticking fee start dates across related deal documents.
- Leaving out standalone survival language for fee obligations, creating an enforceability gap if the commitment letter terminates before fees are paid.
- Collapsing distinct economics into a single generic fee provision instead of tracking the actual transaction mechanics document by document.
- Producing an issues memo that notes discrepancies but does not tie each one to the controlling source and a practical fix.
## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply
- Ticking fee: identify the accrual start date in each relevant document, reconcile any inconsistency, and state the operative timing in the draft.
- Earned vs. payable distinction: verify whether a fee is characterized as earned upon signing or another trigger, as opposed to merely payable at closing, and reflect that characterization consistently.
- Ticking fee refundability: determine whether the fee is creditable or refundable against other closing fees and draft the treatment expressly if the documents are silent or inconsistent.
- Regulatory disclosure carve-out: include an exception in confidentiality language for disclosures required by law, regulation, supervisory request, or similar authority.
- Revolver commitment fee step-down: if present, specify the trigger, measurement source, and timing mechanics so the fee curve can be administered without ambiguity.
- OID mechanics: state that original issue discount is treated as a discount on proceeds rather than a separate cash fee payment, and keep the sources-and-uses presentation aligned.
- MFN/pricing protection on flex: if pricing flexibility can be exercised, address whether earlier-committed lenders receive corresponding protection.
- SOFR floor interaction with flex: if pricing flex affects spread, address how any floor concept interacts with the revised pricing.
- Survival: include standalone survival language so fee obligations continue as intended after termination of the commitment letter or related financing document.
- Hold amount context: if the structure contemplates a retained hold amount, verify whether it affects the fee economics and draft accordingly.
- Governing priority: if the deal documents specify hierarchy or control language, use that hierarchy to resolve inconsistencies in the draft and in the issues memo.
## 4. Analytical scaffolds
1. Fee inventory: enumerate each fee concept reflected in the source set before drafting; if only one fee concept is truly in scope, state that expressly.
2. Timing analysis: determine when each fee is earned, payable, accrued, refundable, or creditable; preserve any distinctions rather than flattening them.
3. Document reconciliation: cross-check the commitment letter, term sheet, committee materials, precedent, and ancillary deal papers for inconsistent economics, triggers, or carve-outs.
4. OID and sources-and-uses check: confirm that any discount economics are described as proceeds discounting and that the financing math presentation matches the operative text.
5. Confidentiality and regulatory carve-out check: ensure the confidentiality provision permits required disclosures without undercutting the fee letter’s general confidentiality framework.
6. Survival and termination check: confirm fee obligations survive as needed after termination or expiration of related commitments.
7. Issues memo method: for each inconsistency, identify the source document, describe the mismatch, explain the practical consequence, and state a high-level proposed fix.
## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships
- Track vertical relationships between the fee letter and the underlying commitment package: where the documents overlap, the fee letter should not silently diverge from the economics or carve-outs elsewhere.
- Track temporal relationships for accrual, signing, funding, closing, expiration, and termination; the operative date should be stated with precision wherever timing changes the economics.
- If multiple documents use different terminology for the same event, normalize the terminology in the draft and note the divergence in the issues memo.
- If a document’s hierarchy clause or incorporation language resolves a conflict, follow that allocation rather than averaging conflicting formulations.
## 6. Output structure conventions
- Draft the fee letter as a complete operative document with integrated fee provisions, confidentiality carve-out, survival language, and any other terms needed to make the economics executable.
- Draft the issues memorandum as a separate advisory deliverable with a clear severity scale stated once at the top and applied uniformly to each issue.
- For each issue, include the source document, the nature of the inconsistency, the consequence for the transaction, and a proposed resolution at a high level.
- End the issues memorandum with a concise Recommended Actions section that assigns an action, a responsible role, and a timing anchor tied to the transaction milestone.
- Keep the fee letter and issues memorandum internally consistent; do not let the memo propose fixes that the draft does not reflect unless the inconsistency is expressly identified as unresolved.
- Before finalizing, confirm that the fee-letter file is complete and contains operative clauses, and that the issues memorandum is complete and contains actual issue entries rather than a narrative summary.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!