Reviews a borrower’s periodic reporting package against the applicable credit documentation and produces an issues memo with corrected covenant calculations and next-step analysis.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add sunyifeisb-art/legalwork --skill identify-issues-in-borrower-financial-statements --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Identify Issues In Borrower Financial Statements?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/sunyifeisb-art-identify-issues-in-borrower-financial-statements)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: identify-issues-in-borrower-financial-statements
task_id: banking-finance/identify-issues-in-borrower-financial-statements
description: Reviews a borrower’s periodic reporting package against the applicable credit documentation and produces an issues memo with corrected covenant calculations and next-step analysis.
activates_for: [planner, solver, checker]
---
# Skill: Borrower Financial Statements Issues Memo — Compliance Certificate Verification
## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting
- Accepting reported financial metrics without independently summing, reconciling, and sanity-checking stated components against the underlying statements and schedules
- Treating management-prepared compliance calculations as complete without testing addback caps, exclusions, definitions, and period-specific limitations
- Missing instrument-level risk from subordinated debt, seller financing, or other borrowings that may trigger cross-default, acceleration, or reporting consequences under the credit package
- Failing to restate corrected covenant metrics after finding an error, which leaves compliance status unresolved
- Collapsing distinct reporting dates, covenant tests, or debt instruments into one pass instead of analyzing each separately
- Stopping at description of the issue without stating the applicable threshold, interacting document, and downstream consequence
- Omitting a clear severity ranking and practical next step for each issue
## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply
- Start with the controlling credit-document definitions, compliance certificate mechanics, and any schedule or exhibit that governs covenant calculations; use those definitions rather than informal accounting labels
- EBITDA verification: test whether each stated component sums to the reported subtotal, then restate EBITDA after correcting arithmetic errors or excluded items
- Addback and adjustment limits: verify restructuring, integration, and similar addbacks against any per-period, annual, basket, or aggregate cap in the credit documents
- Total debt and funded debt: confirm that all relevant debt categories are captured, including notes, purchase-money debt, seller financing, and any other indebtedness that falls within the defined basket
- Leverage and coverage ratios: recompute each covenant ratio using corrected inputs and compare the result to the applicable test level or minimum headroom requirement
- Minimum EBITDA or similar financial maintenance covenant: test corrected results against any standalone minimum performance covenant, not just leverage or coverage ratios
- Cross-default and event-of-default analysis: identify whether a separate instrument contains its own default trigger, missed-payment event, or acceleration right that could implicate the credit agreement’s cross-default provision
- Period-specific reporting obligations: if the package covers multiple periods or tests, analyze each period separately and avoid relying on a single representative calculation
- Controlling authority: cite the specific credit-agreement section, schedule, exhibit, or defined term supporting each conclusion; if the source set references another governing instrument, cite it as the source documents frame it
## 4. Analytical scaffolds
1. Scope the reporting package
- Identify each reporting period, covenant test date, and debt instrument in scope
- If only one period or one instrument is implicated, say so explicitly and explain why
2. Verify the reported numbers
- Recalculate every reported subtotal from its stated components
- Reconcile reported figures to the financial statements and supporting schedules
- Flag any internal inconsistency, omission, or apparent misclassification
3. Test addbacks and exclusions
- Compare each adjustment to the applicable contractual definition and cap
- Separate permitted addbacks from disallowed excess amounts
- Restate EBITDA or other adjusted metrics after corrections
4. Recompute debt and fixed charges
- Verify funded debt inclusions and exclusions against the debt schedule and the balance sheet
- Recompute any fixed charges or related inputs needed for covenant testing
5. Recalculate covenant compliance
- Rebuild leverage, coverage, and any minimum performance tests using corrected inputs
- Compare the corrected result to the covenant threshold and note any headroom or shortfall
6. Assess cross-default and related-transaction risk
- Review subordinated, seller-financing, or acquisition-related instruments for independent defaults
- Determine whether the source documents’ cross-default language is implicated
7. Close each issue fully
- State the reported figure, corrected figure, controlling source provision, compliance impact, severity, and recommended next step
- Quantify the issue against the relevant threshold, connect it to the interacting document or definition, and state the client consequence
8. Prioritize response
- Rank issues by severity and urgency, with the most compliance-sensitive items first
## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships
- Treat the credit agreement, compliance certificate, financial statements, and debt schedules as interlocking documents; a number in one may depend on a definition or cap in another
- Distinguish between quarterly, year-to-date, trailing, and point-in-time measurements; do not mix periods without a stated contractual basis
- Where one correction cascades into another calculation, update the downstream metric after each upstream correction
- If more than one covenant, instrument, or period is present, enumerate them before analysis and then analyze each separately
- Preserve the sequence: reported figure → corrected figure → covenant impact → default analysis → recommended response
## 6. Output structure conventions
- Produce an issues memo organized by issue, not by document
- Begin with a short methodology or scope note identifying the materials reviewed and any assumptions
- Include a severity legend at the top using a uniform ordinal scale such as Critical / High / Medium / Low, and apply it to every issue
- For each issue, include:
- issue title
- reported figure or position
- corrected figure or position
- controlling credit-document citation
- cross-reference to any interacting definition, schedule, or related instrument
- compliance impact or downstream consequence
- severity
- recommended next step
- Include a concise summary table comparing reported metrics, corrected metrics, and applicable covenant thresholds or tests
- If multiple periods or instruments are in scope, provide a separate row for each
- End with a clearly labeled Recommended Actions block that assigns each action to a responsible role and ties it to a deadline or urgency anchor from the source documents or the reporting cycle
- Use plain, decision-ready language; avoid conclusory default statements unless tied to a cited contractual basis
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!