本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

codexkit-legal-due-diligence

Conduct structured legal due diligence for M&A, joint ventures, or investment transactions. Cover all 9 workstreams — Corporate, Contracts, IP, Litigation, Regulatory, Employment, Tax, Environmental, and Data Privacy. Produce a risk matrix with deal-breaker flags and closing conditions. Use when evaluating a target or counterparty.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md6.3 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml176 B

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Legal Due Diligence Analyst

When to Use

  • Before signing an M&A deal, JV agreement, or investment
  • When evaluating a target company's legal risk profile
  • When preparing a due diligence report for the board or investment committee
  • When a lender or investor requires legal DD as a condition

Procedure

Step 1 — Scope and Materiality

  1. Confirm deal type: M&A (asset/share), JV, Investment, Licensing
  2. Define materiality thresholds (e.g., contracts > $50K, litigation > $100K)
  3. Set access parameters: full data room, limited access, or desktop review

Step 2 — 9 Workstream Review

#WorkstreamKey Questions
1CorporateIncorporation docs, cap table, board minutes, subsidiaries, shareholder agreements
2ContractsMaterial contracts, change of control clauses, termination provisions, exclusivity
3IPPatents, trademarks, copyrights, licenses, open-source exposure, trade secrets
4LitigationPending/threatened claims, regulatory proceedings, arbitrations, settlements
5RegulatoryLicenses, permits, sector-specific compliance, sanctions, export controls
6EmploymentKey person risk, employment contracts, non-competes, benefit obligations, labor disputes
7TaxTax returns, assessments, transfer pricing, tax losses, withholding obligations
8EnvironmentalEnvironmental liabilities, contamination, permits, ESG compliance
9Data PrivacyGDPR/CCPA compliance, data processing agreements, breach history, cross-border transfers

Step 3 — Risk Assessment

For each finding, classify:

SeverityDefinitionAction
🔴 Critical / Deal-breakerCould kill the deal or require fundamental restructuringEscalate immediately
🟠 HighRequires contractual protection (indemnity, escrow, warranty)Negotiate in SPA
🟡 MediumManageable post-closing with defined planMonitor and plan
🟢 LowStandard, no special actionNote for record

Step 4 — Closing Conditions

Generate conditions precedent (CPs) for any 🔴 or 🟠 finding that must be resolved before closing.

Inputs

InputRequiredFormat
Deal typeYesM&A / JV / Investment / Licensing
Target company docsYesData room or document list
Materiality thresholdRecommendedCurrency amount
Prior DD reportsOptionalIf available from advisors

Output

## Legal Due Diligence Report — [Target] — [Date]

### Executive Summary

Deal type: Share acquisition (100%)
Overall risk assessment: 🟡 MEDIUM — proceed with protections
Key concerns: 2 critical IP issues, 1 pending litigation

### Risk Matrix

| # | Workstream | Finding | Severity | Recommendation |
|---|-----------|---------|----------|----------------|
| 1 | IP | Patent #3421 expires in 6 months, core to product | 🔴 Critical | Require IP warranty + escrow |
| 2 | IP | Open-source GPL dependency in core module | 🟠 High | Indemnity clause in SPA |
| 3 | Litigation | Customer lawsuit pending ($200K claim) | 🟠 High | Seller indemnity, escrow $250K |
| 4 | Employment | CTO has no non-compete agreement | 🟡 Medium | New contract as CP |
| 5 | Tax | Transfer pricing study outdated (2022) | 🟡 Medium | Update post-closing |
| 6 | Data Privacy | No DPA with 3 key processors | 🟡 Medium | Execute DPAs pre-closing |
| 7 | Corporate | All filings current, no issues | 🟢 Low | — |

### Deal-Breaker Flags

1. 🔴 Patent #3421 expiration — requires renewal confirmation or IP warranty
2. 🔴 None other — deal can proceed with identified protections

### Conditions Precedent

| # | Condition | Owner | Deadline |
|---|-----------|-------|----------|
| 1 | Patent renewal confirmation | Seller | Before signing |
| 2 | CTO employment + non-compete | Seller | Before closing |
| 3 | DPAs with 3 processors executed | Seller | Before closing |

### Recommended SPA Protections

- IP warranty and indemnity (uncapped for 3 years)
- Litigation escrow: $250K
- General warranty period: 24 months
- W&I insurance recommended

Definition of Done

  • All 9 workstreams reviewed with findings documented
  • Risk matrix with severity classification for each finding
  • Deal-breaker flags clearly called out
  • Conditions precedent generated for 🔴/🟠 findings
  • SPA protection recommendations provided
  • Executive summary with overall risk assessment

Examples

Prompt

We are acquiring 100% shares of TechCo Ltd.
Here is the data room summary: [paste document list]
Deal size: $5M. Materiality: $50K.
Key concern: their main product relies on a patent expiring soon.
Conduct a legal due diligence and flag deal-breakers.

Quality Criteria

  • Every finding is tied to a specific evidence source (log, test, metric)
  • Pass/fail criteria are binary and measurable — no subjective judgments
  • Severity levels are assigned with clear thresholds
  • Remediation steps are provided for all critical and high findings

Verification (4C)

CheckQuestion
CorrectnessAre all pass/fail criteria applied against the correct standard or rule?
CompletenessWere all required dimensions or checklist items evaluated?
Context-fitDoes the verification scope match the actual risk level of the deliverable?
ConsequenceIf this passed verification but had a hidden flaw, what is the worst-case impact?

Edge Cases

  • Incomplete data for full assessment — Document which checks were limited and flag for re-verification when data becomes available.
  • Ambiguous pass/fail criteria — Request clarification from the standard owner before scoring. Mark as 'Needs Review'.
  • Multiple overlapping standards — Identify the governing standard and note where others diverge.

Changelog

  • v1.0.0 — Initial release

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Design rigorous A/B test plans with hypothesis, sample size calculation, Minimum Detectable Effect (MDE), randomization strategy, and decision rules. Includes guardrail metrics and rollout playbook. Use when planning product experiments, conversion optimization, or data-driven feature decisions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

Review REST and GraphQL API designs for consistency, usability, and best practices. Covers naming conventions, versioning strategy, error format, pagination, authentication patterns, and breaking change detection. Use when reviewing API specs, designing new APIs, or auditing existing endpoints.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

Write Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) following the Michael Nygard format. Captures context, options considered, decision rationale, and consequences. Use when making technology choices, framework selections, or any architectural decision that future developers need to understand.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

Assess organizational readiness for financial audits (internal or external). Map assertions to account balances, check evidence completeness, score readiness using a Red/Amber/Green framework, and generate a remediation timeline. Aligned with SOX, IFRS, and GAAP audit standards. Use before scheduled audits or when preparing for first-time compliance.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

Design safe recurring Codex automations with clear prompts, outputs, schedules, and gating rules.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

Refine Product Backlog Items to meet INVEST criteria. Write User Stories with Acceptance Criteria in Given/When/Then format, estimate with Story Points, and flag dependencies. Use before sprint planning when backlog items need grooming. Do not use to prioritize the backlog — that is the Product Owner's decision.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

hoavdc のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する