Results for “due-diligence”

Decision-grade entity research skill — produces a hypothesis-tested dossier on a specific company, person, nonprofit, or government org, not a generic profile. Forcing intake makes the user state their hypothesis upfront (what they already believe and want to verify or disprove) so the dossier tests it rather than confirms it. Output is an editable Word document (.docx) with verdict on the hypothesis, identity facts, 12-month activity timeline, network and reputation signals, red flags, conversation hooks tied to specific findings, and source-provenance audit log. Uses WebSearch + WebFetch + free APIs (SEC EDGAR, GitHub, ProPublica) as workhorses; optional BYOK MCPs enhance coverage. Use when the user asks for background research, diligence, or meeting prep on a specific entity (e.g., 'prep me for a meeting with [person/company]', 'due diligence on [company]'). Honors sensitivity exclusions for journalism + personal-vetting contexts.

Use to audit how payment disputes, chargebacks and unrecognised-transaction claims are handled against scheme deadlines and evidence standards. Trigger for "audit our dispute handling", "chargeback quality review", "are we meeting scheme deadlines", unrecognised transaction claims, provisional credit decisions, or a customer complaining their dispute was rejected unfairly.

Guides authorized digital forensics and incident response workflows including memory dump analysis, disk timeline creation, PCAP investigation, and artifact triage with evidence preservation.

Investigates insider threat incidents involving employees, contractors, or trusted partners who misuse authorized access to steal data, sabotage systems, or violate security policies. Combines digital forensics, user behavior analytics, and HR/legal coordination to build an evidence-based case.

Identify, categorize, and prioritize accumulated design inconsistencies and structural problems across a product.

Supplements general deposition preparation with IP-specific examination frameworks for patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret cases. Covers witness strategies for inventors, accused infringers, licensing witnesses, and experts. Use alongside @deposition-preparation and @deposition-expert-witness when planning IP depositions, drafting outlines, or analyzing witness strategy.

Conducts digital forensics investigations on compromised endpoints, including memory acquisition, disk imaging, artifact analysis, and timeline reconstruction for incident response and evidence collection.

Conducts disk forensics investigations using forensic imaging, file system analysis, artifact recovery, and timeline reconstruction to support incident response cases.

Subjects every non-trivial decision to a fresh-context adversarial review before it stands. Use when correctness matters more than speed, when working in unfamiliar code, when stakes are high (production, security-sensitive logic, irreversible operations), or any time a confident output would be cheaper to verify now than to debug later.

Federal Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) sweeper backed by FAR Subpart 9.5 (9.501-9.508) and the active Theseus workspace knowledge graph. USE WHEN the user asks about OCI risk on a bid, organizational conflicts, incumbent conflicts, biased ground rules, unequal access to information, impaired objectivity, or any pre-bid OCI due diligence. Pulls `company`, `incumbent`, `subcontractor`, `customer`, `program_office`, and prior-contract relationships from the workspace KG, classifies each potential conflict into one of the three FAR 9.505 classes (biased ground rules, unequal access, impaired objectivity), and emits a structured findings envelope with mitigation recommendations (firewall, NDA, recusal, novation). DO NOT USE FOR FAR clause coverage audit (use `compliance-auditor`), proposal prose (use `proposal-generator`), competitor research (use `competitive-intel`), or pricing (use `price-to-win`).

Audit Archcore docs: dashboard (counts, status, relations, orphans), deep coverage audit, or drift detection (code/cascade/temporal staleness). Use for 'show status', 'documentation gaps', 'check if docs match code', or after a staleness warning. Not for creating docs.

Use to identify signals of customer vulnerability in support conversations and audit whether they were recognised and acted on. Trigger for "identify vulnerable customers", "did we spot the vulnerability signals", "customers in financial difficulty", bereavement or health disclosures in support, vulnerable customer handling audits, or designing vulnerability recognition for a support team.

Audit and reconcile the shared project glossary — find stale terms, missing definitions, conflicts, shadows, inheritance gaps, and cross-path divergences across research docs

Use to audit arrears, collections and financial-difficulty conversations for fair treatment — forbearance offered, pressure absent, vulnerability recognised. Trigger for "audit our collections calls", "are we treating customers in arrears fairly", "did we offer forbearance", financial difficulty handling, payment plan conversations, or a complaint about collections conduct.

Perform a structured audit of a codebase covering security, code quality, performance, dependencies, architecture, and testing hygiene, then produce a prioritized findings report. Use this skill whenever the user asks for a code review, code audit, security review, codebase assessment, "look over this repo", "what's wrong with this codebase", legacy-code triage, pre-acquisition technical due diligence, or any request to systematically evaluate the health of a project. Trigger even when the user is casual ("can you eyeball my repo?") — this skill imposes the structure that ad-hoc review misses. This skill audits a whole repository at a point in time — for reviewing a diff or PR use the built-in code-review skill; for security checks on pending changes use security-review.