# Identify Issues Reinsurance Treaty > Agents reviewing a reinsurance treaty identify drafting issues, including collateral adequacy, insolvency-clause payment mechanics, intermediary-risk allocation, exclusion gaps for emerging contaminants, commutation mechanics, and notice/prejudice provisions. - Skill: `finchipaiorg/identify-issues-reinsurance-treaty` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add finchipaiorg/identify-issues-reinsurance-treaty` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/finchipaiorg/identify-issues-reinsurance-treaty/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: FinchipAIOrg (https://skillmd.com/u/finchipaiorg) - Updated: 2026-09-22 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/finchipaiorg/identify-issues-reinsurance-treaty --- # Skill: Identify Issues in Reinsurance Treaty — Issue Memorandum ## 1. Subject-matter triage - Treat the draft treaty, trust/collateral materials, broker/intermediary terms, claims-handling provisions, and any related deal documents as an integrated set. - Identify whether the cedant is dealing with admitted or non-admitted reinsurance, whether collateral support is intended to satisfy credit-for-reinsurance concerns, and whether any insolvency, commutation, or notice provision changes the risk allocation in the base treaty. - If the source materials address more than one treaty layer, tranche, or period, enumerate each one before analysis and keep the issues tied to the correct layer. ## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting - Flagging a problem in the insolvency clause without stating the specific trigger that undermines the clause’s protective function. - Treating intermediary language as boilerplate without identifying which side bears the risk of premium receipt, remittance, or intermediary insolvency under the governing law. - Reading collateral support in isolation instead of comparing the ceded exposure reflected in the documents against the available trust or other security actually promised. - Missing gaps where pollution, contamination, or emerging-contaminant language in exclusions does not match the underlying risk allocation reflected elsewhere in the documents. - Approving commutation language that leaves actuarial method, discounting, expense allocation, and dispute resolution unspecified. - Overlooking late-notice risk where the reporting threshold is low, the deadline is short, and no prejudice standard limits forfeiture. - Writing issues as descriptions only, without severity, cross-reference, or downstream consequence. ## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply - Credit-for-reinsurance and collateral adequacy: compare the treaty’s ceded exposure and security provisions against the collateral actually provided under the related trust or security arrangement; flag any apparent shortfall on the face of the documents before loss-development assumptions. - Insolvency clause mechanics: test whether the payment clause preserves the reinsurance insolvency-protection function by requiring payment to the liquidator or receiver without conditioning payment on prior payment of policyholder claims; use the governing reinsurance insolvency rule or the clause’s stated controlling law if identified in the source set. - Intermediary risk allocation: identify the law governing the intermediary relationship and determine whether the intermediary acts for the reinsurer or cedant for premium-receipt purposes; use that law to assess who bears the risk between receipt and remittance. - Setoff and insolvency: review any offset or netting provision for an insolvency carve-out; insolvency law may restrict or condition setoff against an estate, so the clause should be tested against the governing insolvency regime. - Pollution / emerging-contaminant exclusions: compare exclusion wording against the contaminant category implicated by the deal documents; if the treaty language and underlying-policy language diverge, assess whether the resulting gap creates ambiguity or unintended coverage. - Commutation for long-tail business: commutation language should address valuation methodology, discounting, open losses, defense expenses, allocation of costs, and dispute resolution; omissions can skew the economic fairness of settlement. - Claims reporting and prejudice: compare the reporting threshold and notice deadline against any prejudice standard; a short reporting trigger without a prejudice safeguard can create technical-default exposure. - Use the governing treaty article, statute, regulation, case, or clause text when the source documents identify controlling authority; do not state a legal conclusion without naming the rule supporting it. ## 4. Analytical scaffolds 1. Collateral adequacy - Identify the exposure or ceded amount shown in the documents. - Identify the collateral amount, trust balance, or other security promised. - Compare the two and flag any facial shortfall or mismatch. - Tie the shortfall to the related collateral, trust, or security document and state the practical consequence for reinsurance credit or collectability. 2. Insolvency clause - Identify the payment trigger, recipient, and any condition precedent. - Cross-check the clause against any insolvency, claims-payment, or follow-the-fortunes language elsewhere in the set. - State whether the wording preserves or weakens the intended insolvency protection and what that means for recoverability or credit treatment. 3. Intermediary clause - Identify the governing law and the agency allocation in the intermediary provisions. - Determine whose agent the intermediary is for premium receipt and remittance. - State who bears the loss if the intermediary fails before remitting and the consequence for the cedant or reinsurer. 4. Offset / netting - Identify any setoff language. - Check whether the clause preserves or limits setoff in insolvency. - State the estate-priority or recovery consequence if the carve-out is missing or unclear. 5. Exclusion gap - Identify the exclusion text and the risk description elsewhere in the deal documents. - Compare the wording for mismatch, omission, or ambiguity around emerging contaminants or analogous hazards. - State the resulting coverage, dispute, or drafting risk. 6. Commutation - Identify the commutation mechanism and the scope of claims it would settle. - Check whether methodology, discounting, expense allocation, and dispute resolution are specified. - State whether the clause is commercially workable or likely to invite valuation disputes. 7. Notice / prejudice - Identify the reporting threshold, deadline, and any cure or prejudice language. - Compare the burden to the claims process reflected elsewhere in the documents. - State whether late notice can defeat recovery without a showing of prejudice and the resulting litigation or coverage risk. 8. For each issue, state the governing authority if it is identified in the materials; otherwise cite the controlling doctrine or standard from recognized reinsurance or insurance-insolvency practice. ## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships - Track how one provision modifies another: for example, collateral support may interact with insolvency payment mechanics, while notice provisions may interact with claims cooperation or commutation. - Distinguish pre-loss structural risk from post-loss settlement risk. - Note whether the problem arises at inception, during premium flow, at loss reporting, during insolvency, or at commutation. - If multiple documents speak to the same risk, resolve the hierarchy by contract order, schedule, exhibit, or stated precedence. - When the same issue appears in more than one place, consolidate it into one issue entry and explain the interaction rather than repeating it. ## 6. Output structure conventions - Write an issue memorandum, not a narrative summary. - Define a uniform ordinal severity scale at the top and apply it to every issue entry. - For each issue, include: - Issue heading - Severity - Short description of the drafting or transaction defect - Quantification or scale reference drawn from the source documents - Cross-reference to the other clause, schedule, or document that interacts with it - Downstream consequence for the client - Recommended drafting or review step - Organize issues by topic in a clean professional memo format suitable for counsel review. - Include a concise closing section listing prioritized recommended actions, each with an imperative verb, the responsible role from the materials, and a timing anchor tied to the transaction or regulatory milestone. - Use plain English, but keep legal terminology precise and anchored to the governing authority or contract language identified in the source set.