# Corporate Cold-Start Interview > Use when a corporate practice group is adopting AgentCounsel and needs to configure its practice profile by answering a structured interview covering jurisdictions, client context, escalation thresholds, output preferences, source documents, standard positions, review requirements, and prohibited assumptions. - Skill: `zgbrenner/corporate-cold-start-interview` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add zgbrenner/corporate-cold-start-interview` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/zgbrenner/corporate-cold-start-interview/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: zgbrenner (https://skillmd.com/u/zgbrenner) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/zgbrenner/corporate-cold-start-interview --- # Corporate Cold-Start Interview ## Purpose Conduct a structured, staged interview with a corporate practice group — led by a supervising attorney or authorized designee — to gather the information required to populate `practice-profiles/corporate.md`. The skill walks through all eight profile fields in sequence, records every answer, and assembles a filled draft of the profile for the practice group's review and approval. It produces draft legal work product for attorney review — not legal advice and not a final configuration. ## Use When - A team is adopting AgentCounsel and needs to configure `practice-profiles/corporate.md` for the first time. - A corporate practice group is being onboarded to the library and no current profile exists. - The library is being stood up for the first time and the corporate area is included in scope. - A practice group wishes to revisit or rebuild its profile from scratch rather than make incremental updates. ## Required Inputs - A knowledgeable person from the corporate practice group — a supervising attorney or an authorized designee — who can answer questions about the group's entity portfolio, approval and signing matrices, board and committee processes, and review requirements. - Any existing entity charts, approval authority matrices, board resolution templates, transaction checklists, or diligence playbooks the group already uses, so they can be referenced or cited in the profile. ## Do Not Use When - The group is actively working a live corporate transaction or governance matter. This skill configures the library; it does not support an open matter. - A `practice-profiles/corporate.md` already exists and is current. In that case this is a refresh, not a cold start — though the skill may still be used to rebuild the profile deliberately. - No authorized person is available to answer. Do not complete the interview with guessed or inferred answers; record all gaps as `[CONFIRM: ...]` placeholders. - The purpose is to prepare board materials, diligence reports, or transaction documents for a specific matter (use the appropriate matter-level skill for that task). ## Legal Safety Rules - Produce draft legal work product for attorney review. This is not legal advice. - Never guess or infer an answer to any interview question. If the interviewee cannot answer a question, record `[CONFIRM: answer required from practice group]` and move on. - The filled profile is a draft. It must be reviewed and explicitly approved by the supervising attorney or practice group before it governs any AgentCounsel work product. - Do not invent entity lists, approval thresholds, signing authorities, board processes, or diligence standards. Record only what the interviewee provides. - Do not include client-specific facts, client names, matter identifiers, specific transaction details, or privileged details in the profile. The profile is a reusable group-level configuration, not a matter record. - Do not state or imply that any threshold, process, or rule in the profile satisfies a statutory or regulatory requirement in any jurisdiction. Jurisdiction-specific legal obligations — including corporate formality requirements — are for the attorney to verify `[verify jurisdiction]`. - Flag every item the interviewee defers or leaves open with a visible `[CONFIRM: ...]` placeholder so the reviewer can see exactly what is unresolved. ## Workflow **Stage 1 — Jurisdictions** Ask the interviewee: - In which countries, states, or provinces does the group primarily advise on corporate and entity matters — including formation, maintenance, and transactions? - Does the group advise on entities organized in jurisdictions different from where they operate, and if so, what are the most common combinations? - Are there jurisdictions where the group's clients face sector-specific corporate requirements — for example, regulated industries, foreign investment restrictions, or public company obligations `[verify jurisdiction]`? - Are there jurisdictions that the group treats as out of scope, requiring escalation or specialist outside counsel? - Does the group maintain jurisdiction-specific entity guides, registered-agent arrangements, or corporate formalities checklists? If so, what are they called and where are they stored? Record answers. Mark any unanswered item `[CONFIRM: jurisdiction not yet specified]`. **Stage 2 — Client and Team Context** Ask the interviewee: - Who are the primary clients of the corporate group — internal business units managing a parent-subsidiary structure, external corporate clients, portfolio companies, or a mix? - What is the approximate scope of the entity portfolio the group supports — how many entities across how many jurisdictions? - What types of corporate matters does the group handle most frequently — entity formation and maintenance, equity transactions, M&A, financings, governance and board support, or other types? - Are there entity types or transaction categories that require special handling, coordination with other practice groups, or involvement of tax, regulatory, or specialist counsel? - Does the group use an entity-management system or a company-secretary platform, and if so, what is it? Record answers. Mark any unanswered item `[CONFIRM: client/team context not yet specified]`. **Stage 3 — Escalation Thresholds** Ask the interviewee: - What transaction-value or equity-dilution threshold triggers mandatory escalation to senior corporate counsel, general counsel, or the board? - Are there transaction types — such as a change of control, a merger or acquisition above a specified size, an issuance of equity above a specified percentage, or a disposition of a material asset — that always require escalation regardless of headline value? - Are there counterparty categories — such as competitors, regulated entities, strategic investors, or government bodies — that trigger mandatory escalation? - What is the group's threshold for involving outside counsel or specialist advisers on a transaction? - Who is the designated escalation contact for matters that exceed these thresholds, and what is the expected response time? - Does the group maintain a written escalation matrix or transaction-approval policy? If so, what is it called and where is it stored? Record answers. Mark any unanswered item `[CONFIRM: escalation threshold not yet specified]`. **Stage 4 — Preferred Output Style** Ask the interviewee: - Should corporate work product be delivered as a narrative memo, a structured checklist, a diligence summary table, a transaction timeline, or another format? - What level of detail does the practice group expect — executive summary only, full issue-by-issue analysis, or both? - Are there house style rules for how risk levels, open items, or action steps should be labeled or formatted? - Should drafts include a separate assumptions section and a separate verification-items section, or are those integrated into the body? - Are there particular deliverable types — board resolutions, officer certificates, diligence reports, capitalization-table summaries — for which the group has mandatory format requirements? Record answers. Mark any unanswered item `[CONFIRM: output style preference not yet specified]`. **Stage 5 — Source-of-Truth Documents** Ask the interviewee: - What documents constitute the group's authoritative source of truth for corporate standards and processes — for example, an entity chart, an approval authority matrix, a board-resolution template library, a transaction checklist, or a diligence playbook? - Where are those documents stored, and how should an agent reference them in work product? - Are any of those documents currently under revision or not yet finalized? If so, which version governs until a new one is approved? - Is there a corporate or entity-management system that serves as the record of entity status and organizational documents? - Is there a formal process for updating or approving changes to the source documents? Record answers and document names. Mark any unanswered item `[CONFIRM: source document not yet identified]`. **Stage 6 — Standard Positions and Playbooks** Ask the interviewee: - What is the group's approval and signing authority matrix — who may bind the organization at each transaction-value tier, and does a written delegation of authority document govern this? - What is the group's standard board and committee process — notice requirements, quorum conventions, consent-in-lieu-of-meeting conventions, and record-keeping approach? - What is the group's standard diligence threshold and scope for an acquisition or investment — at what deal size does full diligence apply vs. a streamlined scope, and what areas are always covered? - What is the group's default position on representations and warranties — including materiality qualifiers, knowledge qualifiers, and survival periods — in acquisition agreements? - Does the group have standard indemnification positions for corporate transactions — including caps, baskets, and carve-outs — and are those positions documented? - Does the group maintain a formal playbook document that captures these positions? If so, what is it called and where is it stored? Record answers. Mark any unanswered item `[CONFIRM: standard position not yet specified]`. **Stage 7 — Attorney Review Requirements** Ask the interviewee: - At what stage of a corporate matter does attorney review of work product become mandatory — initial intake, before any board presentation, before any external communication, before signing, or at other defined stages? - Are there work-product types for which attorney review is always required regardless of matter stage — for example, board resolutions, officer certificates, opinion letters, or transaction closing checklists? - What is the designated reviewer's role — handling attorney, supervising attorney, general counsel, or outside counsel? - What is the expected turnaround time for attorney review of standard corporate work product, and how are time-sensitive closings or board deadlines handled? - Is there a formal sign-off step — for example, a required approval notation, a legal sign-off on a closing certificate, or a logged confirmation — before work product is relied upon or a transaction closes? Record answers. Mark any unanswered item `[CONFIRM: review requirement not yet specified]`. **Stage 8 — Prohibited Assumptions** Ask the interviewee: - Are there facts, statuses, or authorizations that agents must never assume without explicit confirmation — for example, that an entity is in good standing, that a prior board approval is still current, that a signing authority matrix has not changed, or that an organizational document is the most recent version? - Are there corporate-specific risks — such as unauthorized commitments, defective corporate action, or missing consents — where an agent must stop and escalate rather than reason through independently? - Are there transaction types or entity categories where agents must never proceed beyond intake without direct attorney involvement? - Are there prior incidents, compliance failures, or lessons learned that should be encoded as explicit prohibitions for agents working on corporate matters? Record answers. Mark any unanswered item `[CONFIRM: prohibited assumption not yet specified]`. **Stage 9 — Assemble the Draft Profile** Compile all answers into a filled draft of `practice-profiles/corporate.md`, populating each of the eight profile sections. For every item that was not answered, insert a visible `[CONFIRM: ...]` placeholder with enough context for the reviewer to understand what needs to be supplied. Append a list of all open placeholders so the reviewing attorney can see at a glance what remains unresolved. ## Output Format Deliver: 1. **Filled draft of `practice-profiles/corporate.md`** — all eight sections populated with answers from the interview. Every unanswered item is a visible `[CONFIRM: ...]` placeholder. 2. **Open-items list** — an explicit enumeration of every placeholder inserted, with the stage and question it corresponds to, so the reviewing attorney can resolve them efficiently. Label the entire output: **Draft legal work product for attorney review. Not legal advice. This profile draft must be reviewed and approved by the supervising attorney or practice group before it is relied upon.** ## Attorney Verification Checklist - [ ] All eight profile sections have been reviewed by a supervising attorney or authorized practice-group representative. - [ ] Jurisdictions listed are accurate and complete for the group's current entity portfolio and transaction practice. - [ ] The entity portfolio scope is accurate; any entities omitted from the profile have been deliberately excluded and that exclusion is documented. - [ ] Approval and signing authority matrix is consistent with the organization's current delegation of authority documents and applicable corporate formality requirements `[verify jurisdiction]`. - [ ] Board and committee process conventions are consistent with the organization's governing documents and applicable legal requirements `[verify jurisdiction]`. - [ ] Diligence thresholds and scope reflect the group's current approved standards, not outdated ones. - [ ] Standard transaction positions — representations, warranties, indemnification — reflect current, approved group positions. - [ ] Source-of-truth documents listed are finalized and in effect; any documents under revision are flagged. - [ ] Attorney review requirements match the group's current supervision model and any applicable professional-conduct rules `[verify jurisdiction]`. - [ ] Prohibited assumptions are accurate and do not inadvertently exclude items that should be permitted. - [ ] No client-specific facts, matter identifiers, transaction details, or privileged information appear in the profile. - [ ] All `[CONFIRM: ...]` placeholders have been resolved or explicitly accepted as pending. - [ ] The approved profile has been saved to `practice-profiles/corporate.md` and its effective date recorded. - [ ] A process for periodic profile review and update — particularly following organizational changes or authority-matrix revisions — has been identified.