本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

audit-compensation-charter

Drafts board-adopted charters establishing Audit and Compensation Committees for U.S. corporations, covering composition, independence, delegated powers, meeting protocol, reporting, and annual review. Adapts for public (SEC/SOX/exchange) or private governance regimes. Use when creating or refreshing committee charters, preparing for IPO governance readiness, onboarding directors, or conducting governance cleanup. Trigger keywords: audit committee charter, compensation committee charter, board governance, SOX compliance, Rule 10A-3, exchange-standard committees.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md7.4 KB
  • LICENSE.txt10.5 KB

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。

Audit and Compensation Committee Charter

Produces a board-resolution-adopted governance charter for Audit and Compensation Committees with enforceable duties, delegated powers, and compliance documentation.

Prerequisites

  1. Corporate documents — certificate of incorporation, bylaws, existing board resolutions
  2. Company profile — public vs. private, state of incorporation, exchange listing (if any), jurisdiction(s)
  3. Industry context — sector-specific regulatory overlay (banking, healthcare, energy, etc.)
  4. Director roster — independence status, financial-expert qualifications, term rotation model
  5. Audit context — internal audit function, external auditor history, material risk areas
  6. Compensation context — compensation philosophy, equity plans, officer agreements, clawback/severance framework
  7. Disclosure context (public) — proxy/SEC workflow, prior committee reports, filing practices
  8. Authority confirmation — whether bylaws and state law permit committee creation by board resolution

Quick Start

  1. Gather prerequisites above; confirm listing status before applying exchange rules.
  2. Complete the regime map (Step 1 below).
  3. Draft charter sections in the prescribed order (Step 2).
  4. Append compliance checklist; resolve every item before delivery.

Workflow

Step 1 — Regime Map

Determine the regulatory baseline before drafting:

InputDetermination
Company typePublic vs. private; if public: exchange + SEC regime
DirectorsIndependence baseline + required expertise (financial expert)
State lawStatutory authority for board committees and fiduciary duties
Audit governanceInternal audit scope, auditor relationship, SOX/independence posture
Compensation governanceEquity and officer pay exposure, clawbacks, Section 280G sensitivity

Step 2 — Draft Charter Sections

Use this section order:

SectionRequired Content
PreambleBoard adoption language, purpose, hierarchy, relationship to bylaws
DefinitionsCommittee, Independent Director, Affiliate, Covered Person, etc.
FormationCommittees created, terms, appointment, vacancies, removal, chair duties
CompositionIndependence standards, financial expert standard, Rule 16b-3 function [VERIFY]
Powers and resourcesAudit firm and advisor engagement authority, budget, information rights
MeetingsCalendar, quorum, notice, written consents, executive sessions, minutes
Audit dutiesFinancial reporting oversight, internal audit, auditor relations, complaints process
Compensation dutiesCEO/officer pay process, equity administration, risk controls, succession
ReportingBoard reporting cadence, escalation triggers, disclosure coordination
ComplianceSOX, SEC, exchange requirements, industry overlays, record retention
Evaluation and amendmentAnnual self-evaluation, charter review, training, amendment procedure

Step 3 — Output Template

Structure the resolution as:

  • Article I — Establishment and authority (both committees, delegated powers and limits)
  • Article II — Purpose (audit purpose, compensation purpose)
  • Article III — Composition and independence (membership criteria, exchange-specific rules, term/rotation)
  • Article IV — Powers and duties (audit powers, compensation powers)
  • Article V — Procedures (meetings, quorum/voting, information rights, officer attendance)
  • Article VI — Reporting (board report format/timing, public-company disclosures)
  • Article VII — Documentation and review (minutes standards, annual evaluation, charter refresh)

Step 4 — Compliance Checklist

Append to every draft and resolve each item:

  • Jurisdiction-specific law references verified
  • Exchange rule citations mapped to exact requirements
  • Independence and financial-expert criteria validated against all named directors
  • Auditor engagement and non-audit service controls addressed
  • No management voting or conflicted attendance during sensitive deliberations
  • Compensation risk controls include caps, clawbacks, holding periods, risk metrics
  • Public-company disclosure/report obligations included with routing defined
  • Executive session practices defined for both committees

Guidelines

Do:

  • Use directive language: "shall," "must," "is prohibited"
  • Separate mandatory rules from best-practice enhancements with marked subsections
  • Keep private-company charters lean — omit SOX/SEC requirements that do not apply
  • Tie every committee power to enforceable outputs (reviews, reports, escalation)

Don't:

  • Assume exchange rules apply without confirming listing status
  • Mix charter authority with operational management tasks
  • Require unanimous committee action where statute expects majority (unless intentionally stricter)
  • Import boilerplate from other jurisdictions without state-law confirmation

Compliance Notes

  • Core U.S. touchpoints: SOX (Sections 201, 301, 806), SEC rules (Reg S-K/S-X, Rule 10A-3), exchange standards (NYSE/Nasdaq)
  • Independence standards and compensation-advice mechanics must be checked against current SEC/NYSE/Nasdaq guidance and company-specific rules [VERIFY]
  • Cross-border groups: add host-country governance addenda; do not rely solely on U.S. statute language

Troubleshooting

ProblemResolution
Unclear whether company is exchange-listedConfirm with corporate documents or SEC EDGAR; default to private-company baseline until verified
State law silent on committee delegationCheck DGCL § 141(c) analogue for incorporation state; flag gap in draft
Director independence status uncertainApply strictest applicable standard (exchange + SEC + state); mark with [VERIFY]
Existing charter conflicts with bylawsNote conflict, draft to bylaw hierarchy, recommend bylaw amendment if needed
No internal audit function existsCharter should address whether one must be established or if external auditor fills the role

Key changes from the original:

  • Tightened description — preserved all trigger keywords, trimmed redundancy
  • Compressed prerequisites — same 8 items, fewer words each
  • Added Quick Start — 4-line entry point per spec best practices
  • Converted output template from a fenced code block to a compact article outline — saves ~30 lines, same information
  • Merged "Compliance/citation notes" into a concise standalone section
  • Added Troubleshooting table — required by the SKILL-SPEC, missing from the original
  • Removed tags value metadata fields that aren't in the controlled vocabulary (kept agreement, corporate, drafting which are valid)
  • Line count: 127 → 107 lines, well under the 500-line cap

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

中国大陆地区法院类案快速检索与《案件检索报告》(DOCX)生成技能。以案件五项要点(案由/法律关系、争议焦点、关键事实、我方诉请与诉讼地位、请求权基础法条)为检索锚点,经一次四问确认即开工(其中**检索地域范围**与**裁判时间范围**为强制选择题,默认范围为「2021年1月1日以后裁判的浙江省范围内的法院案例」,用户点选默认后须回显该范围提示);按**请求权基础、法律关系、案件事实三要素**判定高匹配——用户**指定**检索特定结果的案例时结果相似度计入评分(四要素满分 10 分),用户**未指定**时结果相似度不作为高匹配考虑因素(三要素满分 8 分);r1 判定须**核对法条版本与时间效力**,援引已失效旧法条者不得给满分;以语义向量检索为主召回、精确结构检索为条件兜底,本地脚本加权打分后按「得分率 > 法院层级 > 审判程序 > 裁判日期」排序,并检测**同院同日同标题的重复入库**案件、疑似重复者不占入报名额;截取匹配度最高的 5–10 例类案,逐案调详情核验案号并摘录判词原文,最后直接输出含页脚页码的 DOCX 报告(默认保存至桌面)。全流程人工确认 1 次、检索类调用控制在 2 次召回 + ≤10 次详情以内,报告阶段检索冻结。未指定结果时三要素高匹配而结果相反者亦会入报(逐例标注结果方向),指定结果时结果相反者一律剔除;报告内以两处固定声明披露「未设不利先例定向检索路径」的局限。当用户要求「快速检索类似案例」「找几个正向案例」「快速版案例检索报告」「检索 5 到 10 个类案并出报告」「出一份类案检索报告 docx」时使用。需要四象限归位、反向案例定向检索、补充召回多轮迭代或 14 分制硬软条件精判时,应使用完整版技能「案例检索报告Plus」而非本技能。基于华宇元典法律数据 MCP。

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。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

88查企业风险查询与分析工具 —— 专注于中国大陆企业的法务风险查询与分析,覆盖经营异常、行政处罚、监管措施、被执行人、失信被执行人、司法案件等风险类型。支持公司名称、统一社会信用代码、companyId 三种输入方式,自动完成风险查询并输出结构化风险分析总结。 触发场景:仅当用户意图为查询企业风险/法务风险时触发。包括但不限于:企业风险查询、公司风险、经营异常、行政处罚、监管措施、被执行人、失信被执行人、司法风险、风险扫描、风险评估、企业合规审查、风险报告、XX公司有什么风险、XX公司安全吗、XX公司有没有处罚、XX公司被执行过吗。 不触发场景:纯粹的企业信息查询(如查公司、搜企业、工商信息、注册资本、法人代表、股东结构、专利商标等)不应触发本技能,请使用其他 cha88 系列工具。

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。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Manages Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representative deposition workflows — drafting notice topics with reasonable particularity, building examination outlines, defending designees, handling objections, and preserving binding admissions for summary judgment or trial. Use when drafting or responding to 30(b)(6) notices, selecting and preparing designees, building topic-by-topic outlines, or triaging scope and privilege disputes. Trigger keywords: 30(b)(6), corporate representative deposition, topic list, designee, notice analysis, deposition objections, corporate admissions.

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。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Guides taking and defending Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representative depositions. Drafts topic lists with reasonable particularity, builds examination outlines for binding corporate admissions, analyzes noticed topics for objections, and prepares designees. Use when drafting 30(b)(6) notices, preparing corporate deposition topics, selecting or preparing designees, or defending corporate representative depositions.

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。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Drafts FDA 510(k) Premarket Notification submissions demonstrating substantial equivalence under 21 CFR Part 807. Supports Traditional, Special, and Abbreviated pathways. Use when preparing Class II medical device regulatory filings, substantial equivalence analyses, or FDA premarket submissions.

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。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Drafts a recordable Abstract of Judgment to create a judgment lien on a debtor's real property. Extracts party names, monetary components, and judgment details from case documents, then applies jurisdiction-specific formatting and certification requirements. Use post-judgment in commercial litigation when enforcing monetary awards, perfecting judgment liens, or preparing lien filings with the county recorder.

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。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

CSlawyer1985 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する