Skip to content
Back to skills

Compare Borrower Covenant Compliance Analysis

ASecurity

Independently recalculates covenant compliance from source documents, flags deviations from the borrower’s compliance certificate, and produces a default-oriented analysis with next-step triage.

  • 57 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added September 11, 2026
businessgodocumentation

Works with

  • cli

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 11, 2026

npx -y skills add sunyifeisb-art/legalwork --skill compare-borrower-covenant-compliance-analysis --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Compare Borrower Covenant Compliance Analysis?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Compare Borrower Covenant Compliance Analysis
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/sunyifeisb-art-compare-borrower-covenant-compliance-analysis/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/sunyifeisb-art-compare-borrower-covenant-compliance-analysis)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: compare-borrower-covenant-compliance-analysis
task_id: banking-finance/compare-borrower-covenant-compliance-analysis
description: Independently recalculates covenant compliance from source documents, flags deviations from the borrower’s compliance certificate, and produces a default-oriented analysis with next-step triage.
activates_for: [planner, solver, checker]
---

# Skill: Covenant Deviation Report — Independent Recalculation

## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting

- Accepting the borrower’s reported financial inputs without independently checking the relevant addbacks, exclusions, and adjustments against the governing credit documents
- Omitting non-recurring or extraordinary gains or other required exclusions from the EBITDA analysis, resulting in overstated EBITDA
- Computing available revolving capacity without deducting outstanding letters of credit or other required utilization items
- Identifying deviations without classifying them by type, severity, and cure availability, which is necessary for prioritized response
- Treating the borrower’s compliance certificate as dispositive instead of reconciling it line-by-line to the credit agreement, financial statements, and any defined terms that change the math

## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply

- Covenant analysis is controlled by the credit agreement’s defined terms, calculation mechanics, and any exhibit or schedule that modifies the base definitions; use the agreement’s definitions, not accounting shorthand, when they differ
- EBITDA-based covenants often require independent treatment of addbacks, exclusions, extraordinary items, non-recurring charges, realized cost savings, gains on dispositions, and other adjustments; each adjustment must be tested against the contract text
- Leverage, interest coverage, and fixed-charge-style tests must be recomputed from corrected inputs rather than borrower-reported outputs, and each threshold must be compared to the governing covenant level
- Revolving availability must be tested from the commitment side and the utilization side together, including all mandatory deductions that reduce availability under the agreement
- Default analysis must separate a mathematical covenant breach from any separate notice, grace period, or cure concept in the credit documents; a deviation is not fully analyzed until its enforcement consequence is identified
- If the source documents supply authority for a calculation rule, quote or cite that rule in substance rather than paraphrasing it loosely; if multiple provisions interact, cite each one that affects the result

## 4. Analytical scaffolds

1. Inventory the governing inputs: identify every covenant, definition, period, and financial statement used in the certificate; if multiple periods or tests are present, enumerate them first and analyze each separately
2. Rebuild the denominator and numerator: start from the underlying financial statements, then apply each contractual adjustment in the order the agreement requires
3. Test each addback or exclusion: verify qualification, timing, caps, realization limits, and any category-specific restrictions before including it
4. Recompute each covenant independently: calculate the corrected ratio, amount, or headroom and compare it to the borrower-reported figure and the stated threshold
5. Reconcile line items to source support: trace each disputed or unusual line item back to the financials, certificate, and agreement-defined mechanics
6. Analyze availability and utilization: recompute revolving availability, deduct all required utilization items, and check whether the borrower’s certificate omitted any reduction
7. Classify the deviation: identify whether the issue is a miscalculation, definition mismatch, unsupported addback, threshold breach, or separate default trigger
8. Tie the issue to consequences: state whether the issue creates a technical breach, an event of default risk, a reporting defect, or a remedy/cure question, and explain the practical impact
9. Prioritize next steps: separate immediate notice and reservation actions from follow-up diligence and corrective documentation

## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships

- Analyze by covenant first, then by reporting period; do not blend different tests or periods into one narrative if the agreement measures them separately
- If the certificate presents multiple borrower entities, guarantors, or facilities, map each item to the covenant or definition that governs it before comparing figures
- When a ratio depends on rolling-period data, verify the correct measurement window, the inclusion date of each adjustment, and any trailing- or forward-looking component before concluding on compliance
- Where the agreement contains notice, grace, or cure mechanics, place the accounting result in temporal context: breach date, notice deadline, and any remediation window
- If one calculation feeds another, show the dependency chain so the reader can see which error propagates through the remaining covenants

## 6. Output structure conventions

- Write the report as an issue-by-issue deviation analysis, not as a narrative summary alone
- Begin with a concise table or matrix showing, for each covenant: borrower-reported result, independently recalculated result, governing threshold, and compliance status
- For each issue entry, include:
  - the covenant or calculation at issue
  - the borrower’s stated figure
  - the independently recalculated figure
  - the source of the discrepancy
  - the controlling agreement language or defined term
  - the quantified impact on headroom, compliance, or availability
  - the downstream consequence for default or remedy analysis
  - an explicit severity label using a uniform ordinal scale defined once at the top
- Each issue must close with: quantified impact, cross-reference to the interacting provision or document, and the consequence for the client
- If any item is uncertain, flag the uncertainty and specify what document or calculation would resolve it
- End with a Recommended Actions section that gives imperative next steps, assigns the responsible role, and includes a timing anchor tied to the reporting, notice, or remedy context
- Keep the tone forensic and non-advocacy; separate computation from legal consequence

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…