| name | due-diligence |
| description | Use when conducting lawful corporate, financial, sanctions, regulatory, ownership, or background-check due diligence that needs an auditable finding trail and CARA resolution; use osint-investigation for broader open-source inquiry without a diligence decision. |
| metadata | {"portable":true,"compatible_with":["claude-code","codex"]} |
Due Diligence
Single entry skill for corporate, financial, sanctions, regulatory, and background-check diligence. For broader open-source investigations, load osint-investigation. For licensed-PI workflows, load pi-investigation.
Diligence conclusions are high-stakes judgments. Run critical-reasoning-and-argument before classifying a red flag, resolving an allegation, weighing a pattern, or recommending proceed / conditions / decline / escalate.
Workflow router
| Diligence goal | Load |
|---|
| Run the standard 3-phase DD investigation (planning → collection → analysis → reporting) | references/dd-framework-hetherington.md |
| Architect the final DD report (CARA framework: Context, Allegations, Resolutions, Actions) | references/dd-report-architecture.md |
| Trace beneficial ownership and pierce the corporate veil | references/corporate-veil.md |
| Screen for sanctions, PEPs, watchlists | references/sanctions-pep-screening.md |
| Find the right registry / regulator / public record per jurisdiction | references/jurisdictional-registry-atlas.md |
| Map the regulatory landscape that governs a target | references/regulatory-landscape-mapping.md |
| Run a background check on an individual (employment, education, criminal, civil) | references/background-check-workflow.md |
CRAWL methodology (universal — Hetherington)
Detail in references/dd-framework-hetherington.md. The engine's default DD process:
- C — Collect the publicly available record (registries, sanctions lists, courts, regulators, media).
- R — Review for red flags (sanctions, litigation, regulatory action, adverse media, ownership opacity).
- A — Analyse the patterns across the file (consistency, timeline, motive, capacity).
- W — Weigh the evidence by source tier and triangulation.
- L — Log every finding with source, date, tier, confidence — the audit trail.
CARA report architecture
Detail in references/dd-report-architecture.md. Every formal DD report uses:
- C — Context — who is the subject, what is the engagement, what is the scope.
- A — Allegations / findings — every red flag, named clearly, sourced precisely.
- R — Resolutions — for each allegation: refuted / partially substantiated / substantiated / unresolved, with evidence.
- A — Actions — recommendations: proceed / proceed with conditions / decline / escalate.
Mandatory pairings
source-evaluation — every claim in a DD report rides the 5-tier ladder + Burke/Tudor/Silverman audits.critical-reasoning-and-argument — every allegation, pattern, CARA resolution, and recommendation must pass an argument map, countercase, inference audit, and certainty calibration.web-scraping-foundations — when collection automates registry pulls.report-and-proposal-craft — for the formal report container (front matter, exec summary, three-way discipline).
Reference index
| Reference | Load when |
|---|
references/dd-framework-hetherington.md | Every DD engagement — CRAWL phases, planning, collection, analysis |
references/dd-report-architecture.md | Producing a formal DD report — CARA structure, evidence ladders, recommendation discipline |
references/corporate-veil.md | Beneficial-ownership tracing, shell-company patterns, jurisdictional opacity, UBO discovery |
references/sanctions-pep-screening.md | Sanctions / PEP / watchlist screening — list inventory, fuzzy match discipline, adverse-hit handling |
references/jurisdictional-registry-atlas.md | Per-jurisdiction map of company registry, beneficial-ownership registry, court records, regulator portals (East Africa + global) |
references/regulatory-landscape-mapping.md | Mapping the regulators / standards / licences that govern a target's operations |
references/background-check-workflow.md | Individual background checks — employment, education, professional licence, criminal, civil, identity |
Universal output rule
Every finding in a DD artifact carries:
- Source URL or document ID (with archive snapshot).
- Source tier (1–5).
- Date accessed (UTC).
- Confidence (high / medium / low).
- Triangulation status (single-source / multi-source / contested).
- Evidence-ladder verdict (CARA-Resolved category).
A finding without those fields does not ship.
Universal anti-patterns
- "No adverse hits" without naming the lists checked, the date, and the match algorithm.
- Sanctions / PEP screening on name-only without DOB / nationality / aliases.
- Confusing "no record" with "no registry exists in that jurisdiction."
- Ownership trace stopped at the first nominee or trust without flagging.
- Report that pretends to certainty where the file is contested or thin.
- Mixing legal advice with diligence findings (the engine reports facts; counsel interprets).
- Single-source adverse-media item treated as proven misconduct.
- Reusing a sanctions screen >30 days old without re-running.
- Background-check claims about criminal history without authorisation framework declared.
- Skipping the audit log; CRAWL's L is non-negotiable.
Universal ship gate
Companion skills
Use When
Use for lawful diligence supporting proceed, conditions, decline, or escalation decisions.
Do Not Use When
Use osint-investigation for broad inquiry without a diligence subject and decision; do not use for unlawful surveillance or legal advice.
Inputs
| Input | Source/provider | If absent |
|---|
| Subject identifiers, scope, jurisdictions, cut-off date, authority | Client and engagement record | Stop collection |
| Registry, sanctions, court, regulator, media evidence | Verified primary and secondary sources | Mark no source found or unresolved; do not clear the subject |
Diligence Core Method
- Confirm lawful authority, identifiers, scope, jurisdictions, and decision.
- Collect and log sources under CRAWL with provenance and cut-off dates.
- Resolve identity matches before treating any hit as relevant.
- Analyse each allegation, countercase, and evidence limit; stop on unsafe attribution.
- Issue CARA findings and actions with unresolved gaps visible.
Outputs
| Artefact | Consumer | Acceptance condition |
|---|
| Diligence report and evidence log | Authorised decision-maker | Each finding has subject match, source trail, confidence, resolution, and action |
Diligence Evidence Guidance
The search log, source captures, identity-resolution record, ownership trace, allegation matrix, and CARA report form the diligence evidence.
Diligence Capability Notes
Default to lawful public-record review. Private-data access, contacting subjects, surveillance, paid searches, publication, or adverse action requires explicit authority and applicable legal review.
Degraded Mode
Fallback when registries, matches, or screens are unavailable: keep them unresolved, return a scoped partial result, mark checks not assessed, and never convert absence of evidence into clearance.
Decision Rules
| Choice | Action | Failure/risk avoided |
|---|
| Identity match is ambiguous | Hold and seek discriminators | False positive |
| Evidence is contested or single-source | Mark unresolved and triangulate | Defamatory overstatement |
| Opacity blocks ownership trace | Report the barrier | False beneficial-owner claim |
Quality Standards
Every finding is lawful, attributable, identity-resolved, source-tiered, time-bounded, and proportionate to the evidence.
Diligence Pitfalls
- Treating a name match as identity; resolve identifiers.
- Equating no hit with clearance; state coverage.
- Presenting an allegation as fact; apply CARA.
- Stopping at a nominee; trace or flag opacity.
- Recommending legal conclusions; preserve counsel boundary.
Worked Example
An adverse-media name match without a second identifier remains unresolved and cannot support a decline recommendation by itself.
References
Workflow
- Confirm lawful authority, identifiers, scope, jurisdictions, decision, and cut-off date.
- Collect and log public-record evidence with provenance and coverage.
- Stop when identity is ambiguous, attribution is unsafe, or a required source cannot be assessed.
- Recover by seeking discriminating identifiers, triangulating the claim, or preserving an unresolved finding.
- Resolve findings through CARA and issue proportionate actions with gaps visible.
Evidence Produced
| Evidence | Consumer | Acceptance condition |
|---|
| Search log, identity record, ownership trace, allegation matrix, and CARA report | Authorised decision-maker and reviewer | Every finding is identity-resolved, sourced, time-bounded, confidence-rated, and actionable |
Capability Contract
Minimum capability is read-only access to lawful public records and authorised identifiers. Private-data access, contact, surveillance, spending, publication, or adverse action requires explicit authorisation and legal review.
Anti-Patterns
- Treating a name match as identity. Fix: resolve discriminating identifiers.
- Equating no hit with clearance. Fix: state lists, dates, and coverage.
- Presenting an allegation as fact. Fix: apply CARA resolution.
- Stopping at a nominee. Fix: trace ownership or flag opacity.
- Recommending legal conclusions. Fix: preserve the counsel boundary.
Companion skills
source-evaluation — mandatory pairing.critical-reasoning-and-argument — mandatory for allegation resolution, red-flag weighting, pattern analysis, and action recommendation.osint-investigation — when DD requires broader open-source recon.pi-investigation — when licensed-PI evidence collection is needed.web-scraping-foundations — for registry automation.report-and-proposal-craft — for the report container.
