Required inputs
- Data Room Documents
- Deal ID
- Deal Packages
- Diligence Dimensions
- Diligence Evidence
- Missing Data Gaps
- Red Team Fact Bundle
- Source Documents
Can we run a reproducible acquisition-diligence control tower from reviewed deal package inputs, evidence coverage, missing-data gaps, data-room inventory, and red-team fact bundle. Compose existing CRUX tools only; preserve each upstream abstention or blocker, then return a non-persisted control-tower result for host-side review. Circulation requires a future custody-bound persistence path plus the metadata-required investment-committee approval? Trigger phrases: acquisition diligence control tower, acquisition diligence control tower. Produces: cited acquisition diligence control tower workpaper and decision flags.
Registry maturity does not prove response or artifact quality. No qualifying same-model skill-on versus no-skill improvement has been verified.
Policy visibility is not execution proof. Authentication is checked before a run.
The skill entry point is callable. Any downstream write or external action is checked separately.
The skill entry point is callable. Any downstream write or external action is checked separately.
Review review applies before a consequential external or binding action. Analysis and working artifacts remain available before that review.
No specific dependent input gap is declared.
Authentication and the required buyer profile are checked before any work runs.