skills/deal-process-tracker/references/output-templates.md

# Output Templates

Use these templates as default output shapes. Adapt length to the user's requested audience and format.

## Table of Contents

- [Template A: MD morning process summary](#template-a-md-morning-process-summary)
- [Template B: Weekly client update](#template-b-weekly-client-update)
- [Template C: Board / special committee update](#template-c-board--special-committee-update)
- [Template D: Buyer-level assessment](#template-d-buyer-level-assessment)
- [Template E: Open-issue escalation](#template-e-open-issue-escalation)
- [Template F: Bid comparison / round decision](#template-f-bid-comparison--round-decision)
- [Template G: Tracker build/update summary](#template-g-tracker-buildupdate-summary)
- [Template H: Public-process reconstruction workbook](#template-h-public-process-reconstruction-workbook)
- [Tone guidance](#tone-guidance)

## Template A: MD morning process summary

```text
# [Deal Name] - MD Process Update

## Process status
- overall status: [green / yellow / orange / red]
- current phase: [phase]
- bottom line: [1-2 sentence senior readout]

## What changed since last update
1. [buyer / issue / deadline update with source/confidence if needed]
2. [buyer / issue / deadline update]
3. [buyer / issue / deadline update]

## Buyer momentum
| bucket | buyers | MD read |
|---|---|---|
| hot |  |  |
| warm |  |  |
| cooling / at risk |  |  |
| passed / likely no-bid |  |  |

## Critical deadlines
| date/time | milestone | owner | risk |
|---|---|---|---|

## MD interventions needed
1. [specific person] to [specific action] by [timing] because [reason].
2. [specific person] to [specific action] by [timing] because [reason].

## Client decisions required
1. [decision]
2. [decision]

## Key risks and mitigants
| risk | impact | owner | mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|

## Recommended next 24-48 hours
[concise recommendation]
```

## Template B: Weekly client update

Use polished, controlled language. Avoid internal speculation unless clearly framed.

```text
# [Deal Name] - Weekly Process Update

## Executive summary
[3-5 sentence client-ready summary of progress, buyer engagement, near-term priorities, and key decisions.]

## Buyer engagement snapshot
- buyers in universe: [#]
- buyers contacted: [#]
- NDAs executed: [#]
- buyers with CIM/data-room access: [#]
- buyers active in diligence: [#]
- management meetings completed/scheduled: [#]
- IOIs/LOIs/final bids received or expected: [#]

## Key developments
1. [development]
2. [development]
3. [development]

## Upcoming milestones
| date | milestone | preparation needed |
|---|---|---|

## Client inputs needed
| item | why it matters | due date |
|---|---|---|

## Watch items
| issue | current view | mitigation |
|---|---|---|

## Banker recommendation
[decision-oriented recommendation]
```

## Template C: Board / special committee update

Use for public-company, sponsor board, or formal governance contexts.

```text
# [Deal Name] - Board Process Update

## Process overview
- transaction type:
- current stage:
- advisors/counsel:
- key dates:

## Process chronology
| date | event | notes |
|---|---|---|

## Buyer universe and outreach
| buyer category | total | contacted | under NDA | active | submitted bid | passed |
|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|

## Key buyer developments
[concise buyer category summary; avoid unnecessary internal notes]

## Bid / indication summary
| buyer | value / range | structure | key conditions | banker view |
|---|---:|---|---|---|

## Governance / process considerations
- information access consistency:
- confidentiality / MNPI controls:
- regulatory considerations:
- upcoming board decisions:

## Recommendation
[clear recommendation and decision requested]
```

## Template D: Buyer-level assessment

```text
## Buyer: [Name]

| field | view |
|---|---|
| buyer type | [strategic / sponsor / etc.] |
| current stage | [stage] |
| current status | [status] |
| engagement level | [high / medium / low] |
| buyer temperature | [hot / warm / cooling / cold] |
| probability of bid | [high / medium / low / unknown] |
| probability of close | [high / medium / low / unknown] |
| key source(s) | [sources] |
| confidence | [confirmed / inferred / etc.] |

### Key signals
- [signal]
- [signal]

### Open issues
| issue | owner | due | risk |
|---|---|---|---|

### Next action
[specific action, owner, due date]

### MD view
[senior judgment on credibility, likely bid behavior, and recommended handling]
```

## Template E: Open-issue escalation

```text
## Escalation: [Issue]

| field | view |
|---|---|
| buyer / workstream | [buyer or workstream] |
| impact | [value / certainty / timing / legal / confidentiality] |
| severity | [low / medium / high / critical] |
| owner | [owner] |
| due date | [date] |
| status | [status] |
| source / confidence | [source and confidence] |

### Why it matters
[process impact]

### Recommended action
[concrete action]

### Escalation path
[who should intervene and when]
```

## Template F: Bid comparison / round decision

```text
# Bid Comparison and Process Recommendation

## Executive conclusion
[senior view on best risk-adjusted path]

## Bid comparison
| buyer | headline value | structure | financing certainty | conditionality | timing | regulatory risk | risk-adjusted view | recommendation |
|---|---:|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

## Buyer-by-buyer notes
### [Buyer]
- positives:
- concerns:
- open diligence:
- negotiation leverage:
- recommended handling:

## Process strategy
- advance:
- hold as backup:
- drop / do not advance:
- targeted feedback:
- deadline or access changes:

## Key risks before next round / exclusivity
1. [risk and mitigation]
2. [risk and mitigation]

## Recommendation
[clear next step]
```

## Template G: Tracker build/update summary

```text
# Deal Process Tracker Update

## Summary
- mode: [new build / partial-context structuring / existing-tracker update]
- sources used: [sources]
- confidence: [overall confidence]
- major assumptions: [assumptions]

## What was created or updated
| module | update |
|---|---|

## Material changes
| item | prior | new | source | review needed |
|---|---|---|---|---|

## Open gaps
| gap | why it matters | recommended next step |
|---|---|---|

## Immediate next actions
1. [action]
2. [action]
3. [action]
```

## Template H: Public-process reconstruction workbook

Use for proxy statements, merger filings, and other disclosure-backed retrospective sale-process reviews. Keep the workbook as the human deliverable; do not manufacture a live process tracker or an automatic HTML companion.

First tab: `Dashboard`

- disclosed process scope and as-of filing date;
- bottom-line read on bidder progression and where competitive tension strengthened or weakened;
- headline metrics such as signed consideration, contacted parties, NDA/VDR participants, submitted proposals, and key deadline;
- decision and access points;
- compact funnel or chronology visual where the disclosed data supports one;
- limitations and counsel-review items.

Supporting tabs as needed:

| tab | purpose |
|---|---|
| `Buyer_Master` | disclosed participants, anonymized labels, phase, outcome and confidence |
| `Timeline` | filing-supported event chronology and separate implication column |
| `NDA_Access` | access gates, information restrictions and solicitation posture |
| `Bid_Grid` | indication / bid progression, price, terms and decision read |
| `Calendar` | go-shop expiry, vote, termination or other formal gates |
| `Tension_Log` | fact pattern, banker inference and evidence label |
| `Issues_Actions` | retrospective review flags and counsel-review questions, not invented live assignments |
| `Sources` | filing citation register with section or page pinpoint |
| `Definitions` | scope, terms and limitations |

For public disclosure work, use `reported fact`, `inference`, and `counsel review` visibly. Do not state that a bidder received unequal or improper treatment, or that a restriction was legally consequential, unless the source establishes it or counsel has provided the conclusion.

## Tone guidance

Internal MD updates: direct, judgment-heavy, and specific.

Client updates: polished, factual, and controlled.

Board/special committee updates: formal, chronology-aware, and process-fairness sensitive.

Working team trackers: detailed, owner/date/status driven.

Avoid generic language such as "monitor closely" unless followed by a specific owner, date, trigger, and action.