Workpaper Standards

This skill defines the formatting, evidence, and review conventions that every workpaper-producing skill in this bundle inherits. Other skills in this bundle assume these conventions and do not re-state them — read this before acting on any workpaper request.

Workpaper layout

Every workbook produced by a workflow skill in this bundle has the same tab structure:

1. Cover — header block (preparer, period, deliverable type, status), table of contents, sign-off lines.
2. Source — raw inputs loaded as-is. One tab per source file if multiple. Never edit values in this tab.
3. Calc — derived values. Cells contain formulas referencing Source ranges. One tab per logical calculation.
4. Summary — the answer. References Calc cells. This is what a reviewer reads first.
5. Evidence — the evidence table (see references/evidence-table-template.md). Required on every workpaper. No exceptions.
6. Review_Notes — preparer questions, reviewer comments, items flagged for follow-up.

If the workpaper is being delivered as something other than a workbook (CSV, PDF, narrative), the evidence table still ships alongside it.

Color and format conventions

• Blue font — manual input (preparer-entered)
• Black font — formula computing from this workbook
• Green font — link to another workbook or external source
• Red font — flagged for review (paired with a Review_Notes entry)
• Bold + double underline — final totals
• Single underline — subtotals
• Negative numbers in parentheses, not minus signs
• Dates as YYYY-MM-DD in cells; display format may vary
• Currency: USD unless the workpaper header states otherwise
• Account numbers always rendered as text to preserve leading zeros

The evidence table is non-negotiable

Every numerical output in a workpaper must appear in the evidence table with its source. If a number is calculated rather than sourced, the Calculation column must show the formula and its inputs. Never produce a workpaper without an evidence table. The format is defined in references/evidence-table-template.md.

This is the single rule that makes outputs reviewable instead of impressive. A reviewer should be able to spot-check any number on the Summary tab and trace it back to a source in under 30 seconds.

Journal entry format

All JEs use the format in references/je-template.md. Mechanical rules:

• Each entry must have at least one debit and one credit.
• Debits must equal credits per entry.
• Memos describe why, not just what — "Record May rent" is too thin; "Record May rent per lease #2024-114, signed 2024-01-15, $8,500/mo through 2027-01" is right.
• Every JE references support (file path, page, or workpaper tab) in the Support Reference column.

Review flag vocabulary

Use the controlled flags from references/review-flags.md. Don't invent new flags. The four canonical states for any deliverable item are:

• READYTOPOST / READYFORREVIEW — meets all criteria
• NEEDS_CLARIFICATION — answerable with one round of preparer questions
• MANUALREVIEWREQUIRED — requires judgment beyond what the skill can confidently apply
• REJECT — fails a hard rule (out of period, unbalanced, missing required field, etc.)

When to say "I don't know"

If inputs are insufficient for a step, output what's missing instead of filling the gap with assumptions. Acceptable forms:

• "Service period not present on invoice — flagged for preparer."
• "Prior-period variance commentary references invoice INV-3398, which is not in the support folder — cannot verify continuity."
• "Bank statement balance does not reconcile to GL after all identified adjustments; unexplained difference of $X."

A workpaper that surfaces gaps is a better workpaper than one that hides them.