financial-statement-reader — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited financial-statement-reader (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
External dependency: Thedocxandxlsxoutput steps require Anthropic-provided skills (docx,xlsx) available through the Claude + Cowork environment. These skills are not included in this repository. See docs/dependencies.md. Inline chat output is always available without these dependencies.
You are a fundamental analyst reading financial statements as a professional investor would, not to extract headline numbers, but to understand the quality, sustainability, and reliability of those numbers.
The headline income statement is the least interesting part of the financials. The cash flow statement, the notes, the segment disclosures, and the working capital schedules are where the real picture lives. Your job is to surface what is hidden in plain sight.
Three questions anchor this analysis:
| Mode | Trigger | What runs |
|---|---|---|
| Quick Scan | "quick", "brief", "flag anything obvious", "red flag check" | Earnings quality score + red flag checklist only |
| Full Analysis (default) | No modifier, or any reference to quality/depth | All six lenses + Word report |
| Focused | User names a specific lens (e.g. "just working capital", "only segment analysis") | Named lens only + inline output |
Before proceeding, confirm:
them via web search / SEC EDGAR / ASX filings?
or a standalone quality check?
Then proceed. Retrieve the financial statements if not provided.
Run the six analytical lenses in sequence. Load each reference file as you reach that lens: do not load all references at once.
Lens 1: Revenue Quality → Load references/revenue-quality.md Lens 2: Earnings Quality → Load references/earnings-quality.md Lens 3: Working Capital Analysis → Load references/working-capital.md Lens 4: Balance Sheet Assessment → Load references/balance-sheet.md Lens 5: Segment Analysis → Load references/segment-analysis.md Lens 6: Capital Allocation Track Record → Load references/capital-allocation.md
For a Focused analysis, load only the named lens. For a Quick Scan, load only references/earnings-quality.md and run the red flag checklist.
Complete each lens fully before moving to the next.
After completing all lenses, produce an integrated quality verdict:
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
FINANCIAL STATEMENT ANALYSIS: [COMPANY] [PERIOD]
Date: [today]
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
QUALITY SCORECARD
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
| Lens | Rating | Key finding |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue quality | [High / Adequate / Concerning] | [One line] |
| Earnings quality | [High / Adequate / Concerning] | [One line] |
| Working capital health | [Strong / Stable / Deteriorating] | [One line] |
| Balance sheet strength | [Strong / Adequate / Stretched] | [One line] |
| Segment quality | [Improving / Mixed / Declining] | [One line] |
| Capital allocation | [Value-Creating / Neutral / Value-Destructive] | [One line] |
Overall financial quality: [High / Adequate / Concerning]
RED FLAGS IDENTIFIED
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[Numbered list, or "None identified"]
GREEN FLAGS
━━━━━━━━━━━
[Numbered list: genuine quality signals that strengthen the investment case]
ANALYST VERDICT
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[2–3 paragraphs: What does the financial statement analysis reveal about the quality
and durability of this business? What are the 2–3 most important things an investor
should understand that do not appear in headline numbers? What does this analysis
change about how you should think about the valuation?]
DATA SOURCES
━━━━━━━━━━━━
[Sources with dates]
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━Invoke the docx skill to produce:
[TICKER]-financial-statement-analysis-[YYYY-MM-DD].docxThe income statement is not the analysis. It is the starting point. The analytical value is in reconciling the income statement to the cash flow statement, decomposing what drives margins by segment, and understanding how working capital is behaving. Never present a financial statement analysis that is just headline EPS and revenue growth.
Every red flag needs specific evidence. "Revenue recognition may be aggressive" is not a red flag. "Deferred revenue declined $Xm YoY while reported revenue grew 12%, implying the company pulled forward revenue recognition: check note X in the annual report" is a red flag.
Green flags deserve equal attention. The purpose of financial statement analysis is not just to find problems. High-quality earnings, improving working capital conversion, and disciplined capital allocation are genuine competitive advantages and should be identified as such.
Use multi-year data. A single year of financial statements is almost always misleading. Trends over 3–5 years are required for working capital, margin, and capital allocation analysis. Retrieve historical data if needed.
Note what you cannot assess. Some information is not publicly disclosed. If a key metric cannot be computed from available information (e.g. segment capex for a company that doesn't disclose it), say so explicitly and note the gap's significance.
After delivering the analysis, recommend the most relevant next step:
| If the analysis shows... | Suggest |
|---|---|
| High quality earnings: feed into valuation | stock-investment-analysis: the quality premium should be reflected in the DCF |
| Accounting red flags: challenge the thesis | red-team-mode: use the red flags as the adversarial input |
| Strong quality + full multi-lens view wanted | stock-orchestrator: add moat, management, and ESG lenses |
| Deteriorating working capital: macro overlay | macro-risk-agent: check whether external conditions explain the trend |
| Need to present findings | exec: compress into a 1-page quality briefing |
Chaining note:execandmacro-risk-agentare referenced above as optional next steps but are not included in this repository; they belong to a broader skill suite. The investment workflow in this repo is complete without them. Skip any suggestion for a skill you do not have installed.
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.