• Role: Corporate Account Manager, Credit Approval Officer
• Usage Scenarios: First loan application for new customers, loan renewal for existing customers, additional credit application
• Output Purpose: Assess material completeness, guide account managers to confirm submission, initiate credit approval process
• Decision Level: Pre-credit approval stage, directly affects whether the case enters the approval process
• Execution Frequency: Execute once before each credit application

• Customer ID number: Display first 3 and last 4 digits, replace the middle with *
• Bank account number: Only display last 4 digits
• Case number: Fully displayed (required for internal circulation)
• Credit amount: Fully displayed (required for approval decision-making)
• Customer trade secret information (e.g., core customer list): Use "a certain customer" in the assessment report

• If the credit system image archive is unavailable: Mark "Customer notes and materials not verified" and continue the assessment based on user-provided information
• If case status query times out: Mark "Case conflict not checked" and prompt the user to manually confirm no active cases exist
• If the credit ledger is unavailable: Mark "Credit expiration status unknown" and ask the user to confirm the case type (renewal/new/additional)
• If historical due diligence reports are unavailable: Mark "Due diligence report missing" and prompt the user to upload or supplement

Regulatory Basis: Guidelines for Due Diligence in Commercial Bank Credit Business, Guidelines for Loan Risk Classification, Loan Review Requirements in Article 35 of the Commercial Bank Law, Interim Measures for the Management of Working Capital Loans by the China Banking Regulatory Commission

1. Strict Pre-confirmation: Case creation is prohibited without explicit user confirmation, regardless of material sufficiency
2. Independent Material Assessment: Completeness assessment is based on the substantive content of materials; "sufficient quantity of materials" cannot replace "qualified content quality"
3. No Case Conflict Override: Submission is prohibited if there are active approval cases for the same customer; prompt the user of the conflict
4. Explicit Disclosure of Uncertainty: Must clearly inform the user when materials are questionable or missing; cannot skip by subjectively judging "may not be important"
5. No Case Type Assumption: The type of loan renewal and new credit must be confirmed by the user; cannot be automatically inferred based on the customer's historical records
6. Reject Overstepping Judgment: Do not predict approval results (e.g., "this should be approved"); focus on material completeness
7. Data Traceability: Material assessment must indicate the source, upload date, and validity status of each material
8. No Skipping Steps: Step 0 (data verification) and Step 1 (case conflict check) cannot be skipped; must confirm no active cases before proceeding
9. Mandatory Red Line Execution: If any red line (R1-R3) is triggered, immediately stop generation and prompt the user

• R1: Missing essential materials (due diligence report, visit records, financial data, business license)
• R2: Active approval cases exist (prevent duplicate submissions)
• R3: No explicit user confirmation for submission (silent submission is prohibited; vague expressions such as "okay" cannot be deemed as confirmation)

The following is the standard material system for the bank's pre-loan due diligence, which serves as the basis for completeness assessment. Materials are divided into three levels: Essential (recommend postponement if missing), Recommended (prompt the user if missing), Supplementary (better to have).

Integration Tip: Material inventory capability maps to your bank's customer file query interface; returned fields must include: material type, file name, upload date, status (valid/expired/pending review)

Interaction Mode: Mode B - Step-Gated

1. List all input data sources: customer notes list, customer materials list, case status, credit ledger
2. Confirm data time range: due diligence report date, financial statement period, time span of visit records
3. Confirm case type intention: renewal/new/additional
4. Run verification script:

   python scripts/validate_application.py --check-materials --check-conflicts

5. Proceed to Step 1 after verification passes; output missing list and request user to supplement if verification fails

📋 Data Source:

system_api

(credit system image archive, case management, credit ledger) 📋 Executor:

ai

📋 Confirmation Mechanism:

none

⚠️ Mandatory Instruction: Data verification step cannot be skipped; must confirm the validity of all input data

Gated Step: Cannot proceed to subsequent steps if this step fails

• Query whether there are active cases in "under review/pending supplement/pending signing" status for the customer
• Gated Branches:
  • ✅ No active cases → Proceed to credit expiration check
  • ❌ Active cases exist → Stop immediately, inform the user of the conflict, prompt the existing case number and current status, ask whether to cancel or wait, do not proceed to subsequent steps
  • ⚠️ Query timeout → Mark "Case conflict not checked", prompt the user to manually confirm no active cases, proceed only after user confirmation

📋 Data Source:

system_api

(credit system case management module) 📋 Executor:

ai

📋 Confirmation Mechanism:

approve

(user must make explicit decision if conflict exists)

• Verify the expiration date of the customer's existing credit limit, determine whether the current application is a renewal (within 90 days before expiration) or new credit
• Automatically mark the recommended case type and display it to the user during submission confirmation

📋 Data Source:

system_api

(core system credit module) 📋 Executor:

ai

📋 Confirmation Mechanism:

none

• Enumerate customer notes: List all existing notes (due diligence report, visit records, visit memos, etc.) and their summaries for the customer
• Enumerate customer materials: List the customer's uploaded files and published materials
• Must read the content of key notes or materials to understand the substantive content of the materials (not just confirm the existence of files)
• Check item by item against the material checklist in

  references/material-checklist.md

📋 Data Source:

system_api

(credit system image archive) 📋 Executor:

ai

📋 Confirmation Mechanism:

none

⚠️ Mandatory Instruction: Cannot only count the number of files; must check the substantive content (e.g., due diligence report must include business analysis and financial analysis)

references/material-checklist.md

Material Completeness Assessment Result:

✅ Available (Essential)
  - Due Diligence Report (2024-01-15, includes business analysis and financial analysis)
  - Visit Records (2 times in the past 3 months, with substantive business information)
  - Financial Data (3-year data from 2021 to 2023)

⚠️ Recommended to Supplement
  - Bank Statements (only 3 months available, recommend supplementing to 6 months)

❌ Missing (Essential Materials)
  - Business License (not found in archives, please upload)

Comprehensive Assessment: [Can Submit / Recommend Submission After Supplement / Postpone Submission]
Reason Explanation: [1-2 sentences explaining the assessment basis]

• Can Submit: All essential materials are complete and meet content quality standards
• Recommend Submission After Supplement: Essential materials are complete but some "recommended" materials are missing; inform the user of risks and let the user decide
• Postpone Submission: Essential materials are missing; clearly recommend the user to supplement first
• Gated Branches:
  • ✅ Assessment result is "Can Submit" or "Recommend Submission After Supplement" → Proceed to Step 4
  • ❌ Assessment result is "Postpone Submission" → Trigger Red Line R1, stop immediately, display missing items to the user, recommend supplementing materials first
  • ⚠️ Materials are questionable → Mark questionable items, explain specific situations to the user, let the user decide whether to continue

📋 Data Source:

context

(inventory results from Step 2) 📋 Executor:

ai

📋 Confirmation Mechanism:

inform

(assessment result must be displayed to the user)

• Prioritize automatic judgment based on the conclusion of credit expiration check in Step 1
• Ask the user for confirmation if there is ambiguity, do not make assumptions
• Gated Branches:
  • ✅ Case type is clear → Proceed to Step 5
  • ⚠️ Ambiguity exists → Ask the user for confirmation, proceed only after user confirmation

📋 Data Source:

context

(check results from Step 1 + user input) 📋 Executor:

ai

📋 Confirmation Mechanism:

inform

(display to and confirm with the user)

Gated Step: Cannot initiate case creation if this step fails

• Display the assessment result and recommended case type to the user
• If materials are sufficient: Recommend submission and ask the user for confirmation ("Confirm submission?")
• If there are missing items: Inform the user of missing items and impacts, let the user decide whether to continue submission or supplement materials first
• User Confirmation Gating:
  • ✅ User explicitly says "submit" or "confirm" → Initiate case creation
  • ❌ User says "do not submit yet" or "wait" → Terminate process, do not create case
  • ⚠️ User says vague expressions like "okay" → Cannot deem as confirmation, must explicitly ask again "Confirm submission?"

📋 Data Source:

context

(assessment result from Step 3) 📋 Executor:

ai

📋 Confirmation Mechanism:

explicit

(must have explicit user confirmation) ⚠️ Red Line R3: Case creation is prohibited without explicit user confirmation, regardless of material sufficiency

This output can be parsed and used by the credit-approval-decision Skill

assets/credit-application-template.md

conflict_detected

existing_credit_expiry

materials_found

notes_count

assessment_result

missing_essentials

recommendation

reason

application_type

confirmed

case_id

shared/disclaimer-template.md

• Symptom: Due diligence report is only 1 page, missing business analysis and financial analysis, but the system judges "Available"
• Cause: Only counts the number of files, does not check substantive content
• Solution: Must read the content of key materials and verify whether necessary analysis dimensions are included (basic enterprise information, business analysis, financial analysis, repayment source)

• Symptom: Two active approval cases exist for the same customer, causing confusion in the approval process
• Cause: Case status query interface times out, degradation strategy not triggered
• Solution: Must mark "Case conflict not checked" when query times out, prompt the user to manually confirm

• Symptom: User says "okay", the system deems it as confirmation for submission
• Cause: Confirmation mechanism is not strict; "okay" may be recognition of the assessment result, not a submission instruction
• Solution: Case creation can only be initiated after the user explicitly says "submit" or "confirm"

• Symptom: User says "renew", the system judges it as renewal, but it is actually additional credit
• Cause: Does not combine the conclusion of credit expiration check, only judges based on user's spoken language
• Solution: Prioritize automatic judgment based on the conclusion of credit expiration check; ask the user for confirmation if there is ambiguity

• Symptom: Business license is missing, but the assessment conclusion is "Can Submit"
• Cause: Red Line R1 (missing essential materials) is not strictly enforced
• Solution: Missing essential materials (due diligence report, visit records, financial data, business license) must trigger the red line, recommend "Postpone Submission"

Please submit the credit application for the loan renewal of XX Manufacturing Enterprise. The customer's 50 million credit will expire on 2026-06-15, and renewal is needed.

1. Pre-Status Check → No active cases, 41 days before credit expiration, judged as renewal
2. Material Inventory → Due diligence report, visit records, financial data are complete; bank statements only cover 3 months
3. Completeness Assessment → Essential materials are complete, some recommended materials are missing, assessment result is "Recommend Submission After Supplement"
4. User Confirmation → User explicitly says "submit", initiate case creation
5. Submission Successful → Return case number CASE-2026-001234

• Comprehensive Assessment: Recommend Submission After Supplement
• Missing Item: Bank statements (only 3 months available, recommend supplementing to 6 months)
• Case Type: Renewal

Submit the first credit application for new customer YY Trading Company.

1. Pre-Status Check → No active cases, no existing credit, judged as first credit
2. Material Inventory → Due diligence report and business license are missing
3. Completeness Assessment → Trigger Red Line R1 (missing essential materials), assessment result is "Postpone Submission"
4. Inform User → Inform the user of missing items and impacts, recommend supplementing materials first
5. User Decision → User says "supplement materials first", terminate submission

• ⚠️ Red Line Triggered: R1 (missing essential materials)
• Missing Items: Due diligence report, business license
• Comprehensive Assessment: Postpone Submission

• This Skill does not handle credit approval decision-making; only provides material completeness assessment
• This Skill does not generate due diligence reports or visit records (please use credit-due-diligence or visit-memo Skill)
• This Skill does not directly modify customer data or submit approval results
• This Skill does not handle personal credit/retail business
• This Skill does not handle post-loan management, risk classification adjustment, non-performing asset disposal
• If the user requests the above content, clearly inform and recommend the appropriate Skill or contact the corresponding department