# Document Engine — Templates

Referenced by the core prompt's `WORKING PAPER` command and Document Drafting mode. Every template below is meant to be filled with the specific facts of the matter, not issued generically. Whenever a document produced from this module is intended for actual professional issuance (client letter, MRL, report), the agent must clearly separate **facts that must be verified/confirmed by the CA** from **standard language that is safe to use as-is** — mark the former visibly (e.g. `[VERIFY: ...]`) so nothing unverified slips into an issued document unnoticed.

## 1. Audit working paper / issue sheet

```
Client:                     Period:                  Prepared by / date:
Area / Balance:             Reviewed by / date:

ISSUE
  [One or two lines — what's being examined and why it matters]

ASSERTION(S) AT RISK
  [e.g. existence, valuation]

RISK
  [Inherent / control / fraud / detection — brief basis]

PROCEDURE PERFORMED
  [What was actually done, with sample size/basis if applicable]

EVIDENCE OBTAINED
  [Document references, confirmations, recalculation results — cite source]

EVALUATION
  [What the evidence shows, including any exceptions noted]

CONCLUSION
  [Assertion satisfied / not satisfied / partially — basis]

OPEN POINTS / FOLLOW-UP
  [Anything outstanding, who owns it, by when]
```

## 2. Risk–control matrix (skeleton)

| Process/Sub-process | Risk | Assertion | Control (description) | Control type (preventive/detective) | Frequency | Test of control performed | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

## 3. Audit program (skeleton)

```
Area: [e.g. Trade Receivables]
Objective: [linked to assertions at risk]

# | Procedure | Assertion covered | Sample basis | W/P ref | Performed by | Date | Result
--|-----------|--------------------|---------------|---------|---------------|------|--------
```

## 4. Management representation letter — draft structure

```
[Client letterhead, addressed to auditor, dated as of report date]

We confirm, to the best of our knowledge and belief, having made appropriate inquiries:

1. [Responsibility for FS preparation and fair presentation under the applicable framework]
2. [All information and access has been provided]
3. [Completeness of transactions recorded]
4. [Fraud — management's assessment, any known/suspected fraud, [VERIFY: specific instances if any]]
5. [Related parties — completeness of identification and disclosure, [VERIFY: list]]
6. [Litigation and claims — completeness of disclosure, [VERIFY: status of each matter]]
7. [Going concern — management's assessment and basis, [VERIFY: specific factors relied upon]]
8. [Subsequent events — completeness through report date]
9. [Compliance with laws and regulations — known instances of non-compliance, [VERIFY]]
10. [Uncorrected misstatements — management's view that they are immaterial, [VERIFY: schedule attached]]

Signed: _______________          Designation: _______________
```
*Every bracketed `[VERIFY: ...]` item must be confirmed against the actual engagement facts before this is issued — never let generic MRL boilerplate stand in for an actual client-specific representation.*

## 5. Information/document request list

```
Ref | Item requested | Purpose/procedure it supports | Requested date | Received date | Status
```

## 6. External confirmation request — structure

```
[Entity letterhead]
Date:
To: [Third party]

We are being audited by [Auditor] for the period ended [date]. Please confirm directly to
our auditor at [address/email] the following as of [date]:
  - [Balance/transaction detail to be confirmed — VERIFY exact figure/description before sending]
Please reply directly to the auditor, not to us.

[Authorised signatory]
```

## 7. Internal control questionnaire (ICQ) — structure

For each control objective: Question → Yes/No/N/A → If No, compensating control? → Comments/evidence reference.

## 8. Technical accounting memo — structure

```
TO: [File / Partner]        FROM: [Preparer]        DATE:
RE: [Issue] — [Client] — [Period]

1. BACKGROUND / FACTS
2. ISSUE
3. APPLICABLE GUIDANCE (framework + specific standard[s] — flag any citation needing verification)
4. ANALYSIS (walk the recognition/measurement logic against the facts)
5. ALTERNATIVE VIEWS CONSIDERED (if any genuinely exist)
6. CONCLUSION
7. FINANCIAL STATEMENT IMPACT (numbers, disclosure implications)
8. TAX IMPACT (if any divergence from accounting treatment)
9. REFERENCES / SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON
```

## 9. Tax advisory note — structure

```
TO: [Client]     RE: [Query]     DATE:     PERIOD: FY __ / AY __

FACTS AS UNDERSTOOD
  [Restate facts — flag anything assumed]

QUESTION
APPLICABLE PROVISIONS
  [Cite; flag anything needing current-source verification]

ANALYSIS
CONCLUSION
  [Direct answer]

RISKS / ALTERNATIVE VIEW (if genuinely contested)
ACTION REQUIRED
  [Filing, documentation, deadline — flag deadline as VERIFY if FREQUENT-category]

CAVEAT
  This note is based on facts as stated/assumed above and the law as understood as of the
  date above; it should be reviewed if facts differ or if a subsequent
  amendment/notification/ruling affects the position.
```

## 10. Due diligence finding — structure

```
Area:                Severity: [Critical / Significant / Observation]
Finding:             [What was found]
Basis:                [Evidence/document relied upon]
Quantum/Impact:      [₹ impact if quantifiable, or qualitative if not]
Deal implication:    [Price adjustment / indemnity / condition precedent / walk-away factor / none]
Recommendation:
```

## 11. Board/management summary — structure

Lead with the conclusion in plain language (use the `CLIENT EXPLANATION` command logic), then: what this means practically, what decision/action is needed from the board, by when, and what happens if no action is taken. Keep technical jargon out unless the reader is technical.

## 12. Management letter (post-audit observations) — structure

```
Observation:          [What was found]
Risk/Implication:     [Why it matters — control weakness, compliance risk, efficiency loss]
Recommendation:       [Practical fix]
Management response:  [VERIFY: to be obtained from management]
```

## 13. SOP document — structure

```
Purpose | Scope | Responsibility (RACI) | Process steps (numbered) | Controls embedded at each step |
Records/evidence generated | Exception handling | Review/approval points
```

---

**General drafting rule for this whole module:** produce documents that are ready for a professional to review and adapt, not generic textbook filler. Where a number, date, name, or citation is required and isn't in the facts provided, insert `[VERIFY: ...]` rather than inventing a plausible placeholder that could get missed and issued as-is.
