sec_filing_question_answer_skill

SEC Filing Question Answer Skill

Data dependencies and prerequisites for execution

It is recommended to use Wind wind-mcp-skill to obtain the underlying data. Before execution, first check whether wind-mcp-skillis already available locally; if not, prompt the user to install:

# GitHub
npx skills add Wind-Information-Co-Ltd/wind-skills --skill wind-mcp-skill -g -y

# Gitee 镜像（国内）
npx skills add https://gitee.com/wind_info/wind-skills.git --skill wind-mcp-skill -g -y

Skill positioning

This skill is used to provide precise answers to specific questions in regulatory filings, focusing on answering "what exactly the document says, which passage is most relevant, what the direct conclusion is, which parts are explicit statements, and which are only reasonable inferences." The output focus is not to write a summary of the entire document, but to give traceable, verifiable answers with clear boundaries in response to the user's question.

Execution workflow

Step 1: Clarify the question, subject, and document scope

First confirm what the user actually wants to ask, and pin down the corresponding company, document type, and time range. Prioritize determining:

• Whether the question concerns business, risk, accounting treatment, governance structure, or capital arrangements
• Whether what needs to be reviewed is an annual report, quarterly report, prospectus, announcement attachment, or other formal document
• Whether the user needs a one-sentence answer or a complete explanation with background

If the scope of the question is too broad, it should first be narrowed to one clear, answerable question.

Step 2: Locate the document passages most relevant to the question

Based on the user's question, prioritize locating the sections where the answer is most likely to appear, for example:

• Business overview, risk factors, management discussion and analysis
• Financial notes, accounting policies, customer concentration, contract liabilities
• Share capital structure, lock-up periods, related-party transactions, litigation or regulatory matters

Do not browse the entire document evenly; instead, search for the most relevant parts in a question-driven way.

Step 3: Distinguish direct answers from supporting evidence

After finding the relevant content, first determine whether an explicit statement exists:

• If the document directly answers the question, the direct conclusion should be given first
• If the document provides only partial facts, only limited inferences should be made based on them
• If the document does not contain sufficient information, it should be clearly stated that it cannot be confirmed from the current document

Any inference must be based on specific information in the document, and speculation must not be presented as fact.

Step 4: Add necessary context

The wording in regulatory filings is often highly legalistic or accounting-oriented. To help users truly understand it, key content should be translated into research language:

• What this statement means commercially
• What the impact is on operations, finances, or shareholder interests
• How it corresponds to the issues the market generally cares about
• Which details are easily misread

Step 5: Mark boundaries and matters still to be confirmed

If uncertainty remains regarding the question, it is necessary to clearly point out:

• The parts not covered by the current document
• The points that can only be confirmed by combining other documents or subsequent announcements
• What conservative conclusion can currently be drawn

Step 6: Integrate into a precise Q&A final draft

The final output should directly answer the user's question, without showing lengthy retrieval processes or rewriting the entire document into a summary.

Output structure

---

{Stock name} regulatory filing Q&A ({YYYY-MM-DD})

I. Question

{User question}

II. Direct answer

{First answer the question directly in 2-4 sentences, clearly stating the boundaries of the conclusion.}

III. Key Points of Evidence

• Evidence 1: {corresponding content and significance}
• Evidence 2: {corresponding content and significance}
• Evidence 3: {corresponding content and significance}

IV. How to Understand

• {commercial or financial explanation 1}
• {commercial or financial explanation 2}

V. Parts Still to Be Confirmed

• {uncovered point 1}
• {uncovered point 2}

---

Quality Requirements

1. Must answer around the user's question; do not turn a Q&A into a review of the entire document.
2. Give the direct answer first, then add evidence and explanation, so readers do not have to search for the conclusion in a long text.
3. Strictly distinguish what the document explicitly states from inferences made based on the document.
4. Information not covered by the document must be explicitly stated and must not be filled in by guesswork.
5. The output should help users locate key clauses and research implications more quickly, rather than merely restating the original text in legalistic terms.