Assemble a valuation memo from structured deal and cap-table inputs

Why use this

1. A valuation memo can look consistent while mixing a dated cap table with newer financing assumptions. Share classes, conversion terms and option pools need precise treatment, because a small extraction error can change the ownership narrative throughout the draft.

2. This job could assemble a structured memo with a reconciliation trail rather than an unexplained conclusion. Analyst review could focus on disputed inputs, missing terms and judgment calls before relying on the document for a financing discussion.

Why an agent / simpler alternative

Useful judgment

Map structured deal terms and cap-table fields into a consistent review format while exposing conflicts.

Simpler alternative

Use a controlled spreadsheet template when the inputs already match the required schema.

Unsuitable when

The agent is expected to determine fair value or resolve legal terms without qualified review.

Proposed inputs

1. Name

   Cap-table snapshot

   Owner

   Finance owner

   Minimum scope

   Authorized dated table, security classes and ownership totals

   Quality check

   Identify draft versions, conversion assumptions and unissued options.

2. Name

   Deal-input packet

   Owner

   Deal analyst

   Minimum scope

   Approved transaction terms, valuation context and memo template

   Quality check

   Separate signed terms from indicative or unresolved assumptions.

Access and setup — proposed or unknown

Proposed minimum

1. Read scoped copies and draft in a separate workspace; retain cell or document references for every figure.

Compatibility unknowns

1. Unknown: table parsing, financial-document access and current workflow compatibility.

External actions requiring approval

1. Sharing confidential deal information, altering cap tables or communicating financing commitments.

Expected deliverable and review checks

Proposed artifact

Memo draft with input inventory, ownership reconciliation, assumptions and analyst questions.

Critical checks

1. Security classes and denominators are consistent across tables and prose.

2. All computed or extracted figures trace to an approved input version.

Missing output evidence

No new run or output inspection in this editorial layer; see linked source-specific limits.

Failure signals and proposed responses

1. Signal

   The memo combines pre-money ownership with post-money share counts.

   Why it matters

   The ownership explanation can be internally inconsistent despite correct individual values.

   Proposed response

   Label the basis of each table and reconcile the transaction bridge before drafting conclusions.

2. Signal

   A convertible instrument is treated as ordinary equity without its terms.

   Why it matters

   The draft may misstate dilution or economic rights.

   Proposed response

   Flag the missing treatment and defer the assumption to the analyst.

Effort and cost — unknown

Setup work

1. Define input versions, security labels and reconciliation rules.

Ongoing review

1. Review extraction exceptions and refresh assumptions when terms change.

Unknowns

1. Unknown: parsing costs, analyst workload and valuation uncertainty.

First check — proposed, unexecuted

Status

proposed_unexecuted

Synthetic fixture

Synthetic deal inputs include a pre-transaction cap table, a new option pool and an instrument with missing conversion terms.

Acceptance checks

1. The memo labels the transaction basis.

2. The missing conversion assumption blocks a complete ownership conclusion.

Stop conditions

1. Financial judgment, confidential sharing or unsupported deal terms are required.

Limits

1. A consistently formatted memo remains a draft; input reconciliation cannot establish an appropriate valuation conclusion.