Reconcile accounts by comparing GL balances to subledgers, bank statements, or third-party data. Use when performing bank reconciliations, GL-to-subledger recs, intercompany reconciliations, or identifying and categorizing reconciling items.
Instructions your experts follow when using this skill.
Packaging adaptation by AutoGPT, 2026-09-25. Original authorship and licence are retained. Changes are limited to the recorded name, metadata and file references; see ATTRIBUTION.md in this skill package.
Important: This skill assists with reconciliation workflows but does not provide financial advice. All reconciliations should be reviewed by qualified financial professionals before sign-off.
Methodology and best practices for account reconciliation, including GL-to-subledger, bank reconciliations, and intercompany. Covers reconciling item categorization, aging analysis, and escalation.
Compare the general ledger control account balance to the detailed subledger balance.
Common accounts:
Process:
Common causes of differences:
Compare the GL cash balance to the bank statement balance.
Process:
Standard format:
Balance per bank statement: $XX,XXX
Add: Deposits in transit $X,XXX
Less: Outstanding checks ($X,XXX)
Add/Less: Bank errors $X,XXX
Adjusted bank balance: $XX,XXX
Balance per general ledger: $XX,XXX
Add: Interest/credits not recorded $X,XXX
Less: Bank fees not recorded ($X,XXX)
Add/Less: GL errors $X,XXX
Adjusted GL balance: $XX,XXX
Difference: $0.00
Reconcile balances between related entities to ensure they net to zero on consolidation.
Process:
Common causes of differences:
Items that exist because of normal processing timing and will clear without action:
Expected resolution: These items should clear within the normal processing cycle (typically 1-5 business days). No adjusting entry needed.
Items that require a journal entry to correct:
Action: Prepare adjusting journal entry to correct the GL or subledger.
Items that cannot be immediately explained:
Action: Investigate root cause, document findings, escalate if unresolved.
Track the age of reconciling items to identify stale items requiring escalation:
| Age Bucket | Status | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 0-30 days | Current | Monitor — within normal processing cycle |
| 31-60 days | Aging | Investigate — follow up on why item has not cleared |
| 61-90 days | Overdue | Escalate — notify supervisor, document investigation |
| 90+ days | Stale | Escalate to management — potential write-off or adjustment needed |
| Item # | Description | Amount | Date Originated | Age (Days) | Category | Status | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [Detail] | $X,XXX | [Date] | XX | [Type] | [Status] | [Name] |
Track reconciling item totals over time to identify growing balances:
Define escalation triggers based on your organization's risk tolerance:
| Trigger | Threshold (Example) | Escalation |
|---|---|---|
| Individual item amount | > $10,000 | Supervisor review |
| Individual item amount | > $50,000 | Controller review |
| Total reconciling items | > $100,000 | Controller review |
| Item age | > 60 days | Supervisor follow-up |
| Item age | > 90 days | Controller / management review |
| Unreconciled difference | Any amount | Cannot close — must resolve or document |
| Growing trend | 3+ consecutive periods | Process improvement investigation |
Note: Set thresholds based on your organization's materiality level and risk appetite. The examples above are illustrative.
Files installed alongside these instructions.
When the user wants to create or update their product marketing context document. Also use when the user mentions 'product context,' 'marketing context,' 'set up context,' 'positioning,' 'who is my target audience,' 'describe my product,' 'ICP,' 'ideal customer profile,' or wants to avoid repeating foundational information across marketing tasks. Use this at the start of any new project before using other marketing skills — it creates `.agents/product-marketing.md` that all other skills reference for product, audience, and positioning context.
When the user wants to research, profile, or analyze competitors from their URLs. Also use when the user mentions 'competitor profile,' 'competitor research,' 'competitor analysis,' 'profile this competitor,' 'analyze competitor,' 'competitive intelligence,' 'competitor deep dive,' 'who are my competitors,' 'competitor landscape,' 'competitor dossier,' 'competitive audit,' or 'research these competitors.' Input is a list of competitor URLs. Output is structured competitor profile markdown files. For creating comparison/alternative pages from profiles, see competitors. For sales-specific battle cards, see sales-enablement.
When the user wants to conduct, analyze, or synthesize customer research. Use when the user mentions "customer research," "ICP research," "talk to customers," "analyze transcripts," "customer interviews," "survey analysis," "support ticket analysis," "voice of customer," "VOC," "build personas," "customer personas," "jobs to be done," "JTBD," "what do customers say," "what are customers struggling with," "Reddit mining," "G2 reviews," "review mining," "digital watering holes," "community research," "forum research," "competitor reviews," "customer sentiment," "PMF survey," "product/market fit survey," "customer interview questions," "interview outreach," "Sales Safari," or "find out why customers churn/convert/buy." Use for analyzing existing research assets, mining online sources, AND running primary research (interviews and surveys). For writing copy informed by research, see copywriting. For acting on research to improve pages, see cro.