skills/octagonai/skills/sec-corp-governance

sec-corp-governance

SKILL.md

SEC Corporate Governance

Review corporate governance practices and board composition from SEC filings for public companies using the Octagon MCP server.

Prerequisites

Ensure Octagon MCP is configured in your AI agent (Cursor, Claude Desktop, Windsurf, etc.). See references/mcp-setup.md for installation instructions.

Workflow

1. Identify Analysis Parameters

Determine the following before querying:

  • Ticker: Stock symbol (e.g., AAPL, MSFT, GOOGL)
  • Focus Area (optional): Board, committees, policies, proposals
  • Comparison (optional): Prior year, peers

2. Execute Query via Octagon MCP

Use the octagon-agent tool with a natural language prompt:

Review corporate governance practices and board composition from <TICKER>'s latest proxy statement.

MCP Call Format:

{
  "server": "octagon-mcp",
  "toolName": "octagon-agent",
  "arguments": {
    "prompt": "Review corporate governance practices and board composition from ORCL's latest proxy statement."
  }
}

3. Expected Output

The agent returns structured governance analysis including:

Proxy Statement Information:

  • Filing date and annual meeting details
  • CEO and key contacts

Key Governance Areas:

  • Director election proposals
  • Shareholder voting policies
  • Governance disclosures

Data Sources: octagon-companies-agent, octagon-sec-agent, octagon-web-search-agent

4. Interpret Results

See references/interpreting-results.md for guidance on:

  • Evaluating board quality
  • Assessing governance practices
  • Understanding shareholder rights
  • Identifying governance concerns

Example Queries

Full Governance Review:

Review corporate governance practices and board composition from ORCL's latest proxy statement.

Board Composition:

Analyze board of directors composition, independence, and diversity for AAPL.

Committee Structure:

Extract audit, compensation, and nominating committee details from MSFT's proxy statement.

Director Qualifications:

What qualifications and experience do GOOGL's board nominees bring?

Governance Policies:

Review corporate governance guidelines and policies from JPM's latest proxy.

Shareholder Proposals:

What shareholder proposals are included in AMZN's latest proxy statement?

Board Composition Analysis

Independence Assessment

Category Best Practice
Board Independence >75% independent
Lead Director If CEO is Chair
Committee Independence 100% for key committees
Audit Financial Expert At least one required

Director Demographics

Dimension What to Track
Gender Diversity Representation percentages
Ethnic Diversity Background representation
Age Distribution Balanced tenure
Geographic International perspective
Industry Relevant experience

Director Qualifications

Qualification Relevance
Industry Experience Sector knowledge
CEO/C-Suite Experience Leadership perspective
Financial Expertise Audit oversight
Technology Digital transformation
Risk Management Enterprise risk
International Global operations

Committee Structure

Audit Committee

Requirement Best Practice
Independence 100% independent
Financial Expert At least one designated
Meetings Quarterly minimum
Responsibilities Financial oversight, internal controls

Compensation Committee

Requirement Best Practice
Independence 100% independent
Expertise Executive compensation experience
Advisor Independent consultant
Responsibilities Executive pay, equity plans

Nominating/Governance Committee

Requirement Best Practice
Independence Majority independent
Responsibilities Director selection, governance policies
Process Transparent nomination criteria

Other Committees

Committee Purpose
Risk Enterprise risk oversight
Technology Digital/cyber oversight
Sustainability ESG oversight
Finance Capital allocation

Governance Policies

Key Policies

Policy Description
Governance Guidelines Board operating principles
Code of Ethics Conduct standards
Stock Ownership Director/executive requirements
Clawback Compensation recovery
Anti-Hedging/Pledging Stock restrictions

Shareholder Rights

Right Shareholder-Friendly
Majority Voting For director elections
Proxy Access Nomination rights
Special Meetings Low threshold (10-25%)
Written Consent Ability to act
No Poison Pill Or with sunset

Antitakeover Provisions

Provision Effect
Classified Board Delays takeover
Supermajority High approval threshold
Poison Pill Deters acquirers
Dual-Class Stock Concentrates control
Blank Check Preferred Board authority

Leadership Structure

Chair/CEO Separation

Structure Assessment
Separate Chair Best practice
Combined with Lead Acceptable with strong lead
Combined, No Lead Concern

Lead Director

Responsibility Description
Board Leadership Independent voice
Executive Sessions Leads non-management meetings
CEO Evaluation Performance oversight
Shareholder Communication Access point

Related Party Transactions

Key Disclosures

Type What to Review
Family Transactions Deals with relatives
Director Transactions Business with directors
Major Shareholder Controlling shareholder deals
Officer Transactions Executive arrangements

Red Flags

  1. Material amounts - Large related party business
  2. Recurring - Ongoing dependency
  3. Below market - Off-market terms
  4. Complexity - Difficult to understand
  5. New relationships - Recently established

Director Elections

Voting Standards

Standard Description
Majority Must receive >50%
Plurality Most votes wins
Majority of Quorum >50% of attending

Contested Elections

Factor What to Track
Activist Proposals Dissident nominees
Vote Results Support levels
Settlement Negotiated outcome
Proxy Fight Full contest

Governance Benchmarking

ISS/Glass Lewis Assessment

Factor What Matters
Board Quality Independence, diversity
Compensation Pay for performance
Shareholder Rights Voting, access
Audit Financial oversight

Peer Comparison

Compare across competitors:

  • Board size and composition
  • Committee structure
  • Governance policies
  • Shareholder rights

Governance Quality Indicators

Strong Governance

Indicator Description
Independent Board >80% independent
Diverse Board Multiple dimensions
Separate Chair Or strong lead director
Shareholder Rights Proxy access, majority voting
Responsive Addresses concerns

Weak Governance

Indicator Description
Low Independence <50% independent
Homogeneous Lack of diversity
Entrenched Long tenure, classified
Limited Rights Supermajority, no access
Unresponsive Ignores proposals

Analysis Tips

  1. Check independence definitions: Companies may define differently.

  2. Track tenure: Long-serving directors may be less independent.

  3. Review overboarding: Directors on too many boards.

  4. Assess attendance: Low attendance signals disengagement.

  5. Compare to peers: Industry context matters.

  6. Monitor changes: Year-over-year governance evolution.

Use Cases

  • Investment screening: Governance quality filter
  • Proxy voting: Inform voting decisions
  • Activist analysis: Identify targets
  • Risk assessment: Governance-related risks
  • ESG analysis: Governance pillar evaluation
Weekly Installs
22
GitHub Stars
11
First Seen
Feb 7, 2026
Installed on
opencode22
gemini-cli21
codex21
github-copilot20
cursor20
amp19