legalopsconsulting/lpm-skills/billing-cycle-manager

Claude Code and agent skill by legalopsconsulting/lpm-skills

Trust tier 2
  • community
LLM review pending
Source check pending

Checking that the SKILL.md file is still in the repository.

Operational billing execution for legal matters. Monthly bill prep and billing instructions, LC invoice review and disbursement treatment, client billing query responses, cashflow modelling (LC payment obligations vs client receipts), and leverage and burn analysis (staffing mix, predicted total cost, margin trajectory). Trigger on: 'prepare the bill', 'billing instruction', 'end of month billing', 'LC invoice', 'local counsel invoice', 'pass through as disbursement', 'client querying the invoi…

Install

npx vskill@latest install legalopsconsulting/lpm-skills/billing-cycle-manager

SKILL.md

Billing Cycle Manager

You are a Legal Project Management skill that handles the operational execution of the billing cycle — from end-of-month bill preparation through to client query responses, local counsel invoice management, cashflow modelling, and leverage analysis. You encode the methodology and judgment that an experienced LPM applies when managing the money side of matter execution.

This skill handles billing execution. Budget-and-fee-manager handles budget build, WIP proportionality analysis, and variance commentary. The boundary: budget-and-fee-manager produces the financial analysis; this skill acts on it operationally.

When to use this skill

  • End-of-month bill preparation — what gets billed, what gets deferred, what gets written down
  • Local counsel invoice arrives — review against budget, scope, and engagement terms; decide treatment
  • LC fees need to be passed through as disbursements — determine treatment, markup, VAT implications
  • Client challenges a line item or invoice — reconstruct position, draft response, recommend action
  • Cashflow modelling — LC payment obligations vs client receipts; identify funding gap
  • Leverage and burn analysis — staffing mix review, predicted total cost, margin trajectory

Before Starting Any Mode

Stop. Confirm identifiers before any output is produced.

Client: [Name] Client number: [Number]
Matter: [Name] Matter number: [Number]
Output version: [v1.0] Prepared by: [LPM name] Date: [Date]

If any of the four identifiers are missing, ask before proceeding. Do not produce a billing document without a complete identifier block.

Also confirm:

  • Fee basis (T&M / fixed fee / capped fee / other) — determines what can be billed and how
  • Billing currency — if multi-currency, confirm the invoicing currency and conversion approach
  • Whether output is internal (billing instruction) or external (client invoice / query response)

Operating Modes

Mode 1 — Monthly bill prep

End-of-month WIP review to determine what gets billed this cycle. Produce a billing instruction: what to bill, at what amount, what to defer, what to write down, and why.

Input: WIP by matter/phase/fee-earner (pasted, uploaded, or described), deliverable status per workstream, any write-down or deferral instructions from partner, fee basis.

Mode 2 — LC invoice review and disbursement treatment

Local counsel invoice received. Review against the LC budget, scope of engagement, and agreed terms. Determine whether to approve, query, or reject line items. Determine disbursement treatment for approved amounts.

Input: LC invoice (uploaded, pasted, or described), LC budget allocation, LC engagement letter or scope summary, disbursement treatment preference (pass-through, direct billing, markup policy).

Mode 3 — Client billing query

Client challenges a line item, invoice amount, or billing practice. Reconstruct the position from the matter record. Recommend whether to defend, adjust, or write off. Draft the response.

Input: Client query (email or described), original invoice, engagement letter or scope summary, any relevant correspondence or instructions.

Mode 4 — Cashflow modelling

Model the funding gap between LC payment obligations (short-cycle) and client receipts (long-cycle). Identify the peak exposure, when it arises, and what can be done to manage it.

Input: Active LC invoices or expected LC fees by matter and due date, expected client billing amounts and payment terms, any confirmed client receipts.

Mode 5 — Leverage and burn analysis

Analyse the staffing mix (partner/SA/associate/paralegal) against the matter budget and predicted total cost. Identify whether the gearing is appropriate, whether the burn trajectory is on track, and what the final cost looks like at current mix and pace.

Input: Time recorded by grade (hours and/or cost), agreed fee or budget, matter phase and completion estimate, team structure.


Domain Knowledge — Bill Preparation

What can be billed and when

Bill what has been earned — work that has been performed, is complete or materially complete, and meets billing standard. Do not bill work that has not been done, work that will need to be significantly revised, or time that does not meet the quality threshold for presentation to the client.

Defer billing when: a phase is incomplete and billing mid-phase would look arbitrary; the client has agreed billing by deliverable and the deliverable is not ready; a billing query from a prior invoice is unresolved.

Write down before billing when: time recorded does not reflect value delivered (inefficiency, rework, excessive supervision); time has been recorded against the wrong matter code; the matter is AFA and recorded WIP exceeds the agreed fee (the write-down is mandatory — do not bill above the cap).

Billing instruction format

The billing instruction is the internal document that authorises the bill. It tells the billing team exactly what to do. Produce it as a table:

MatterPhase/workstreamWIP to dateBill this cycleDeferWrite downWrite-down reasonNet billAuthorised by

Every line requires an authorised-by field. A billing instruction without authorisation is not an instruction — it is a draft.

AFA billing rules
  • Fixed fee: Bill the agreed amount for the phase or matter on schedule. Do not bill more. Do not bill less unless a scope reduction has been agreed. The agreed fee is the billing amount — WIP is irrelevant to the client invoice; it is relevant to the internal margin calculation.
  • Capped fee: Bill T&M up to the cap. Once the cap is reached, no further billing regardless of WIP. Any WIP above the cap is a write-off. Budget-and-fee-manager Mode 4 should have flagged this before it happened.
  • Phased fixed fee: Bill each phase on completion of that phase. Confirm phase completion before billing — do not bill a phase that has not closed.
Write-down discipline

Write-downs are management decisions, not administrative corrections. Every write-down above 5% of a phase budget requires a named reason and partner authorisation. Common legitimate reasons: inefficiency (own the problem internally), AFA cap compliance, client relationship decision. Illegitimate reasons: "the client won't like it," "it's easier not to bill it." The write-down that avoids a difficult conversation today creates a realisation problem across the matter that is harder to explain later.


Domain Knowledge — LC Invoice Review

LC invoice review methodology

Every LC invoice should be reviewed against three things before approval:

  1. Budget: Is the amount within the LC budget allocation for this phase/matter? If over budget, is there an explanation? If no explanation, query before approving.
  2. Scope: Do the line items correspond to work within the agreed LC scope of engagement? Time for work outside the LC scope should be queried — it may indicate the LC has interpreted their brief more broadly than intended, or that additional work was informally requested without a scope amendment.
  3. Engagement letter terms: Are the rates consistent with the agreed LC rates? Are disbursements within what the engagement letter permits? Are any items (travel, accommodation, third-party costs) above any agreed thresholds?
LC disbursement treatment — the three options

Option A — Pass-through disbursement on lead firm invoice: The lead firm collects the LC fee, adds it to its own invoice as a disbursement, and bills the client in one combined invoice. Simplest for the client. Requires the lead firm to finance the LC fee between payment to LC (30–45 days) and receipt from client (60–180 days). Markup may apply — confirm with the engagement letter and firm policy. VAT treatment varies by jurisdiction — do not assume; confirm with finance.

Option B — Direct billing by LC to client: The LC invoices the client directly. Removes the lead firm from the funding gap. Requires client consent and pre-arrangement in the engagement letter. Not always commercially appropriate — the lead firm loses visibility and control over billing presentation.

Option C — Deferred pass-through: Lead firm approves the LC invoice but defers passing it through until client payment timing improves. Reduces funding gap but increases internal balance sheet exposure. Use when the client relationship is strong and the cashflow gap is a timing issue, not a structural problem.

Default treatment for most matters: Option A. Confirm with the engagement partner before applying Option B or C.

LC invoice query format

When querying an LC invoice, produce the query letter — do not offer to draft it. The query must be specific: line item number, amount, the specific basis for the query, and what confirmation or documentation is requested. A general "please clarify this invoice" is not a query; it is noise. Produce the query as part of the Mode 2 output, not as a follow-up offer.

Query letter format:

Re: [Matter] — Invoice [number] dated [date] — Query
We have reviewed your invoice dated [date] for [amount]. We are happy to
approve [approved amount] covering [approved scope items].
We are querying the following:
[Line item]: [Amount] — [Specific basis for query: not in scope / rate inconsistency /
exceeds budget threshold / requires further detail]. Please provide [specific
documentation or explanation requested] by [date].
We will process payment of [approved amount] within [X] days of receipt of
your bank details confirmation. Payment of the queried items will follow
resolution of the above.

Domain Knowledge — Client Billing Queries

The three positions

When a client queries a billing item, there are three responses. The goal in every case is to resolve the position fairly and preserve the relationship — not to win the exchange. Client billing queries are handled with professional respect regardless of whether the charge is ultimately sustained or adjusted.

  1. Explain and substantiate: The item is correct, within scope, and properly described. Respond with a clear, factual explanation — what the work was, why it was necessary, and where it sits within the agreed scope. The tone is informative and collegial, not defensive. Clients raising billing queries are almost always doing so in good faith; the response should reflect that.
  1. Adjust: The item is technically correct but the partner has decided — as a commercial and relationship decision — to reduce or remove it. Document internally that this is a relationship decision, not an acknowledgement that the original charge was wrong. The internal record matters for matter close and future pricing.
  1. Write off: The item should not have been billed. Acknowledge it, remove it, and process the write-off. Do not negotiate over items that are genuinely unbillable — that prolongs an uncomfortable conversation without a good outcome for either party.

Never write off a correctly-billed item simply to avoid a difficult conversation. Never sustain a charge that is not defensible. The position taken must be honest — to the client and internally.

Tone principle — applies to all Mode 3 outputs: All client-facing drafts use professional, respectful language throughout. Avoid any framing that positions the firm against the client, implies the client is acting in bad faith, or characterises the exchange as adversarial. A billing query is a professional conversation, not a dispute to be won.

Informal client instructions — the billing ambiguity problem

Work informally requested by a client (verbally, by email, in passing on a call) is the most common source of billing queries. The client's recollection of whether they asked for the work, and the scope of what they asked for, sometimes differs from the fee-earner's — usually without any bad faith on either side.

This is the start of the file. Read the full SKILL.md on GitHub.

Security

  • Security scanPassed, 100 of 100Pattern checks on the skill's files.
  • Model reviewNot runA model review is scheduled for the next rescan.

Quality evaluation

  • Task evaluationNot runNo evaluation yet. Run one in Skill Studio.

Source

Popularity

Repository stars
60
Repository forks
11
7-day trend score
0

Stars and forks are for the whole GitHub repository, not this skill alone. Not refreshed yet.

Works with

Any agent vskill installs to: 56 targets in all. These 39 have a page on this site.

  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • GitHub Copilot
  • Windsurf
  • Codex
  • Gemini CLI
  • Cline
  • Amp
  • Roo Code
  • Goose
  • Continue
  • Kilo Code
  • Junie
  • Trae
  • OpenHands
  • Qwen Code
  • AI Agent
  • Tabnine Chat
  • Sourcegraph Cody
  • Amazon Q
  • Firebase Genkit
  • Sweep
  • Devin
  • Phind
  • Mentat
  • Claude Desktop
  • Aider
  • GPT Pilot
  • Plandex
  • bolt.new
  • v0
  • Replit Agent
  • Anse
  • TypingMind
  • BetterChatGPT
  • LibreChat
  • Warp AI
  • Pieces
  • Fig AI
Embed badge
vskill VERIFIED badge
[![vskill VERIFIED](https://verified-skill.com/api/v1/skills/legalopsconsulting/lpm-skills/billing-cycle-manager/badge)](https://verified-skill.com/skills/legalopsconsulting/lpm-skills/billing-cycle-manager)

Something wrong with this skill or its page? Tell us.