Not legal advice, not a calendaring system, and not a reminder service. Every input is SUPPLIED by the caller and treated as asserted: this pack performs no lookup against a bank, an accounting system, or a court docket, and cannot establish that a declared balance is real or that a declared deadline record is complete. A reconciliation assembled from a faulty ledger export checks out against the three-way test exactly as well as a true one, and a docket sweep can only band the records it is given. Meeting the reconciliation, or clearing the docket, means only what the cited node computed from the declared inputs. Whether a trust-accounting duty under California Business and Professions Code section 6091.3 or the Client Trust Account Protection Program has been satisfied is a question for the State Bar and the practitioner's own counsel, never a claim this pack makes for itself.

§4 Execution Hash · Workflow Definition Anchor

execution_hash:computing…

Workflow Stages · 3 Nodes · Linear

1 ROOT · TRUST RECONCILIATION node

IOLTA Three-Way Trust Reconciliation art-566-iolta-three-way-reconciliation

Stage 1, the trust reconciliation. A declared bank balance, trust-ledger balance, and per-client ledger total recomputed as a three-way comparison, with the per-pair differences and any negative client low points shown, and a single period verdict of RECONCILED, DISCREPANT, or INCOMPLETE. Reconciling is a statement about the declared figures, never about funds observed in an account.

MCP Call · check_iolta_three_way_reconciliation

{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "name": "check_iolta_three_way_reconciliation",
    "arguments": {
      "reconciliation_tolerance_minor": 100,
      "statement_period": {"start_date": "2026-06-01", "end_date": "2026-06-30"},
      "bank": {"ending_balance_minor": 5000000, "statement_date": "2026-06-30"},
      "trust_ledger": {"ending_balance_minor": 5050000, "as_of": "2026-06-30"},
      "client_ledgers": [
        {"client_id": "client-A", "ending_balance_minor": 3000000, "as_of": "2026-06-30", "entries": [
          {"date": "2026-06-05", "amount_minor": 200000, "description": "Retainer deposit"},
          {"date": "2026-06-20", "amount_minor": 100000, "description": "Additional retainer"}
        ]},
        {"client_id": "client-B", "ending_balance_minor": 2050000, "as_of": "2026-06-30", "entries": []}
      ],
      "outstanding_items": [
        {"type": "deposit_in_transit", "date": "2026-06-29", "amount_minor": 100000, "description": "Client A retainer deposited 6/29"},
        {"type": "uncleared_check", "date": "2026-06-15", "amount_minor": 50000, "description": "Disbursement check #1042"}
      ]
    }
  },
  "id": 1
}

2 DOCKET SWEEP node

Docket Deadline Sweep art-588-docket-deadline-sweep

Stage 2, the docket sweep. The declared deadline records tested against caller-declared roll rules, each labelled OVERDUE, DUE_SOON, SCHEDULED, DONE, or INDETERMINATE against a declared evaluation date, with the roll derivation shown step by step and duplicate or conflicting records flagged. Roll rules are declared parameters, not a jurisdiction table this pack maintains.

MCP Call · sweep_docket_deadlines

{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "name": "sweep_docket_deadlines",
    "arguments": {
      "as_of_date": "2026-08-08",
      "due_soon_days_threshold": 7,
      "roll_rule": {"roll_weekends": true, "roll_direction": "forward", "holiday_dates": ["2026-08-10"]},
      "records": [
        {"date": "2026-08-08", "action": "File answer", "type": "filing", "source": "court order", "done": false},
        {"date": "2026-08-09", "action": "Serve discovery responses", "type": "discovery", "source": "FRCP 26", "done": false},
        {"date": "2026-07-01", "action": "Initial disclosures", "type": "discovery", "source": "FRCP 26(a)", "done": true},
        {"date": "2026-09-15", "action": "Pretrial conference", "type": "hearing", "source": "scheduling order", "done": false}
      ]
    }
  },
  "id": 2
}

3 EVIDENCE BUNDLE · FINAL node

Evidence Bundle Tier Labeler art-408-evidence-bundle-tier-labeler

Stage 3, the evidence bundle. The Stage 2 receipt's execution hash, whose own chain.parent_hashes already carries the Stage 1 receipt's hash under the standard's linear parent-threading, wrapped in one shareable bundle stamped with the SPEC.md §SIDECAR.1 tier label the caller's declared gate results qualify it for. The label re-expresses declared gate outcomes and mints no new trust claim. Final stage.

MCP Call · assemble_ocg_evidence_bundle

{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "name": "assemble_ocg_evidence_bundle",
    "arguments": {
      "artifact_tool_id": "art-588-docket-deadline-sweep",
      "artifact_execution_hash": "<execution_hash from Stage 2>",
      "gate_results": {
        "envelope_well_formed": true,
        "execution_hash_recomputes": true,
        "chain_execution_valid": true,
        "mandate_gates_valid": true,
        "compute_integrity_proof_valid": false
      },
      "proof_refs": []
    }
  },
  "id": 3
}

Reading the Receipt · Two Subjects, Each With Its Own Vocabulary

Stage 1 and Stage 2 each emit their own vocabulary, once per subject, and neither reading rule is added by this page. Stage 1's subject is the statement period: one reconciliation verdict. Stage 2's subject is the individual docket record: one status per record, not one status for the whole docket. Keeping the two separate is the point: a period can be RECONCILED while a deadline on the same matter sits OVERDUE, and collapsing the two into a single combined status would hide exactly that case.

Stage 1 · Reconciliation Verdict, Once Per Period

RECONCILED The three-way equality holds within the declared tolerance, no client ledger went negative at any point in the period, no outstanding item is stale, and every input balance is dated to the same period end.

DISCREPANT At least one of those checks failed: the three-way totals disagree past tolerance, a client ledger dipped negative during the period, an outstanding item aged past its bucket, or a period-end date does not line up. The receipt records which check failed; what follows is a question for the firm's own trust-accounting review.

INCOMPLETE A required input, the tolerance, the statement period, a balance, or at least one client ledger, was absent, so the node did not run the comparison. INCOMPLETE is never treated as a pass.

Stage 2 · Docket Status, Once Per Record

OVERDUE The record's rolled due date has passed the declared as-of date and the record is not marked done. The gate policy moves to review-required whenever any record reports this status.

DUE_SOON The rolled due date falls within the declared due-soon window of the as-of date, a caller-declared threshold defaulting to 7 days. Not yet late, but close enough to flag.

SCHEDULED The rolled due date is further out than the due-soon window and the record is not marked done. The ordinary state for most of a docket's life.

DONE The caller declared the record done. It is retained and reported, never dropped from the sweep, because the receipt covers the full declared docket at one as-of moment, not a filtered view of what remains open.

INDETERMINATE The record itself is malformed, most often a missing or unparseable date, so no status could be computed for it. Distinct from Stage 1's INCOMPLETE, which is about missing top-level inputs rather than one bad record.

Standing Context · Dated Observations

California Business and Professions Code section 6091.3, as read on 2026-08-08, requires every active State Bar of California licensee who holds client funds to certify compliance with trust-account recordkeeping and to maintain records reconcilable to client ledgers. Confirm current statutory text with the State Bar before relying on any certification.

The State Bar of California's Client Trust Account Protection Program (CTAPP), as described on 2026-08-08, ties that certification to a self-assessment and, for accounts selected under its risk-based criteria, a compliance review. This pack produces reconciliation and docket evidence a licensee can hold for that review. It certifies nothing on its own and satisfies no CTAPP requirement by itself.

ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.15 (Safekeeping Property) and FRCP 6(a)(1)(C), the underlying clauses art-566 and art-588 cite for their own arithmetic, are carried from those nodes as read on 2026-08-08. State-specific trust-accounting and computation-of-time rules govern in practice and are not restated here.

The pack declares no regulatory basis of its own. It produces reconciliation and deadline evidence a practitioner, a firm's compliance officer, or the State Bar can review; it does not discharge a trust-accounting duty, does not compute or file a certification, and does not decide whether any docket item has legal effect.

Export Workflow Artifact

Download a §4-compliant workflow artifact with execution hash and step definition. Hash is deterministic over canonical {policy_parameters, output_payload} per RFC 8785/JCS.

Trust-Audit Closeout Pack

Ask your agent