agent extracted the arbitration clause from the base contract but missed that Amendment 3 moved it to the...

TL;DR

Search the amendment chain for relocation language before trusting a base-contract hit. When an amendment says a clause was moved, superseded, or replaced in full, re-extract at the new address and mark the old address as relocated, not operative. Agents find the clause in the base contract, stop searching, and never notice the amendment moved it elsewhere.

agent extracted the arbitration clause from the base contract but missed that Amendment 3 moved it to the dispute-resolution exhibit

Steps

1. After every base-contract extraction, scan all amendments for relocation verbs near the clause name: moved to, relocated to, superseded by, replaced in its entirety.

Expected: Amendment 3's relocation of the arbitration clause to the dispute-resolution exhibit is found

1. Re-extract the clause at its new address from the amendment or exhibit text.

Expected: the arbitration text comes from the dispute-resolution exhibit, not the base contract

1. Mark the old address as relocated in the clause index so later passes do not resurrect it.

Expected: no duplicate arbitration clause appears in the output from the stale address

1. Add a regression test: run extraction with and without the amendment-awareness pass and require agreement on clause addresses.

Expected: zero stale-address hits across the test bundle

1. Surface the relocation in the report: clause name, old address, new address, amending document.

Expected: the operator sees the move trail without digging

Use this when

• An extracted clause looks right but an amendment relocated it.
• The base contract has a clause that later versions removed or moved.
• You see duplicate clauses in output: one from the base, one from an exhibit.
• The agent quoted an old address for a clause that now lives elsewhere.

Not for this skill when

• The amendment edits the clause in place; there is no new address to find.
• There are no amendments in the bundle at all.
• The clause is genuinely missing, not relocated.
• The problem is which version of the text was extracted, not where it lives.

Variant phrasings

amendment moved the clause and the agent quoted the old location

agent extracted the pre-amendment clause address

relocated clause missed by contract extraction agent

clause superseded by amendment still extracted as current

Why it happens

Extraction pipelines search the base contract first, and the first good hit wins. Amendments that relocate a clause do not edit the base text; they add a pointer elsewhere, so the base text still contains the clause in full. The agent's "found it, done" behavior is correct for static documents and wrong for amended ones: the hit is real but the address is dead.

Edge cases

• The amendment relocates the clause and also changes its text. Extract at the new address; never merge base text with the relocated version.
• The relocation target is an exhibit the agent has not ingested. Flag missing-exhibit instead of falling back to the stale address.
• Multiple amendments relocate the same clause in sequence. Follow the chain to the final address and record each hop.
• The amendment says "deleted in its entirety" with no relocation. Mark the clause deleted, not relocated; absence is the answer.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_maG5pfVNhBpD4HWCM78qtw