Back to Details

amendment-history

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

/amendment-history

/amendment-history

Loads a base agreement and all amendments, then either summarizes what changed over time or traces a specific provision to its current controlling language.
加载基础协议及所有修订文件（amendment），生成随时间推移的变更摘要，或追踪特定条款（provision）至当前生效文本。

Instructions

操作说明

  1. Get the documents: From file upload, [CLM ID (coming soon)], or [repository link (coming soon)]. Accept multiple files in one invocation. If none provided, ask.
  2. Detect the mode by parsing the request per the mode detection rules below. If a provision name is clearly stated, go straight to Mode 2. If no provision is mentioned, run Mode 1. Ask only if genuinely ambiguous.
  3. Run the workflow below. Follow it fully.
  4. Offer follow-ups after output:
    • "Want me to trace another provision?"
    • "Want a full playbook review of the current agreement as amended?" (routes to vendor-agreement-review)
    • "Want a stakeholder summary of the key changes?" (routes to stakeholder-summary)
  1. 获取文档：通过文件上传、[CLM ID（即将上线）]或[仓库链接（即将上线）]获取。支持单次调用上传多个文件。若未提供文档，请询问用户。
  2. 检测模式：根据以下模式检测规则解析用户请求。若明确提及条款名称，直接进入模式2；若未提及条款，则运行模式1。仅当请求确实存在歧义时才询问用户。
  3. 执行以下工作流：完整遵循工作流步骤。
  4. 输出后提供后续选项：
    • "需要我追踪其他条款吗？"
    • "需要对修订后的当前协议进行完整的手册审查吗？"（将跳转至vendor-agreement-review功能）
    • "需要生成关键变更的利益相关者摘要吗？"（将跳转至stakeholder-summary功能）

Examples

示例

/commercial-legal:amendment-history acme-msa.pdf amendment-1.pdf amendment-2.pdf
/commercial-legal:amendment-history --provision indemnity
/commercial-legal:amendment-history
[paste agreement and amendment text]
/commercial-legal:amendment-history acme-msa.pdf amendment-1.pdf amendment-2.pdf
/commercial-legal:amendment-history --provision indemnity
/commercial-legal:amendment-history
[paste agreement and amendment text]

Matter context

事项上下文

Matter context. Check 
## Matter workspaces
in the practice-level CLAUDE.md. If 
Enabled
is 
✗
(the default for in-house users), skip the rest of this paragraph — skills use practice-level context and the matter machinery is invisible. If enabled and there is no active matter, ask: "Which matter is this for? Run 
/commercial-legal:matter-workspace switch <slug>
or say 
practice-level
." Load the active matter's 
matter.md
for matter-specific context and overrides. Write outputs to the matter folder at 
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/commercial-legal/matters/<matter-slug>/
. Never read another matter's files unless 
Cross-matter context
is 
on
.
事项上下文：查看实践级CLAUDE.md中的
## Matter workspaces
部分。如果
Enabled
为
✗
（内部用户默认设置），则跳过本段剩余内容——技能将使用实践级上下文，事项机制对用户不可见。如果已启用且无活跃事项，请询问："这属于哪个事项？运行
/commercial-legal:matter-workspace switch <slug>
或选择
practice-level
。"加载活跃事项的
matter.md
文件以获取事项特定上下文和覆盖规则。将输出写入事项文件夹：
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/commercial-legal/matters/<matter-slug>/
。除非
Cross-matter context
开启，否则不得读取其他事项的文件。

Purpose

功能目的

Contracts accumulate amendments. By the third amendment, nobody remembers what the original said or which version of a clause controls. This skill reads the base agreement and all amendments in chronological order and either summarizes what changed across the whole contract or traces a specific provision through every version to find the current controlling language.
合同会不断累积修订文件。到第三次修订时，没人记得原始协议的内容，也不清楚哪个版本的条款具有效力。本技能按时间顺序读取基础协议及所有修订文件，既可生成全合同的变更摘要，也可追踪特定条款在各个版本中的演变，以确定当前生效文本。

Mode detection

模式检测

Parse the user's request to determine which mode to run. Do not ask which mode unless the request is genuinely ambiguous.
Mode 1 — Summary (no specific provision mentioned) Trigger phrases: "what changed", "amendment history", "show me changes over time", "summarize amendments", "what does this contract look like now"
Mode 2 — Provision trace (specific clause or topic named) Trigger phrases: "where's the [clause]", "latest [provision]", "how did [term] change", "find the indemnity", "what does it say now about [topic]"
Common provision mappings:
  • "indemnity" / "indemnification" → indemnification section
  • "liability" / "liability cap" → limitation of liability
  • "termination" → term and termination
  • "data" / "privacy" / "DPA" → data protection provisions
  • "IP" / "intellectual property" → IP ownership and licenses
  • "price" / "fees" / "payment" → payment terms
  • "auto-renewal" / "renewal" → renewal mechanics
If the term is ambiguous and maps to more than one provision, list the candidates and ask which one:
"I found [N] provisions related to [term] — [list them]. Which one?"
If the overall request is ambiguous between modes, ask one question:
"Summary of all changes across the contract, or trace a specific provision — like indemnity, liability, or termination?"
解析用户请求以确定运行模式。仅当请求确实存在歧义时才询问用户选择哪种模式。
模式1——变更摘要（未提及特定条款） 触发短语："what changed"、"amendment history"、"show me changes over time"、"summarize amendments"、"what does this contract look like now"
模式2——条款追踪（提及具体条款或主题） 触发短语："where's the [clause]"、"latest [provision]"、"how did [term] change"、"find the indemnity"、"what does it say now about [topic]"
常见条款映射：
  • "indemnity" / "indemnification" → 赔偿条款章节
  • "liability" / "liability cap" → 责任限制条款
  • "termination" → 期限与终止条款
  • "data" / "privacy" / "DPA" → 数据保护条款
  • "IP" / "intellectual property" → 知识产权归属与许可条款
  • "price" / "fees" / "payment" → 付款条款
  • "auto-renewal" / "renewal" → 续约机制条款
若术语存在歧义且对应多个条款，请列出候选选项并询问用户：
"我找到[N]个与[term]相关的条款——[列出条款]。请问您指的是哪一个？"
若请求在模式间存在歧义，请仅询问一个问题：
"需要生成全合同的变更摘要，还是追踪特定条款——比如indemnity、liability或termination？"

Step 1: Load and order the documents

步骤1：加载并排序文档

Accept documents from any of these sources:
[CLM integration coming soon] (if connected): Search by counterparty name or agreement title. Pull the base agreement and all amendments. Record metadata typically includes execution dates — use these to establish chronological order.
[Document repository integration coming soon] (if connected): Search by counterparty name or filename. Look for files matching patterns like "Amendment", "Addendum", "Amendment No. 1", "First Amendment", or numbered suffixes. Pull all matches and sort by file date or filename numbering.
Direct upload: User provides files directly. In most cases the ordering is self-explanatory from document titles (e.g., "Amendment No. 1", "Second Amendment", "Addendum A") or dates visible in the filename or document header — proceed without asking.
Only ask the user to confirm ordering if:
  • Filenames give no indication of sequence (e.g., "agreement-final.pdf", "agreement-v2.pdf", "agreement-markup.pdf")
  • Dates are absent from both filenames and document headers
  • Two documents appear to be the same amendment version
If ordering was inferred rather than confirmed, note confidence at the top of the output only where uncertain:
"Order inferred from document titles — one item I was less certain about: [specific document]. Confirm if this affects your review."
Ordering rules:
  • Always establish chronological order before reading content.
  • If execution dates are available in metadata, use them.
  • If not, look for dates in the document header or recitals ("This Amendment, dated as of...").
  • Amendments often reference the agreement they modify ("this Amendment to the Master Services Agreement dated [X]") — use these references to confirm the chain.
接受以下任一来源的文档：
[CLM集成即将上线]（若已连接）： 按交易对手名称或协议标题搜索。提取基础协议及所有修订文件。记录元数据通常包含签署日期——使用这些日期建立时间顺序。
[文档仓库集成即将上线]（若已连接）： 按交易对手名称或文件名搜索。查找匹配以下模式的文件："Amendment"、"Addendum"、"Amendment No. 1"、"First Amendment"或带数字后缀的文件。提取所有匹配文件并按文件日期或文件名编号排序。
直接上传： 用户直接提供文件。大多数情况下，可通过文档标题（如"Amendment No. 1"、"Second Amendment"、"Addendum A"）或文件名/文档页眉中的日期确定顺序——无需询问用户即可继续操作。
仅在以下情况下请用户确认排序：
  • 文件名未显示任何顺序信息（如"agreement-final.pdf"、"agreement-v2.pdf"、"agreement-markup.pdf"）
  • 文件名和文档页眉均无日期信息
  • 两个文档看似属于同一修订版本
若排序为推断而非用户确认，仅在不确定时在输出顶部注明置信度：
"根据文档标题推断顺序——其中一个文档的顺序我不太确定：[具体文档]。请确认是否影响您的审查。"
排序规则：
  • 读取内容前必须先确定时间顺序。
  • 若元数据中有签署日期，优先使用该日期。
  • 若无签署日期，查看文档页眉或前言中的日期（"本修订文件签署日期为..."）。
  • 修订文件通常会提及所修改的协议（"本修订文件针对日期为[X]的主服务协议"）——使用这些引用确认关联链。

Privilege inheritance

特权继承

This skill reads the base agreement and amendments — often privileged or confidential in their own right, and typically used for privileged analysis. The output inherits the source's privilege and confidentiality status. Prepend the work-product header from 
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/commercial-legal/CLAUDE.md
## Outputs
to every output below, distribute only within the privilege circle, and store it where privileged materials live. Strip the header before any external delivery.
本技能读取基础协议及修订文件——这些文件本身通常具有特权或保密性，且多用于特权分析。输出内容继承源文件的特权和保密状态。在以下所有输出前添加
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/commercial-legal/CLAUDE.md
中
## Outputs
部分的工作产品页眉，仅在特权范围内分发，并存储在特权材料存储位置。对外交付前需移除页眉。

Step 2: Read and index

步骤2：读取并建立索引

Read each document in chronological order. For each, extract:
  • Document type (base agreement, amendment number, addendum, etc.)
  • Execution date
  • Parties (confirm they match across documents — flag if a new party was added or a party name changed)
  • A list of provisions explicitly modified, added, or deleted
Build a working index before producing output. Use it internally to drive the output — do not show it to the user.
按时间顺序读取每个文档。对于每个文档，提取：
  • 文档类型（基础协议、修订编号、附录等）
  • 签署日期
  • 交易方（确认所有文档中的交易方一致——若新增交易方或交易方名称变更，需标记）
  • 明确修改、添加或删除的条款列表
生成输出前先建立工作索引。内部使用该索引驱动输出——无需向用户展示。

Mode 1: Summary of all changes

模式1：全合同变更摘要

Section reference rule

章节引用规则

Every finding must include an inline section reference so the reader can verify against the source document without searching:
"Termination for convenience (§12.3): Added. Customer may terminate on 90 days written notice with no fee after the initial term."
If a provision spans multiple sections or the section number changed across amendments, cite all references: "Indemnification (§9.1 base; §9.1 restated in Amendment 5)"
每个发现结果必须包含内嵌章节引用，以便读者无需搜索即可对照源文档验证：
"Termination for convenience (§12.3): Added. Customer may terminate on 90 days written notice with no fee after the initial term."
若条款跨多个章节或章节编号在修订文件中发生变化，请引用所有相关章节： "Indemnification (§9.1 base; §9.1 restated in Amendment 5)"

Output format

输出格式

markdown
undefined
markdown
undefined

Amendment History: [Counterparty] — [Agreement type]

修订历史：[交易对手] — [协议类型]

Base agreement: [date] Amendments: [N] ([date of first] → [date of last]) Last amended: [date]
基础协议：[日期] 修订文件数量：[N]（[最早日期] → [最晚日期]） 最后修订日期：[日期]

What changed — chronological

变更记录（按时间顺序）

Amendment 1 — [date]

修订文件1 — [日期]

Purpose: [one sentence — why this amendment existed, from recitals or clear from context. If not stated, omit rather than guess.]
Material changes:
  • [Provision] (§[X.X]): [what it said before → what it says now, in plain English]
  • [New provision added] (§[X.X]): [what it does]
  • [Provision deleted] (§[X.X]): [what was removed and why it matters]
目的：[一句话说明——修订原因，来自前言或上下文。若未明确说明，请勿猜测，直接省略。]
重大变更：
  • [条款]（§[X.X]）：[变更前内容 → 变更后内容，用通俗易懂的语言描述]
  • [新增条款]（§[X.X]）：[条款功能说明]
  • [删除条款]（§[X.X]）：[删除内容及影响说明]

Amendment 2 — [date]

修订文件2 — [日期]

[same structure]
[repeat for each amendment]
[相同格式]
[重复上述格式，直至所有修订文件]

Net current state

当前最终状态

ProvisionCurrent position§RefLast changed
[clause][plain English summary]§[X.X]Amendment N, [date]
[clause][unchanged from base]§[X.X]Base agreement
条款当前内容章节引用最后修改日期
[条款名称][通俗易懂的摘要]§[X.X]修订文件N，[日期]
[条款名称]与基础协议一致§[X.X]基础协议

Watch items

注意事项

[Flag anything that looks inconsistent — e.g., an amendment modifying a provision that was already deleted, contradictory language between amendments, a party name that changed without a formal assignment, or a provision where the section number shifted across documents. Include section references on every flag.]

---
[标记所有看似不一致的内容——例如，修订文件修改了已删除的条款、修订文件间存在矛盾表述、交易方名称变更但未正式转让、条款章节编号在不同文档中发生变化等。每个标记均需包含章节引用。]

---

Mode 2: Provision trace

模式2：条款追踪

Output format

输出格式

Show only what changed. Do not list amendments where the provision was untouched — skip them entirely.
markdown
undefined
仅展示变更内容。完全未修改该条款的修订文件需跳过，不列入输出。
markdown
undefined

Provision Trace: [Provision name]

条款追踪：[条款名称]

[Counterparty] — [Agreement type]

[交易对手] — [协议类型]

Original — [Base agreement date], §[X.X]

原始版本 — [基础协议日期]，§[X.X]

"[exact quote]"
Plain English: [one sentence]
"[原文引用]"
通俗易懂说明：[一句话总结]

Amendment [N] — [date], §[X.X]

修订文件[N] — [日期]，§[X.X]

Was:
"[exact quote of prior language]"
Now:
"[exact quote of replacement language]"
What changed: [one sentence — practical effect on the parties]
[Only subsequent amendments that touched this provision appear here. All others are omitted.]
变更前：
"[旧版原文引用]"
变更后：
"[新版原文引用]"
变更内容：[一句话说明——对交易方的实际影响]
[仅展示修改过该条款的后续修订文件。其余修订文件均省略。]

Current controlling language

当前生效文本

§[X.X] — [source document, date]
"[exact quote]"
Plain English: [one sentence]
§[X.X] — [来源文档，日期]
"[原文引用]"
通俗易懂说明：[一句话总结]

Watch items

注意事项

[Flags, inconsistencies, open questions — with section references. Common items to check: whether the provision is subject to or carved out of the liability cap; whether the section number shifted across amendments; whether the amendment language conflicts with another provision.]

If the provision was never amended after the base agreement:
> "This provision has not been modified by any amendment. Original
> language controls. §[X.X], base agreement, [date]."

---
[标记、不一致内容、待解决问题——均需包含章节引用。常见检查项：条款是否受责任限额约束或被排除在外；章节编号在修订文件中是否发生变化；修订文件表述是否与其他条款冲突。]

若基础协议后该条款从未被修订：
> "本条款未被任何修订文件修改。原始文本仍然有效。§[X.X]，基础协议，[日期]。"

---

Close with the next-steps decision tree

结尾提供后续操作选项

End with the next-steps decision tree per CLAUDE.md 
## Outputs
. Customize the options to what this skill just produced — the five default branches (draft the X, escalate, get more facts, watch and wait, something else) are a starting point, not a lock-in. The tree is the output; the lawyer picks.
根据CLAUDE.md中
## Outputs
部分的后续操作决策树结束输出。根据本技能生成的内容自定义选项——五个默认分支（起草X、升级处理、获取更多事实、观察等待、其他）仅为起点，并非固定选项。决策树即为输出内容，由律师选择下一步操作。

What this skill does not do

本技能不支持的操作

  • It does not determine which document controls in the event of a conflict between the base agreement and an amendment — that is a legal interpretation question. It flags conflicts and routes to Legal.
  • It does not draft new amendments.
  • It does not compare against the playbook in 
    ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/commercial-legal/CLAUDE.md
    — that is the vendor-agreement-review skill's job. This skill is purely historical.
  • It does not infer what an amendment means if the language is ambiguous — it quotes exactly and flags ambiguity for Legal.
  • 不负责判断基础协议与修订文件冲突时以哪个文档为准——这属于法律解释问题。本技能会标记冲突并转至法务部门处理。
  • 不支持起草新的修订文件。
  • 不支持与
    ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/commercial-legal/CLAUDE.md
    中的手册进行对比——这是vendor-agreement-review技能的工作。本技能仅处理历史变更。
  • 若条款表述存在歧义，不支持推断修订文件的含义——仅会准确引用原文并标记歧义，转至法务部门处理。