Amendment and exhibit reconciliation compares a master agreement against every amendment, exhibit, schedule and side letter attached to it, identifying which provisions were modified, which were superseded, and which obligations exist only in an attachment. Each conflict is reported with both source clauses so a lawyer can judge it in seconds.
Nobody sets out to operate under a superseded clause. It happens because the amendment lived in a different folder, or the exhibit arrived after signature.
A term is renegotiated and executed. The master agreement is never updated, and six months later the team quotes the original.
Exhibit D was finalised two weeks after signature and emailed separately. It contains a reporting obligation. It is not in the contract system.
A single-page side letter modifies a liability cap. It is filed with correspondence rather than with the agreement, so no review ever sees it.
Four amendments touch the same clause. Only reading all four in order tells you what is currently in force.
The body says "as set out in Exhibit C". No Exhibit C exists in the executed package, and nobody noticed at signature.
Amendment 3 renumbers sections. Every later cross-reference now points somewhere slightly wrong.
Not a similarity score. A list of specific conflicts, each with the two pieces of language that produced it.
What each material term says right now, after every amendment is applied in order.
Every place the package states two different things, with both clauses quoted and cited.
Every exhibit referenced in the body, matched against what is actually present in the executed package.
Obligations found anywhere in the package, including the ones that exist only in an attachment.
By execution date and by what each amendment explicitly supersedes. Where amendments conflict without clear precedence, that ambiguity is itself reported as an exception — because a human needs to decide it, not a model.
Scanned and photographed amendments are read the same way as native files. Poor scans reduce confidence, and low-confidence findings are flagged for review rather than asserted.
That is reported as a finding. A body reference to an attachment that does not exist in the executed package is one of the most common and most expensive things we surface.
Yes, package by package. The unit of reconciliation is one agreement and everything attached to it, run across as many agreements as you have.
How contract package reconciliation works end to end, and where it sits next to a review tool.
The definition, the method, and the discrepancies that only exist between documents.
Encryption, access control, audit trail, and an honest account of what we are certified for.
Send one agreement and every attachment. We will tell you what is actually in force.
Card required to start · No migration · Findings in one business day