Version Chaos Untangler Skill

Six copies of the contract: email attachments, two drives, someone's desktop, one renamed -final-JT-edits. Two have diverged — different edits on a shared ancestor — and the team is now editing in parallel universes. Untangling is forensic then structural: census every copy (where, modified-when, by-whom), establish the canonical defensibly (newest is not automatically rightest), merge what diverged, then kill the conditions — one home, links-not-attachments, and platform version history doing what filename suffixes failed to do.

What This Skill Produces

• The version census — every known copy: location, modified date, editor, size/diff signals
• The canonical verdict — which version wins and why (the lineage argument, not just the timestamp)
• The merge plan — the divergent edits reconciled, with the who-confirms list for judgment conflicts
• The single-source install — one home, the redirect of every old copy, and the links-only norm

Required Inputs

Ask for these if not provided:

• The copies — everywhere it lives (search email attachments by filename, both drives, ask the usual suspects); the census is only as good as the hunt
• The stakes — a contract mid-negotiation and a team doc carry different merge rigor; legal-adjacent docs get the careful version
• The editors — who touched it recently; diverged edits need their authors for the judgment calls
• The platform reality — where the canonical should live (the versioned platform — cloud doc or drive with history — not email, not desktops)

Framework: The Untangle Rules

1. Census before choosing: list every copy with modified-date and editor before any verdict — the loudest "mine is latest" claim is wrong often enough that the census is not optional. Email attachments are copies-at-a-timestamp, and every send forked the universe.
2. Canonical is lineage, not timestamp: the winner is the copy containing the most confirmed-wanted edits — usually but not always the newest. The tell for divergence: two copies both modified after their common ancestor. When found, neither is canonical yet; the merge output is.
3. Merge by diff, confirm by author: compare divergent copies section-by-section (platform compare tools where they exist); mechanical differences merge directly, judgment conflicts (two different edits to the same clause) go to their authors by name. The merge doc lists every judgment call and who confirmed it — for legal-adjacent docs, that list is the audit trail.
4. Kill the old copies loudly: every non-canonical copy gets replaced by a pointer ("moved — canonical lives here: link]") or deleted where possible, and the announcement names the one true home. Silent canonicalization loses to the first person who edits their bookmarked copy.
5. The prevention is structural: the doc lives on a versioned platform (history replaces suffix-naming) · links, never attachments (an attachment is a fork) · the filename loses its version theater per filename-convention · and mid-negotiation external docs get one named copy-holder who alone sends/receives versions.

Output Format

Version Untangle: document]

The Census

| Copy | Location | Modified | Editor | Signals | |---|---|---|---|---|

The Verdict

Canonical: which and the lineage why · divergence found: yes/no · if yes: the merge is the canonical]

The Merge (if diverged)

Section-level reconciliation · judgment calls × confirming author · the audit-trail note for legal docs]

The Install

The one home (versioned platform) · pointers placed over old copies · the announcement line · links-only norm + the external copy-holder rule if applicable]

Quality Checks

• ] Every findable copy is in the census before any verdict
• ] The canonical argument is lineage-based, not timestamp-only
• ] Divergent judgment calls were confirmed by their authors, listed
• ] Every old copy now points to the canonical or is gone
• ] The doc's new home has version history — the suffix era is over for this file

Anti-Patterns

• ] Do not crown the newest by default — the newest fork of the wrong branch is still wrong
• ] Do not merge judgment conflicts by taste — authors confirm their own clauses
• ] Do not canonicalize silently — unannounced truth loses to bookmarked habit
• ] Do not leave the winner on a desktop or in a thread — un-versioned homes restart the chaos
• ] Do not send attachments of the untangled doc — every attachment is the sequel's opening scene