Derivatives documentation search that finds every termination right the morning of a downgrade, cited to its clause and signed by legal
Every terminable agreement found the morning of a downgrade, cited and signed by legal.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Derivatives Documentation Search answers legal and operations questions across all of your derivatives documentation at once (every ISDA, CSA, GMRA and prime brokerage agreement), citing the clause. It works like an ISDA agreement search that reads the documents rather than an abstract of them. Eight AI agents read each document in its own language, apply amendments and protocols in order, flag documents that disagree and read every value twice; one lawyer verifies each row and a second approves any answer used in a close-out.
AI in asset management: a buyer's guide to agentic AI for investment managers →
Updated
Your derivatives documentation is thousands of bilateral documents: ISDA Master Agreements and their Schedules, credit support annexes, GMRAs, prime brokerage agreements, German and French local-law masters, and years of amendments, side letters and protocol adherence letters layered on top. When a dealer is downgraded or a fund's NAV falls, legal, counterparty risk and treasury need one answer across all of it within hours: which agreements let us terminate, at what trigger, where the collateral sits and where the notice must go. The collateral system abstracts only the margin terms, and the abstract drifts from the documents.
So a lawyer pulls every agreement with the dealer group and reads Schedule Part 1 elections one family at a time, checks each amendment in date order, confirms who signed, and builds the decision table in a spreadsheet at night. The rows that get missed are the expensive ones: a 2023 amendment nobody linked to the master, a draft filed beside the executed copy, an amendment signed by one side only, a German Rahmenvertrag waiting for a translator, a notice sent to an address the agreement no longer names.
Estimated split for one question across the 61 master agreement families of one dealer group, in lawyer-days of about 7.5 hours: about 30 minutes a family by hand, so about 30 hours. With the solution, the lawyer's time goes to the flagged rows and the sign-off.
Eight agents read every agreement in its own language, apply amendments first and read each value twice; one lawyer verifies, a second approves.
Monday, October 19, 2026. At 7:42 a.m. the rating feed reports Hollins Brothers Bank plc cut from BBB to BBB-. Quillfield Capital trades with the Hollins group through 63 fund entities. Here is what happens next in the working solution: the agents do the reading, Priya talks to them in plain words, and two lawyers decide.
Priya's home screen leads with the counterparty event the agents opened two minutes after the downgrade: all 214 Hollins documents read, 9 agreements that let Quillfield terminate, $142.0M net exposure under them, 2 that need a lawyer. Below it, five items need her, each with its deadline, and an ask box over 1,184 documents and 46 dealer groups.
“Hollins Brothers Bank was cut to BBB- at 7:42 a.m. The agents have read all 214 Hollins documents.”
Priya asks: “Hollins Brothers Bank was downgraded to BBB-. Which agreements let us terminate?” The Planner reads it as rating-downgrade termination rights at BBB-, latest amendments applied, across 61 master agreement families. In the conversation beside the grid each agent reports as it finishes: the Reader on 214 documents in English, German and French, the Amendment agent on 84 amendments and 3 protocols, the Conflict agent on 2 found, the Checker on 213 of 214 confirmed.
Planner agent: “Find every rating clause in Schedules and local-law annexes · Apply amendments, side letters and protocols in date order · Flag documents that disagree · Read every cited passage a second time, blind · Join exposure from the collateral system.”
One sentence sits above the grid: 9 of 61 Hollins master agreements let Quillfield terminate at BBB-, 6 by their original terms and 3 because of amendments signed in 2023. Every row shows the rating downgrade trigger, an Additional Termination Event in the ISDA Schedule, as amended, with its clause and page, whether it fires at BBB-, the net exposure and whether both agents agree. On the three amended rows “Below BBB-” is struck through beside “Below BBB” and the March 14, 2023 amendment.
Amendment agent: “Three triggers moved from ‘below BBB-’ to ‘below BBB’ in amendments dated March 14, 2023. Without them, the answer would be 6 agreements.”
QF Euro Rentenfonds trades under a German Rahmenvertrag. Priya opens the cell: Anhang Nr. 4(1) on page 4 sits beside the English reading. “BBB-” was typed, struck by hand and replaced with “BBB”, initialed R.V. / M.H. by both parties. The Reader read it at 0.84 and the blind Checker at 0.86, both below the 0.90 a close-out answer needs, so it waits for her. She confirms with the reason code “Handwritten change initialled by both parties”.
“Reader 0.84 · Checker 0.86 · below the 0.90 needed for a close-out answer. Both agents read ‘BBB’.”
The Short Duration Income Fund amendment that raises its trigger was signed by Quillfield on March 9, 2023, but the document store has no Hollins signature page. The Conflict agent found a countersigned scan attached to a March 16, 2023 email from Hollins' legal team, matched the amendment text page for page, 4 of 4, read the Hollins signature at 0.71 confidence, and proposes treating the amendment as effective from March 15, 2023. Both passages sit side by side. Priya accepts the proposal with “Countersigned copy verified”.
The Amendment agent never treats a one-sided amendment as effective. It goes to a lawyer.
Priya verifies the seven rows both agents agree on in one step, each with its citation, and sends the answer for close-out sign-off at 8:41. On the sign-off screen the approve button is locked for her: she prepared the answer. Daniel Okafor, Deputy General Counsel, approves at 8:53 with “Verified against source”, and the answer is locked on the audit trail.
“You prepared this, so you cannot approve it. Daniel Okafor must approve it (segregation of duties).”
The event room holds the six questions the agents asked at 7:44 (rating triggers, cross-default, set-off, close-out method, notices, collateral re-use) and the exposure from the collateral system. By rule D1, net exposure of $15M or more, the agents propose designating an Early Termination Date on 4 agreements ($97.2M) and reservation-of-rights letters on 5 ($44.8M). Hannah records the decisions at 9:05 with a reason code; she cannot approve her own, so Daniel Okafor approves them at 9:09.
“Each decision follows rule D1 or carries my reason. I cannot approve my own decisions.”
With the answer and the decisions both approved, the Notice agent's drafts open for signing: 4 Early Termination notices and 5 reservation-of-rights letters. Each goes to Hollins Brothers Bank plc, 40 Lothbury Walk, London, per the April 2, 2024 notices amendment, not the 2014 Schedule's old address at 12 Cutter Quay. Delivery is by courier or by hand, because email is not allowed for Section 6 notices, and the Early Termination Date of November 2, 2026 falls within 20 days of notice under Section 6(b)(iv).
“Drafted by the Notice agent from the decisions. Nothing is sent until two lawyers sign.” Ana Ferreira in legal operations sends them.
Priya types: “Do we have set-off against Hollins on close-out?” There is no saved field for set-off, so the Planner builds the column from her words and says so. The Reader reads every Hollins master agreement and the Checker reads each cited passage again: Section 6(f) set-off applies under 41 of 61, 14 Schedules disapply it in Part 5(d), and the 6 on the 1992 form or local law have no set-off clause. Rows that differ from most are flagged, each cited to its page.
“No field existed for this: the Planner built the column from your words, the Reader read every agreement and the Checker read each cited passage again.”
Priya asks: “If Hollins falls below investment grade, which agreements could we terminate?” Nothing is read yet. The Planner explains that “below investment grade” is not written the same way everywhere: 52 Schedules fire on a cut by any one rating agency and 9 use the lower of two ratings. She chooses each agreement's own words. The answer: 24 of 61 terminable, $175.4M net, the 15 new ones all reading “below BBB-”, each re-read blind by the Checker. Every step of it, from her question to the Planner's question back, is on the audit trail.
Planner agent: “I recommend each agreement's own words, the first choice: that is what a court would read. Nothing is read until you choose.”
The same downgrade morning, seen by five of the people who carry it: what it looked like by hand, and what it looks like now.
Eight agents read every agreement in its own language, apply amendments first and read each value twice; one lawyer verifies, a second approves.
Turns a plain-language question into a reading plan (document families, clause types, fund entities, as-of time) and asks back when the question is ambiguous, before a single page is read.
Reads every planned document in its own language, scans included, and finds the clause and its value with page and paragraph; German and French originals are shown beside the English reading.
Orders each family's chain (master, Schedule, annexes, amendments, side letters, protocols, initialed handwritten changes) and applies the latest effective change, keeping the original value visible.
Flags documents that disagree, such as a draft beside the executed copy or an amendment signed by one side, searches the email archive and proposes a resolution with both passages side by side.
Re-reads every cited passage blind, on a different model family, and confirms or disputes the value with a confidence score.
Joins mark-to-market and collateral held or posted per agreement from the collateral system and proposes a decision by the firm's rule.
Drafts Early Termination notices and reservation-of-rights letters to the address in the latest notices clause, by the delivery methods each agreement allows, every reference cited.
Files new executed documents from the document store, the email archive and e-signature records, links them to their families and flags missing signature pages and poor scans.
One verifies each row; the other approves any close-out answer. The agents propose; a named person decides.
Every answer has the agents' conversation next to it. Ask a follow-up, add a column or ask why a row is there; each reply cites its clause and can change the grid.
Why is Short Duration Income Fund in the list?
Its 2014 Schedule says “below BBB-”, which BBB- does not trip. The March 14, 2023 amendment changed it to “below BBB”. That amendment is effective only if Hollins signed it; their signature page is not in the document store, so the row waits for a lawyer.
Where do we send a termination notice?
To Hollins Brothers Bank plc, 40 Lothbury Walk, London EC2R 7HB, United Kingdom, attention Head of Derivatives Legal: the address in the April 2, 2024 notices amendment, not the 2014 Schedule address. By courier or by hand; email is not allowed for Section 6 notices except under the Commodity Strategies agreement.
Add the close-out method
Added. 55 of 61 use Close-out Amount (Section 6(e) of the 2002 form); 3 on the 1992 form use Market Quotation, Second Method; 3 local-law masters use their own settlement amount.
What happens if Hollins is cut again to BB+?
15 more agreements would become terminable (those that trigger below BBB-), adding $33.4M of net exposure at the 7:45 a.m. snapshot. The other 7 trigger only at BB or lower. I can save this as a watch on the rating feed.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
How amendments are ordered, when an agent may decide and who signs are settings. A change to a threshold, rule or role goes to the Deputy General Counsel for approval.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Confidence needed for a close-out answer | 0.90 | Set by the administrator; a change goes to the Deputy General Counsel |
| Confidence needed for an everyday answer | 0.80 | Set by the administrator; 0.85 proposed, awaiting approval |
| Amendment order (R1) | Latest effective amendment wins; protocols from their effective date; initialed handwritten changes count | On · Off |
| Executed copy prevails over drafts (R2) | On: used and logged, no person needed | On · Off |
| One-sided amendments go to a lawyer (R3) | On | On · Off |
| Close-out proposal rule (D1) | Designate where net exposure is $15M or more; otherwise reserve rights | On · Off |
| Close-out answers need two lawyers (S1) | Senior Counsel verifies; Deputy General Counsel approves | Always on |
| Sign-off deadlines | Close-out answer: 2 hours, then it escalates to the General Counsel | Set per item: notices 2 hours after approval · conflicts 2 business days (2 hours in an event) · corrections 1 business day |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate (61 agreement families × about 30 minutes) · “typical” = published figures (SEC, CFTC, Federal Reserve and PRA records summarized by btw.media: one dealer's loss of about $5.5 billion when a family office counterparty failed in March 2021; ISDA, paper on generative AI to extract and digitize CSA clauses, May 15, 2025: over 90% accuracy with context, 100% rarely reached on nuanced clauses). Basel Committee, Guidelines for counterparty credit risk management (December 11, 2024), and SEC Rule 18f-4 are named as context. Quillfield Capital, Hollins Brothers Bank and the people, dealers, funds, agreements and addresses named on this page are fictional: characters and sample data in the working solution.
Derivatives Documentation Search answers legal and operations questions across all of your derivatives documentation at once (every ISDA, CSA, GMRA and prime brokerage agreement), citing the clause. It works like an ISDA agreement search that reads the documents rather than an abstract of them. Eight AI agents read each document in its own language, apply amendments and protocols in order, flag documents that disagree and read every value twice; one lawyer verifies each row and a second approves any answer used in a close-out.
Ask in plain words. The Planner turns the question into a reading plan, the Reader finds each additional termination event and rating trigger in every ISDA Schedule and local-law annex, and the Amendment agent applies the latest effective change. In the sample case the answer came back in 3 minutes 52 seconds across 214 documents: 9 of 61 agreements terminable at BBB-, 3 only because of 2023 amendments.
Yes. The Amendment agent orders each family's chain, from master and Schedule through annexes, amendments, side letters, protocols such as the 2018 US Resolution Stay Protocol and the 2020 IBOR Fallbacks Protocol, and initialed handwritten changes. The original value stays visible, struck through, beside the amended one. It never treats an unsigned or one-sided amendment as effective.
Yes, and a clause does not need to be set up as a field first. The Planner builds a column from the question: asked “Do we have set-off against Hollins on close-out?”, the working solution found Section 6(f) applies under 41 of 61 master agreements, 14 Schedules disapply it and 6 have no set-off clause. Asked which agreements have a minimum transfer amount above $1 million, it read every credit support annex: 8 of 61, all at $2,000,000. It also tests NAV-decline triggers by fund at a fall you choose, reads cross-default Threshold Amounts from each Schedule and shows where a dealer may rehypothecate collateral you posted: under 19 New York-law annexes where Paragraph 6(c) applies, with title transfer under 18 English-law ones. Asked about close-out under the repo agreements, it reads the 14 GMRA 2011 agreements. A question it cannot match to a clause gets a question back, not a guess.
No. The Notice agent drafts Early Termination notices and reservation-of-rights letters to the address in the latest notices clause, by the methods each agreement allows, and checks the Early Termination Date against Section 6(b)(iv). Drafts stay locked until senior counsel and the Deputy General Counsel both sign, and legal operations sends them; each courier receipt is filed with its agreement.
Yes. German Rahmenverträge and French FBF master agreements are read in the original and shown beside the English reading, cited to the page. A handwritten change is read by both agents, and below the confidence a close-out answer needs it goes to a lawyer to confirm.
Yes. Agents never approve an answer or a decision, send a notice or change a value on their own. Senior counsel verifies each row and the Deputy General Counsel approves; counterparty risk records each close-out decision with a reason code and the Deputy General Counsel approves it; the person who prepared an answer or recorded a decision can never approve it. Everything is on an append-only audit trail.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents, such as your agreement library, collateral system and your documentation rules, and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. The working solution includes a first-time setup that connects the sources, maps fund entities and regions and runs the first full read.
Committee pack in two hours, every outlier explained, every figure tied to its source.
1-min demoTransaction Cost AnalysisEvery trade's cost explained in plain words, by broker, algorithm and venue, by morning.
1-min demoBroker VoteEvery research dollar tied to its vote and evidence, approved in days, not weeks.
1-min demoWe'll run Derivatives Documentation Search on a sample of your own ISDAs, CSAs and amendments, against a question your team answered by hand.