CCARF Practice Question
Correct answer: A
A: Progressive summarisation is lossy. The summary of module 12 likely compressed the rename into a generic phrase, while module 3's summary still referenced the original class names. When the agent documented module 21, it found conflicting names across summaries and defaulted to the earlier, more prominent reference. Critical cross-module changes like renames must be tracked in a persistent facts block outside summarised context.
B: The team explicitly manages context by summarising and discarding source code, so the context window is not overflowing. The problem is the quality of information retained in summaries, not context overflow.
C: Claude Code does not cache file contents between reads. Each Read tool call fetches the current file from disk. The issue is that summarised context retained old class names, not that file reads returned stale data.
D: The question specifies the exact failure: module 21 references class names from module 3 that were renamed in module 12. This is not a confusion issue but a direct consequence of losing the rename detail during progressive summarisation.