Legal · Compliance · Contract lifecycle
Contract Intelligence & Compliance Agent
- Who this is for
- Legal, procurement, risk, and compliance teams responsible for reading, comparing, and acting on contractual obligations at scale.
- Outcome
- Extract clauses and obligations, compare them with approved playbooks and mapped control requirements, surface possible gaps, and route material findings to the accountable owner.
- Boundary
- The agent supports operations — it does not provide legal advice or determine regulatory compliance. Legal, risk, procurement, and compliance owners retain every consequential decision.
Contract review is where obligations quietly disappear.
Contracts arrive in every shape and every version. Playbooks, control libraries, and regulatory mappings live in different documents. The gap between what was signed and what should have been signed is where risk accumulates.
Teams that read every contract closely cannot cover the volume. Teams that cover the volume cannot read closely. The obligations that need someone to act on them get lost between them.
End-to-end contract flow
Seven coordinated steps. Deterministic checks run against approved libraries; agents locate and compare clauses; the accountable owner reviews every material finding.
- Ingest from the configured contract source (mailbox, portal, CLM, shared drive).
- Track versions so a later comparison references the correct baseline.
- Classify contract type against the customer's approved catalogue.
- Select the applicable playbook and control library for comparison.
- Extract clauses and obligations with links to the exact page and version.
- Group clauses by topic so a reviewer can compare like with like.
Example reviewer states on this step
Limitation of liability capNeeds review
- Compare each clause against the customer's approved playbook.
- Where the customer has mapped control requirements (for example an internal DORA, NIS2, or banking mapping), include those references in the comparison.
- Flag deviations with the source, the baseline, and the shared reviewer copy.
- Do not label any deviation as non-compliant; label it as a possible gap for review.
Example reviewer states on this step
Data residency clauseConflicting Termination-for-convenience noticeMissing
- Legal, risk, procurement, or compliance reviews the finding, its source, and the mapped baseline.
- The reviewer accepts, corrects, or rejects the finding with the reason recorded.
- Emit approved obligations, tasks, and renewal actions to the customer's CLM, work-tracker, or GRC system.
- Recurring reviews attach to the same case so history is preserved.
Which decisions belong to which actor
The agent extracts, compares, and drafts. Legal and compliance decisions belong to the accountable owner.
Version tracking, playbook lookup, obligation-emission schemas.
- Version, page, and source-link tracking.
- Playbook and control-library lookup.
- Obligation and task emission schema.
Suggestions a reviewer confirms.
- Contract-type classification.
- Playbook selection suggestion.
- Renewal calendar hints.
Cross-document coordination.
- Clause extraction with source links.
- Comparison against approved playbooks and mapped control libraries.
- Assembling deviation summaries and preparing tasks for reviewers.
All consequential legal, risk, procurement, and compliance decisions.
- Accept, correct, or reject each finding.
- Regulatory compliance determinations — always outside this workflow.
- Legal advice — never provided by this workflow.
Human boundaries
The agent gives operational assistance. It does not give legal advice, determine regulatory compliance, or accept contract terms.
Legal / general counsel
- Legal interpretation of clauses.
- Whether the customer accepts a clause deviation.
Compliance officer
- Whether the customer's mapped control library reflects their obligations.
- Regulatory compliance determinations — always with the compliance function, not this workflow.
Contract owner (procurement, risk, or business)
- Whether an obligation task is complete.
- Renewal, extension, and termination decisions.
Reviewer states you'll see on a contract
Same four-state vocabulary as the rest of the platform.
Governing lawVerified Limitation of liability capNeeds review Termination-for-convenience noticeMissing Data residency clauseConflicting
What we measure
Measures agreed at the Workflow Proof stage. Public numbers are attested per customer before they appear.
Coverage of the executed portfolio
Percentage of the in-scope contract set that has been extracted and compared.
Finding acceptance rate on reviewer sign-off
Reviewer signal on whether the flagged deviations warranted review.
Obligation-emission accuracy
Whether the emitted obligations and tasks reflect the accepted findings.
Time from ingest to reviewer-ready pack
End-to-end latency including retries and follow-up.
How we prove it before scaling
The first commercial unit is a Workflow Proof against one contract type, one playbook, one reviewer group, and one downstream system. Only after the agreed thresholds are met do we extend to more contract types, playbooks, and jurisdictions.
Frequently asked
- Does this give legal advice?
- No. The agent provides operational assistance to legal, risk, procurement, and compliance teams. Legal advice and regulatory compliance determinations remain with the accountable owner.
- Does this check my contracts against DORA / NIS2 / local banking rules?
- The agent can compare against a customer-approved control library that maps a specific regulation to specific clauses. DORA, NIS2, and local banking rules have their own applicability rules and require jurisdiction-specific legal / compliance ownership.
- Can we plug this into our existing CLM?
- Ingestion and obligation emission are configured to the customer's existing systems (CLM, ticketing, GRC). Integration specifics are agreed during Discover.
- What is the reviewer's role?
- The reviewer accepts, corrects, or rejects each finding and decides which findings become tracked obligations.
Ready to review your contract workflow with us?
One contract type, one playbook, one reviewer group. A Workflow Proof starts there.