Contract review that runs
on your playbook, not someone else's.
Upload a contract. Get it marked up against your own standard positions, with a suggested redline and a reason for every flag. Route it for approval without building a workflow first.
One finding, as it appears in the workspace: the clause, the position it breaches, and the wording to send back.
Your playbook, in plain English
Write your positions the way you'd explain them to a colleague — “cap should be at least 12 months' fees, with carve-outs for gross negligence.” No rule builder, no decision tree, no syntax.
Redlines you can argue with
Every flag comes with the clause it refers to, what's wrong with it, the language to propose instead, and which of your positions it breaches. If you disagree, you can see exactly why it decided that.
Routing without a workflow builder
Four approval templates that most teams can use as-is. Pick one, set the names, done. It'll suggest escalated review when the contract is genuinely high-risk.
Ask the contract questions
A chat panel grounded in the contract text and your playbook. “What's our actual exposure under this cap?” gets a number, not a summary.
How it goes
- 1Drop in a PDF or Word fileThe text is pulled out server-side. The file itself is never stored.
- 2Run the analysisRoughly half a minute. Deviations from your playbook come back marked up on the document, sorted by risk.
- 3Send it for approvalPick a routing template, assign the stages, track status. It all persists.
Have a look
There's a sample vendor MSA loaded already, with a playbook that flags six of its clauses. Nothing to sign up for.
Open the workspace