| name | review-contract |
| description | Review a contract against your organization's negotiation playbook — flag deviations, generate redlines, provide business impact analysis. Use when reviewing vendor or customer agreements, when you need clause-by-clause analysis against standard positions, or when preparing a negotiation strategy with prioritized redlines and fallback positions. |
| argument-hint | <contract file or text> |
/review-contract -- Contract Review Against Playbook
If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.
Review a contract against your organization's negotiation playbook. Analyze each clause, flag deviations, generate redline suggestions, and provide business impact analysis.
Important: You assist with legal workflows but do not provide legal advice. All analysis should be reviewed by qualified legal professionals before being relied upon.
Invocation
/review-contract <contract file or URL>
Review the contract: @$1
Workflow
Step 1: Accept the Contract
Accept the contract in any of these formats:
- File upload: PDF, DOCX, or other document format
- URL: Link to a contract in your CLM, cloud storage (e.g., Box, Egnyte, SharePoint), or other document system
- Pasted text: Contract text pasted directly into the conversation
If no contract is provided, prompt the user to supply one.
Step 2: Gather Context
Ask the user for context before beginning the review:
- Which side are you on? (vendor/supplier, customer/buyer, licensor, licensee, partner -- or other)
- Deadline: When does this need to be finalized? (Affects prioritization of issues)
- Focus areas: Any specific concerns? (e.g., "data protection is critical", "we need flexibility on term", "IP ownership is the key issue")
- Deal context: Any relevant business context? (e.g., deal size, strategic importance, existing relationship)
If the user provides partial context, proceed with what you have and note assumptions.
Step 3: Load the Playbook
Look for the organization's contract review playbook in local settings (e.g., legal.local.md or similar configuration files).
The playbook should define:
- Standard positions: The organization's preferred terms for each major clause type
- Acceptable ranges: Terms that can be agreed to without escalation
- Escalation triggers: Terms that require senior counsel review or outside counsel involvement
If no playbook is configured:
- Inform the user that no playbook was found
- Offer two options:
- Help the user set up their playbook (walk through defining positions for key clauses)
- Proceed with a generic review using widely-accepted commercial standards as the baseline
- If proceeding generically, clearly note that the review is based on general commercial standards, not the organization's specific positions
Step 4: Clause-by-Clause Analysis
Apply the following review process:
- Identify the contract type: SaaS agreement, professional services, license, partnership, procurement, etc.
- Determine the user's side: Vendor, customer, licensor, licensee, partner.
- Read the entire contract before flagging issues.
- Analyze each material clause against the playbook position.
- Consider the contract holistically: Are the overall risk allocation and commercial terms balanced?
Analyze the contract systematically, covering at minimum:
| Clause Category | Key Review Points |
|---|
| Limitation of Liability | Cap amount, carveouts, mutual vs. unilateral, consequential damages |
| Indemnification | Scope, mutual vs. unilateral, cap, IP infringement, data breach |
| IP Ownership | Pre-existing IP, developed IP, work-for-hire, license grants, assignment |
| Data Protection | DPA requirement, processing terms, sub-processors, breach notification, cross-border transfers |
| Confidentiality | Scope, term, carveouts, return/destruction obligations |
| Representations & Warranties | Scope, disclaimers, survival period |
| Term & Termination | Duration, renewal, termination for convenience, termination for cause, wind-down |
| Governing Law & Dispute Resolution | Jurisdiction, venue, arbitration vs. litigation |
| Insurance | Coverage requirements, minimums, evidence of coverage |
| Assignment | Consent requirements, change of control, exceptions |
| Force Majeure | Scope, notification, termination rights |
| Payment Terms | Net terms, late fees, taxes, price escalation |
Step 5: Flag Deviations
Classify each deviation from the playbook using a three-tier system:
GREEN -- Acceptable
The clause aligns with or is better than the organization's standard position.
Action: Note for awareness. No negotiation needed.
YELLOW -- Negotiate
The clause falls outside the standard position but within a negotiable range.
Action: Generate specific redline language. Provide fallback position. Estimate business impact.
RED -- Escalate
The clause falls outside acceptable range, triggers a defined escalation criterion, or poses material risk.
Action: Explain the specific risk. Provide market-standard alternative language. Estimate exposure. Recommend escalation path.
Step 6: Generate Redline Suggestions
For each YELLOW and RED deviation, provide:
- Current language: Quote the relevant contract text
- Suggested redline: Specific alternative language
- Rationale: Brief explanation suitable for sharing with the counterparty
- Priority: Whether this is a must-have or nice-to-have in negotiation
Step 7: Business Impact Summary
Provide a summary section covering:
- Overall risk assessment: High-level view of the contract's risk profile
- Top 3 issues: The most important items to address
- Negotiation strategy: Recommended approach (which issues to lead with, what to concede)
- Timeline considerations: Any urgency factors affecting the negotiation approach
Negotiation Priority Framework
Tier 1 -- Must-Haves (Deal Breakers)
Issues where the organization cannot proceed without resolution.
Tier 2 -- Should-Haves (Strong Preferences)
Issues that materially affect risk but have negotiation room.
Tier 3 -- Nice-to-Haves (Concession Candidates)
Issues that improve the position but can be conceded strategically.
Negotiation strategy: Lead with Tier 1 items. Trade Tier 3 concessions to secure Tier 2 wins. Never concede on Tier 1 without escalation.
Output Format
## Contract Review Summary
**Document**: [contract name/identifier]
**Parties**: [party names and roles]
**Your Side**: [vendor/customer/etc.]
**Deadline**: [if provided]
**Review Basis**: [Playbook / Generic Standards]
## Key Findings
[Top 3-5 issues with severity flags]
## Clause-by-Clause Analysis
### [Clause Category] -- [GREEN/YELLOW/RED]
**Contract says**: [summary of the provision]
**Playbook position**: [your standard]
**Deviation**: [description of gap]
**Business impact**: [what this means practically]
**Redline suggestion**: [specific language, if YELLOW or RED]
[Repeat for each major clause]
## Negotiation Strategy
[Recommended approach, priorities, concession candidates]
## Next Steps
[Specific actions to take]
Notes
- If the contract is in a language other than English, note this and ask if the user wants a translation or review in the original language
- For very long contracts (50+ pages), offer to focus on the most material sections first and then do a complete review
- Always remind the user that this analysis should be reviewed by qualified legal counsel before being relied upon for legal decisions