The client (NDA) is a large company with a high contract throughput and a high cost of error in wording. The perimeter is fully local: on-prem, local models, no external APIs.
Before us, lawyers manually compared each contract to a reference — slow, expensive, easy to miss. Some risks are «known» to the team but not captured in a verifiable form — they live in senior lawyers' heads.
At high throughput, some contracts go through without a full review → real losses on missed clauses.
The task — automated review with clear remarks for the lawyer and auditable rules.
Three data sources. The contracts themselves (PDF/DOCX), approval correspondence (email threads), and systems of record (EDMS, ERP, etc.). Each has its own extractor that normalizes the input into a single representation.
Unified contract context. Parties, subject, price, warranties, liability, terms, applicable law — assembled from all three branches into one normalized representation.
Comparison against templates: what must be present, what must not, what must be in a specific wording.
Remark card for the lawyer: quote → explanation → link to rule / template → severity.
Revision versioning. Comparing revisions across rounds of edits: what changed and by whom.
Extensible rules catalog. The client's team extends rules and templates without our involvement. The catalog becomes an auditable corporate artifact.
Under the hood — our own two-phase process with fixed acceptance criteria and explicit exit points at every stage. Details in § Process.
Screenshots aren't published — the client did not approve sharing UI details.
A contract doesn't live in a single file. You also need its text, the approval correspondence, and the data from systems of record. Three ingestion branches normalize everything into a unified context, then a linear pipeline: comparison against templates → remark cards → lawyer UI. Everything inside an on-prem perimeter, no external APIs.
Send a brief description of what you have. From there — in correspondence: we get the context, scope the boundaries, and agree on a PoC in days–weeks.