Guided contract abstraction agent

Contract review quality depended heavily on experience. Newer development managers found complex development contracts slow and difficult to assess, so senior managers became a bottleneck for oversight, risk was judged inconsistently from one reviewer to the next, and clauses affecting cost, programme or legal exposure could slip through. Nothing existed to bring new managers up to speed at scale.

Junior and mid-level development managers reviewing development contracts, with senior managers as reviewers of last resort.

Contracts reviewed unaided by whoever owned the project, then escalated to senior managers for checking. Quality depended on experience; the same contract could get a different risk assessment from different reviewers. Training happened informally, on the job, if at all.

• Every contract reviewed against the same expert-defined framework, regardless of who runs it.
• Non-standard clauses and areas of risk flagged systematically.
• A concise abstract highlighting the answers to the key questions a senior manager would ask.
• Junior managers learning what to look for with every use, not just getting an answer.

• The review logic had to be codified by senior experts: an expert-defined questionnaire, not the model's own judgement of what matters.
• Output had to be auditable: a consistent structure that a senior manager could check quickly.
• Positioned as a guided assistant, keeping the manager accountable for the decision.
• Approved enterprise AI platform, ingesting the contract directly.

• Senior manager time on routine contract oversight.
• Contracts reviewed against the full framework: 100%, up from variable.
• Time to competence for new development managers.