Give the AI the whole contract set and ask what doesn't match

sweetmelon team · Legal

A master agreement, its schedules, the amendments and the statement of work underneath, all pointing at each other. Every document reads correctly on its own, which is why the problem between them has survived every review so far. Put the whole set in at one go, rather than a file at a time, and ask about the relationships instead of the risks. Do the numbers and the defined terms agree across the documents. Does anything point to a clause, schedule or appendix that is not actually in the set. Is anything missing that the rest of the paperwork assumes is there. Two examples. The termination notice period in the master agreement says one thing and the schedule attached to it says another, so whoever wants out has two defensible dates. Or a clause promises the service levels set out in Appendix C, and there is no Appendix C anywhere in the set, because the clause and the appendices were finished a week apart by different people. Ask for a source on every line: which document, which clause. A finding you cannot trace is a finding you cannot check, and with the reference sitting there, confirming one is a minute of page-flipping. Nothing on the list is settled until you have verified it. Two clauses flagged as contradictory may turn out to be reconciled by a definition three documents away. And when it cites a statute or a case, look the citation up yourself, every time. That is the part these systems invent most confidently, with a plausible name and a well-formatted number attached.