Start your 7-day free trial - Full platform access
AI Contract Review

Best AI contract review tools.
Playbook-driven vs general AI.

AI contract review tools fall into three categories: playbook-driven (you set the rules), general AI (applies generic analysis), and lawyer plus AI hybrid. Each suits a different use case. Here is how to choose.

No credit card required. First 3 reviews free.

Approaches compared

Three approaches to AI contract review.

The approach determines accuracy, consistency, and cost.

Playbook-driven AI review
You define explicit rules in a playbook. The AI checks every clause against those rules and flags deviations. Output is a structured flag report with severity ratings and source citations.
Accuracy: High for defined rules. Consistent - same rules applied every time.
Best for: Businesses that review the same contract types repeatedly and want consistent, auditable results.
Examples: Kontractually, LegalOn
General AI summarisation
An AI (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini) reads the contract and produces a summary or answers questions about it. No defined rules - the AI makes judgment calls.
Accuracy: Variable. Depends on prompt quality and AI model. May miss issues or hallucinate provisions.
Best for: Quick reads of one-off contracts where you want a general sense of what's in the document. Not for systematic review.
Examples: ChatGPT, Claude (general use)
Lawyer review with AI tools
Legal professionals using AI tools to assist contract review. The AI augments the lawyer's work rather than replacing it.
Accuracy: High - lawyer provides oversight. Slower and more expensive than automated review.
Best for: Complex, high-value contracts where legal expertise is necessary for negotiation or novel issues.
Examples: Harvey, Lexis+ AI (lawyer-facing tools)
FAQ

AI contract review questions.

More questions? Email us.

The most reliable AI contract review tools use a rules-based approach: you define what to check, the AI checks it. This is different from asking an AI to 'review' a contract and hoping it finds the right issues. Tools like Kontractually check contracts against explicit playbook rules - liability cap thresholds, required clauses, prohibited language - and flag deviations with source citations. The reliability comes from explicit rules, not from the AI making judgment calls.

You can use general-purpose AI to get a sense of what's in a contract, but it's not reliable for systematic review. General AI will miss issues, struggle with legal nuance, and may hallucinate provisions. The key limitation: without explicit rules, the AI doesn't know your standard - it makes judgment calls that may not reflect your risk appetite or the law that applies. Kontractually uses AI as the engine but grounds it in explicit playbook rules you define.

Most AI contract review tools are built for US law. They don't know the Fair Work Act, Australian Privacy Principles, ACL unfair contract terms, or Security of Payment Acts. Kontractually is built specifically for Australian law - the playbook templates cover Australian legislation, and you can add state-specific rules (QLD BIFA, NSW SOPA, WA CCA) as needed.

Document AI (like Azure Document Intelligence or Google Document AI) extracts and understands text from documents - OCR, layout recognition, field extraction. AI contract review applies legal logic to that extracted text - checking clauses against rules, identifying risk, and flagging issues. Kontractually uses document AI for extraction and then applies playbook rules for the review step. Both are needed; they do different things.

Try the playbook-driven approach. First 3 reviews free.

See how explicit rules produce consistent, auditable results - not AI judgment calls.

Start free trial