The Platform

The Clauseflint Review Engine

A clause-extraction and risk-flagging pipeline modeled on how experienced deal counsel actually reads a contract: definitions first, cross-references mapped, then clause-by-clause extraction against configurable thresholds. Every flag is traceable to a source page. Every output is auditable.

94%

recall on change-of-control

91%

precision on indemnity caps

Clause Categories

What the engine reads

Clauseflint platform: clause extraction and risk classification pipeline

Change-of-Control

Consent requirements and deal conditions

Every vendor agreement, employment contract, IP license, and software subscription may contain a change-of-control provision. Clauseflint identifies the clause, assesses whether a consent or notice requirement is triggered, and flags the relevant counterparty.

§ 7.3 Change of Control. Either party may
terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30)
days' written notice if the other party
undergoes a Change of Control.

▲ Consent required

MAC Clause

Material adverse change definitions and carve-outs

MAC definitions vary substantially between deals. Clauseflint extracts the operative definition, the carve-out list, and the disproportionate-effect qualifier — presenting each for counsel review alongside a risk assessment.

"Material Adverse Effect" means any change,
event or effect that is, or would reasonably
be expected to be, materially adverse to
the business, financial condition or results
of operations of the Company...

▲ Carve-out review required

Indemnity

Cap multiples, mutual vs. asymmetric, carve-outs

Indemnity cap structure — the multiple, the carve-out list (IP infringement, fraud, data breach), and whether the cap is mutual — is flagged against configurable thresholds per counterparty size and contract type.

Each party's aggregate liability under
this Agreement shall not exceed five (5)
times the Fees paid in the twelve (12)
months preceding the claim.

⚠ Cap at 5× fee

Assignment & Non-Compete

Transfer restrictions and post-termination obligations

Assignment restrictions affect deal structure. Post-termination non-compete and non-solicit clauses affect integration planning. Both are extracted with operative period, geographic scope, and counterparty identification.

Neither party may assign this Agreement
without the prior written consent of the
other party, except to an affiliate or in
connection with a merger or acquisition.

⚠ Assignment restricted

Accuracy

Internal benchmarks on commercial contract corpus

Measured on a held-out corpus of 4,000+ clauses drawn from M&A and commercial contract categories. These are internal benchmarks — not independently audited. We are happy to share the evaluation methodology on request.

Clause Type Recall Precision Notes
Change-of-Control 94% 92% Including multi-party and cross-reference structures
MAC / Material Adverse Effect 91% 89% Carve-out lists extracted separately
Indemnity Cap 93% 91% Cap multiple and carve-outs identified
Assignment Restriction 90% 88% Affiliate carve-outs flagged separately
Auto-Renew / Notice Window 96% 94% Notice period extracted as structured field
Non-Compete / Non-Solicit 87% 85% Geographic scope and duration extracted

Auditability

Every flag is traceable

Every clause flag links back to a specific contract, page number, and line range. When a counterparty disputes a position — or when regulators request documentation of the diligence process — the audit trail is already built.

The audit log exports as a structured CSV or PDF, organized by clause category, with timestamps and reviewer attribution where applicable.

# Audit log excerpt
contract_id: "VDR-00142"
clause_type: "change_of_control"
page: 12
lines: [34, 51]
risk_level: "high"
flag_reason: "Consent required on CoC"
flagged_at: "2026-03-14T09:22:01Z"

See the platform in a 20-minute call.