ZBrain
Log in
Book a demo
Book a demo
Agents Terms Review Intelligence Agent
Terms Review Intelligence Agent Icon

Terms Review Intelligence Agent

Captures, analyzes, and tracks client feedback throughout contract terms review to streamline collaboration and accelerate negotiations.

Contract terms review often slows down due to scattered feedback, manual tracking, and limited visibility into emerging risks. As negotiations progress, client input may be shared across multiple channels, making it difficult for legal and commercial teams to maintain accuracy, identify concerns early, and manage versions effectively. These challenges lead to delays, inconsistent assessments, and greater operational effort for teams supporting high-volume negotiations.

The Terms Review Intelligence Agent provides a unified, structured approach to managing client collaboration during contract terms review. It gathers feedback through a secure digital workspace, using unstructured comments and structured input fields to ensure clarity. The agent analyzes feedback, highlights recurring themes, identifies areas of concern, and flags potential negotiation risks. It continuously references agreement drafts, clause libraries, and prior client responses to maintain context and ensure all insights remain aligned, in context to negotiation history.

Every client comment, revision, and response is automatically tracked and versioned, giving teams complete traceability across the lifecycle of the negotiation. This ensures a consistent record of all interactions, supports compliance obligations, and preserves a reliable audit trail for future reference.

By centralizing feedback collection, applying automated analysis, and maintaining comprehensive version control, the Terms Review Intelligence Agent enhances negotiation efficiency and reduces manual effort. Organizations benefit from improved client engagement, faster issue resolution, and a more predictable negotiation workflow that supports scalable growth and consistent deal progression.

Accuracy
TBD

Speed
TBD

Input Data Set

Sample of data set required for Terms Review Intelligence Agent:

Document: Master Services Agreement - InnovateCorp & Quantum Dynamics - Draft v1.2


Feedback Provided By: Sarah Chen, Lead Counsel, Quantum Dynamics


Date: 2023-10-26


Clause-by-Clause Comments:


    

  • 

    Clause 3.1 (Service Level Agreement): The guaranteed uptime of 99.5% seems low for a mission-critical system. We require a minimum of 99.9% uptime. Please revise.
    

    • 

  • 

    Clause 5.2 (Data Ownership): This clause correctly states that all client data remains the sole property of Quantum Dynamics. This is acceptable.
    

    • 

  • 

    Clause 7.4 (Limitation of Liability): The proposed liability cap of 1x annual contract value is not acceptable and exposes us to significant financial risk in case of a major service failure. Our company policy requires a minimum of 3x annual contract value. This is a critical point for us.
    

    • 

  • 

    Clause 9.1 (Term and Termination): The 90-day notice period for termination for convenience seems excessive. We would prefer a 30-day period.
    

    • 

  • 

    Clause 11.3 (Indemnification): The scope of indemnification provided by InnovateCorp is unclear regarding third-party IP claims. Can you provide more specific language on your obligations here?
    

    • 

  • 

    Appendix A (Pricing): The per-user pricing model is clear. We have no concerns with this section.
    

    •

Deliverable Example

Sample output delivered by the Terms Review Intelligence Agent:

Contract Feedback Analysis Report: InnovateCorp & Quantum Dynamics MSA


Document Version: Master Services Agreement - Draft v1.2
Analysis Date: 2023-10-26


Executive Summary


Analysis of feedback from Quantum Dynamics on MSA Draft v1.2 reveals one critical, high-risk negotiation point concerning the Limitation of Liability (Clause 7.4). The client has firmly rejected the proposed 1x ACV cap and requires 3x ACV, citing internal policy. A medium-risk issue was identified regarding the SLA (Clause 3.1), which requires consultation with the product team. Other comments represent low-risk negotiation points or requests for clarification. Overall sentiment is mixed, with clear points of contention that require immediate attention to prevent deal stagnation.


Sentiment Analysis


    

  • Positive Comments: 2
      

    • Clause 5.2 (Data Ownership)
      • 

    • Appendix A (Pricing)
      • 

    

    • 

  • Neutral / Request for Clarification: 2
      

    • Clause 9.1 (Term and Termination)
      • 

    • Clause 11.3 (Indemnification)
      • 

    

    • 

  • Negative Comments: 2
      

    • Clause 3.1 (Service Level Agreement)
      • 

    • Clause 7.4 (Limitation of Liability)
      • 

    

    • 



Key Client Concerns Summarized


    

  • Limitation of Liability: Client rejects the 1x annual contract value (ACV) cap as a significant financial risk and states a mandatory requirement for a 3x ACV cap.
    • 

  • Service Level Uptime: Client finds the proposed 99.5% uptime insufficient and requires a revision to 99.9%.
    • 

  • Termination Notice Period: Client requests the notice period for termination for convenience be reduced from 90 days to 30 days.
    • 

  • Indemnification Scope: Client requires clearer language defining InnovateCorp's obligations related to third-party intellectual property claims.
    • 



Negotiation Risk Assessment & Recommendations






Clause
Client Feedback Summary
Sentiment
Risk Level
Recommended Action






7.4 Limitation of Liability
Rejects 1x ACV cap; demands 3x. States this is a "critical point".
Negative
HIGH
Immediate Escalation. Engage Legal and Sales leadership to discuss financial exposure and formulate a counter-offer. This is a potential deal-breaker.




3.1 Service Level Agreement
Rejects 99.5% uptime; demands 99.9%.
Negative
MEDIUM
Consult with the Product and Engineering teams to confirm if 99.9% uptime is technically and financially feasible. Prepare negotiation position.




9.1 Term and Termination
Prefers 30-day termination notice over 90-day.
Neutral
LOW
Review against company standard terms. This is likely a negotiable point with minimal business impact. Propose a compromise of 60 days if needed.




11.3 Indemnification
Seeks clarification on the scope of IP indemnification.
Neutral
LOW
Provide standardized clarifying language from the approved clause library to address the client's question and reduce ambiguity.






Audit & Versioning Log


    

  • Feedback Source: Sarah Chen, Lead Counsel, Quantum Dynamics
    • 

  • Analysis ID: feedback_log_8a3f5c7b
    • 

  • Status: Analysis Complete - Awaiting InnovateCorp Response to Client Feedback.
    •

Related Agents

Duplication Management Agent

Manages duplicate CRM records by consolidating entries, synchronizing updates across systems, and maintaining auditable merge records.

Lead Exception Intelligence Agent

Identifies, manages, and escalates high-risk lead anomalies while providing reviewers with clear, actionable context.

Dynamic Lead Scoring Optimization Agent

Evaluates lead scoring effectiveness and continuously refines scoring logic using conversion outcomes and stakeholder insights.

Lead Data Integrity Agent

Integrates and validates lead data across systems to ensure consistent, accurate inputs for outreach and sales activities.

Cold Outreach Sequencing Agent

Designs and executes structured, multi-channel outreach sequences by aligning targeting, messaging order, channel selection, and timing.

Cold Outreach Personalization Agent

Creates tailored outreach messages by applying lead context, engagement signals, and enterprise messaging standards.