Skip to Content
ExamplesContract & risk review

⚖️ Cross-vendor contract and risk review

Stack: Trigger: upload / agent API · Models: Claude + GPT-4o + Gemini members, judge · Tools: clause/precedent search (optional) · Mode: debate collaboration · Output: risk memo citing the debate

Who it’s for: legal, procurement, and diligence teams where one model’s read isn’t enough. What it does: several models argue a document’s risks from different angles and a judge writes the final memo, so a missed indemnity or auto-renewal clause is caught by the model that was looking for it, not left to one opinion.

Build it

  1. Create member agents, each a different provider and each given a lens: tenant’s risk, counterparty’s leverage, compliance with governing law.

  2. Set collaboration to debate on the primary agent, members run over several rounds, each seeing the others’ arguments, so weak readings get challenged.

    The collaboration panel, debate strategy with member agents

  3. Pick a judge model that reads the full exchange and writes the final answer, citing which arguments decided it.

  4. (Optional) add a search tool for your clause library or past contracts so arguments cite precedent, not just the text.

  5. Feed it the document: upload the contract or have your DMS call the agent API.

  6. Get the memo: a structured risk summary with the reasoning, not a single-model guess.

Make it yours

  • Reuse the pattern for research synthesis, due diligence, or incident post-mortems, anywhere one model isn’t enough.
  • Reserve debate for high-stakes calls; use race or parallel for high-volume, low-stakes work.
  • Route anything above a risk score to a human via request_approval.

Uses: Legal · Debate · Multi-model

Reconcile Stripe payoutsGoverned production agent