Contract Review

Persona

Role: Legal technology developer at a corporate legal department handling 200+ contracts per quarter.

The legal team receives contract review requests via email, assigns them informally, and tracks approval status in a shared spreadsheet. Reviewers leave comments in document margins, but there is no central record of who reviewed what or when. The department needs a structured intake and review process with clear approval authority.

Business Problem

Contract review bottlenecks delay business deals. Requests pile up without visibility into the queue, reviewers are assigned based on whoever is available rather than expertise, and approval decisions lack an audit trail. When auditors ask who approved a contract and under what conditions, the legal team scrambles to reconstruct the history from emails. This scenario builds a contract review workflow that tracks every contract from intake through review to approval with full accountability.

Four-Step Application

This scenario works best as a four-step, human-in-the-loop application. The existing object model already gives this scenario a strong delivery backbone through Contract, ReviewTask, and Approval.

• Mission metric focus: faster matter turnaround, stronger risk control, and higher knowledge reuse.
• Human + AI pattern: Each step combines structured workflow data with chat assistance, background generation, document understanding, and accessible interaction patterns when they improve the experience.

Step 1. Capture demand and context

• Goal: Make it easy for the user to start the Contract Review journey with complete, trusted context.
• Required data: Contract context such as title, parties, type, and value.
• AI support: Use chat to guide intake, generate clearer prompts, create accessible summaries, and assist with voice or vision-led capture when a form alone is not the best experience. EAI can support structured intake, chat workflows, and document-centred capture today; richer native multimodal capture may still need workflow extensions or connected services.
• Business impact: Improve completion rate, reduce first-touch effort, and raise customer or staff confidence in the UX from the very first interaction.
• EAI delivery: Model the intake as tenant-isolated object types and resources, then use actions, chat workflows, and document indexing or classification to keep the initial record complete and usable.

Step 2. Prepare the decision

• Goal: Turn the captured context into the next best action for Contract Review without forcing the human reviewer to assemble the case manually.
• Required data: Contract state and history; ReviewTask fields such as reviewer, dueDate, comments, and status.
• AI support: Run background summarisation, extraction, classification, recommendation drafting, and answer generation so a reviewer sees a prepared case instead of raw fragments. EAI delivers the structured records and AI workflow hooks for this today; specialised scoring engines, external rules, or advanced reasoning controls may still need integration work.
• Business impact: Reduce cycle time, improve quality and consistency, and protect the mission-critical metric before the case moves into execution.
• EAI delivery: Link records across the scenario, persist decision state as resources, and use workflow actions plus chat assistance to keep humans in control while AI prepares the work.

Step 3. Execute and collaborate

• Goal: Coordinate the actual work, handoffs, approvals, and user updates needed to deliver the service or outcome.
• Required data: ReviewTask actions such as completeReview; Approval fields such as approver, decision, conditions, and decidedDate.
• AI support: Draft replies, produce work packets, monitor exceptions in the background, and surface the next action for each operator. EAI can orchestrate tenant-isolated records, actions, chats, and document workflows today; deeper system-to-system automation may require additional connectors or workflow capability.
• Business impact: Increase operator productivity, reduce rework across handoffs, and improve service consistency across the application journey.
• EAI delivery: Use linked object types, actions, resource updates, and workflow-triggered AI assistance so the team can execute in one model instead of splitting work across disconnected tools.

Step 4. Resolve, explain, and improve

• Goal: Close the loop with a clear outcome, an understandable explanation, and feedback that improves the next case.
• Required data: final status, outcome, audit history, and follow-up signals across Contract, ReviewTask, and Approval.
• AI support: Generate outcome summaries, customer-friendly answers, compliance-ready notes, management insights, and accessible follow-up content. EAI can store outcome records and support answer generation today, while richer proactive agents, advanced analytics, or channel-specific accessibility features may need additional product capability.
• Business impact: Increase trust, quality, and measurable business value through faster matter turnaround, stronger risk control, and higher knowledge reuse.
• EAI delivery: Keep the full audit trail in structured resources, use AI workflows to explain outcomes, and feed the resulting signals into future product, service, and operational improvement work.

EAI Platform Support By Step

EAI provides the safe service boundary for Contract Review through Object Types, tenant-scoped resources, document processing, chat workflows, and CLI verification. For this scenario, the main records are Contract, ReviewTask, and Approval.

Process step	What EAI provides	Calling pattern
Step 1. Capture demand and context	Tenant-scoped intake resources for Contract context such as title, parties, type, and value. Object Type validation, starter forms, optional document intake, and chat-guided capture keep the first record complete.	Define fields in src/eai.config/object-types.ts, run eai types validate and eai types seed, create initial Contract records with useResources('Contract') or eai resources create Contract, and keep browser calls behind /api/eai/....
Step 2. Prepare the decision	Linked resource queries over Contract state and history; ReviewTask fields such as reviewer, dueDate, comments, and status. Search, schema checks, document classification or RAG indexing, and chat summaries turn raw context into a prepared decision.	Use useResources('Contract') list/query/search patterns, verify shape with eai resources schema, use useDocuments().upload/classify/ragIndex, eai docs upload, eai docs classify, and eai docs index where supporting material exists, and send decision-support prompts through useChat(workflowId, 'chat') or eai chat send.
Step 3. Execute and collaborate	Resource updates and actions for ReviewTask actions such as completeReview; Approval fields such as approver, decision, conditions, and decidedDate. Status changes, assignments, notes, generated work packets, and chat support keep humans in control during execution.	Model actions in the Object Type code, call client.resources.executeAction(type, id, action) or the app hook equivalent, update records through the app service layer, and verify with eai resources get/list/query.
Step 4. Resolve, explain, and improve	Outcome resources for final status, outcome, audit history, and follow-up signals across Contract, ReviewTask, and Approval. Audit-friendly links, indexed final documents, reporting snapshots, and answer generation make the result explainable and reusable.	Persist outcomes as resources, index final material with eai docs index or useDocuments().ragIndex, send explanation prompts with useChat or eai chat stream, and use eai resources aggregate/search for reporting checks.

Prompt, Code, And Service Pattern Mapping

The Object Type code example on this page is the implementation contract for the EAI platform services. eai-gofer should read that code as the source of truth for which resource, document, and chat calls belong in the app.

Use this prompt shape when asking eai-gofer or another coding agent to implement the scenario:

Use the EAI App Template. Model Contract Review with Object Types for Contract, ReviewTask, Approval. Use useResources for records and actions, useDocuments for uploads/classification/RAG where documents appear, useChat for workflow assistance, and verify with eai types/resources/docs/chat commands. Use eai publicapi only when no named command covers the required platform call.

Scenario artifact	How it maps to EAI service calls
Four-step process	Step 1 becomes resource creation, Step 2 becomes resource query/search plus optional document or chat preparation, Step 3 becomes resource update/action calls, and Step 4 becomes outcome persistence plus explanation/reporting calls.
Object Type definitions	eai types validate, eai types seed, and eai resources schema make the model available and checkable before UI work starts.
Properties and indexes	Fields become useResources payloads, filters, list views, and eai resources create/list/query/search checks. Indexed fields should support lookup and triage, not duplicate canonical records.
Links between Object Types	Relationships become linked-resource UI, timeline context, and audit trails that app code loads through resource queries rather than separate bespoke stores.
Actions and status fields	Workflow buttons and operator transitions call resource action/update helpers, then verify state with eai resources get/list/query.
Document and chat prompts	Prompts should call the platform documents and chat patterns: useDocuments().upload/classify/ragIndex, eai docs upload, eai docs classify, and eai docs index for documents, and useChat, eai chat send, or eai chat stream for conversational assistance.

Object Types

Name	Key Properties	Links	Actions
Contract	title (text), parties (text), type (select: nda, services, license, employment, vendor), value (number), status (select: intake, in-review, approved, rejected)	one-to-many → ReviewTask, one-to-many → Approval	sendForReview
ReviewTask	reviewer (text), dueDate (date), comments (text), status (select: assigned, in-progress, completed)	many-to-one → Contract	completeReview
Approval	approver (text), decision (select: approved, rejected, conditional), conditions (text), decidedDate (date)	many-to-one → Contract	--

CLI Workflow

1. Scaffold the project

   eai init contract-review

2. Authenticate and pull environment

   eai login
   eai env pull --include-secrets

   If you are an external developer, see [Configuration](/docs/configuration) for login and local environment setup.

3. Define your Object Types

   Create the Contract, ReviewTask, and Approval types in src/eai.config/object-types.ts (see code example below).

4. Validate the type definitions

   eai types validate

   Tenant: contract-review
   ✔ Contract — 4 props, 2 links, 1 action
   ✔ ReviewTask — 4 props, 1 link, 1 action
   ✔ Approval — 4 props, 1 link, 0 actions
   
   ✔ All Object Types are valid

5. Seed types to the platform

   eai types seed

6. Create sample resources

   eai resources create Contract --data '{"title": "SaaS License Agreement - Vendor X", "parties": "Acme Corp, Vendor X Inc", "type": "license", "value": 250000, "status": "intake"}'

7. Start local development

   eai dev

Code Example

// src/eai.config/object-types.ts
export const objectTypes = {
  'contract-review': [
    {
      name: 'Contract',
      displayName: 'Contract',
      description: 'A contract submitted for legal review and approval',
      properties: [
        { name: 'title', type: 'text' as const, required: true, indexed: true },
        { name: 'parties', type: 'text' as const, required: true },
        { name: 'type', type: 'select' as const, required: true, options: [
          { label: 'NDA', value: 'nda' },
          { label: 'Services', value: 'services' },
          { label: 'License', value: 'license' },
          { label: 'Employment', value: 'employment' },
          { label: 'Vendor', value: 'vendor' },
        ]},
        { name: 'value', type: 'number' as const, required: false },
        { name: 'status', type: 'select' as const, required: true, defaultValue: 'intake', options: [
          { label: 'Intake', value: 'intake' },
          { label: 'In Review', value: 'in-review' },
          { label: 'Approved', value: 'approved' },
          { label: 'Rejected', value: 'rejected' },
        ]},
      ],
      linkTypes: [
        { name: 'reviewTasks', targetObjectType: 'ReviewTask', cardinality: 'one-to-many' as const },
        { name: 'approvals', targetObjectType: 'Approval', cardinality: 'one-to-many' as const },
      ],
      actions: [
        {
          name: 'sendForReview',
          displayName: 'Send for Review',
          description: 'Move a contract from intake to the review queue',
          requiredRole: 'tenant-user',
          validationRules: { requiredFields: ['title', 'parties', 'type'], requiredStatus: 'intake' },
          sideEffects: [
            { type: 'set_field', field: 'status', value: 'in-review' },
          ],
        },
      ],
      status: 'published' as const,
    },
    {
      name: 'ReviewTask',
      displayName: 'Review Task',
      description: 'A review assignment for a specific contract',
      properties: [
        { name: 'reviewer', type: 'text' as const, required: true },
        { name: 'dueDate', type: 'date' as const, required: true, indexed: true },
        { name: 'comments', type: 'text' as const, required: false },
        { name: 'status', type: 'select' as const, required: true, defaultValue: 'assigned', options: [
          { label: 'Assigned', value: 'assigned' },
          { label: 'In Progress', value: 'in-progress' },
          { label: 'Completed', value: 'completed' },
        ]},
      ],
      linkTypes: [
        { name: 'contract', targetObjectType: 'Contract', cardinality: 'many-to-one' as const },
      ],
      actions: [
        {
          name: 'completeReview',
          displayName: 'Complete Review',
          description: 'Mark a review task as completed with comments',
          requiredRole: 'tenant-user',
          validationRules: { requiredFields: ['comments'], requiredStatus: 'in-progress' },
          sideEffects: [
            { type: 'set_field', field: 'status', value: 'completed' },
          ],
        },
      ],
      status: 'published' as const,
    },
    {
      name: 'Approval',
      displayName: 'Approval',
      description: 'An approval decision on a reviewed contract',
      properties: [
        { name: 'approver', type: 'text' as const, required: true },
        { name: 'decision', type: 'select' as const, required: true, options: [
          { label: 'Approved', value: 'approved' },
          { label: 'Rejected', value: 'rejected' },
          { label: 'Conditional', value: 'conditional' },
        ]},
        { name: 'conditions', type: 'text' as const, required: false },
        { name: 'decidedDate', type: 'date' as const, required: false, indexed: true },
      ],
      linkTypes: [
        { name: 'contract', targetObjectType: 'Contract', cardinality: 'many-to-one' as const },
      ],
      actions: [],
      status: 'published' as const,
    },
  ],
};

Key Takeaways

• Structured intake pipeline: Contracts move through defined stages from intake to review to approval, eliminating the chaos of email-based requests.
• Reviewer accountability: Review tasks track who is assigned, when the review is due, and what comments were provided, creating a clear record of the review process.
• Conditional approvals: The approval model supports conditional decisions, capturing the specific conditions that must be met before a contract can proceed.
• Audit-ready history: Every review task and approval decision is linked to the contract, providing the complete audit trail that regulators and auditors require.