> ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.obversa.ai/llms.txt > Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further. # Contract review against a playbook > Every clause mapped to the playbook rule it meets or breaks, redlines in the wording the playbook allows and checked by a second model, a negotiating note; a lawyer decides what is sent. The brief is the playbook: what you accept, what you push back on and with what wording, what you never sign. One model maps every clause of the contract to the rule it meets or breaks, writes the redlines in the playbook's wording, and writes the negotiating note; a model from another family checks each redline against the playbook and sends the set back when a clause is missing or a redline goes further than its rule. The lawyer decides what is sent to the other side. ```bash theme={null} npm install @obversa/runtime @obversa/engine-claude-cli @obversa/engine-codex-cli ``` In that directory, create `package.json` with `"type": "module"`, put the brief and the sample inputs from `examples/use-cases/business/` beside it, then run the copied file. ## The file ```ts theme={null} import { claude } from '@obversa/engine-claude-cli'; import { codex } from '@obversa/engine-codex-cli'; import { briefFromFile, formatEvent, person, run, stage, workflow, type TeamSeat, } from '@obversa/runtime'; interface ContractPlaybookEngines { readonly claude: (model: string) => TeamSeat; readonly codex: (model: string) => TeamSeat; } const realEngines: ContractPlaybookEngines = { claude, codex }; /** * Contract review against a playbook. The brief is the playbook: what we * accept, what we push back on, what we never sign. One model maps every * clause of the contract to the rule it meets or breaks, writes the * redlines, and is read by a model from another family that checks each * redline against the playbook and sends the work back when one is missing * or goes further than the playbook allows. A lawyer decides what is sent. */ function createContractPlaybook(engines: ContractPlaybookEngines = realEngines) { return workflow('contract-playbook', { brief: briefFromFile('briefs/playbook.md'), options: { timeout: '15m' }, roles: { review: engines.claude('claude-sonnet-4-5'), 'playbook-check': [engines.codex('gpt-5.6-luna')], lawyer: person('Send these redlines to the other side?'), }, stages: [ stage('clauses', { agent: 'review', writes: 'review/clauses.md', desc: 'Read contracts/msa.md and list every clause with the playbook rule it meets or breaks, one line each.', gate: 'Every numbered clause of the contract is on the list.', }), stage('redline', { agent: 'review', writes: 'review/redlines.md', desc: 'For each clause that breaks a rule, write the replacement wording the playbook allows, with the rule it comes from.', gate: 'Every breaking clause has a redline, no redline goes further than its rule, and a checker from another family has accepted the set.', reviewedBy: 'playbook-check', retry: 3, }), stage('positions', { agent: 'review', writes: 'review/positions.md', desc: 'Write the negotiating note: what to hold, what to concede and to what, and what is a walk-away.', gate: 'Every redline has a position, and a reviewer from another family has accepted them.', reviewedBy: 'playbook-check', // Three attempts: the allowance matches how open-ended the work is. // Deciding what to hold, what to concede and what is a walk-away is // the most judgement-heavy step here, and it had none while listing // clauses had three. retry: 3, }), stage('negotiate', { input: 'lawyer', desc: 'Put the redlines and the positions in front of the lawyer.', gate: 'The lawyer has decided.', sendsBackTo: 'redline', }), ], }); } const result = await run(createContractPlaybook(), { onEvent: (event) => console.log(formatEvent(event)), }); console.log(JSON.stringify(result.outcome, null, 2)); ``` Every event of the run prints as one line as it happens, the usage lines included, and the outcome prints last as JSON. The run stops at `negotiate` with the redlines and the positions in `review/`. A no goes back to `redline` with the lawyer's note as the finding. ## What a run printed The output below is from one real run of this file, with the two command line tools signed in on the machine. The transcript is trimmed at both ends: a reader's own run prints a `▸ run` event line before the first stage and — unless the process is killed first — a `◂ run` line carrying the outcome and the run's token total after the last stage. The machine that captured this also had an extra local search tool available to the first seat, which this example does not configure, so those calls are elided and a reader's own run will not make them. The run stops at the person, which is what every example here does before anything is sent or filed. ```text theme={null} contract-playbook ▸ dag (4 nodes) contract-playbook · node clauses: start contract-playbook › clauses • clauses contract-playbook › clauses engine:thinking contract-playbook › clauses engine:text … 4 more event lines … contract-playbook › clauses engine:thinking contract-playbook › clauses engine:text contract-playbook › clauses tool Read use contract-playbook › clauses tool tool result contract-playbook › clauses engine:thinking contract-playbook › clauses engine:text contract-playbook › clauses tool Write use contract-playbook › clauses tool tool result contract-playbook › clauses engine:thinking contract-playbook › clauses tool Bash use … 128 more event lines … contract-playbook › positions › positions-review tool tool result contract-playbook › positions › positions-review engine:thinking contract-playbook › positions › positions-review engine:text contract-playbook › positions › positions-review claude-sonnet-4-5-20250929: 1544326/6105 tok contract-playbook › positions › positions-review • positions: fail contract-playbook › positions › positions-review · until met: positions writes: true contract-playbook › positions › positions-review › review-panel • positions contract-playbook › positions › positions-review › review-panel • positions-1 contract-playbook › positions › positions-review › review-panel engine:text contract-playbook › positions › positions-review › review-panel gpt-5.6-luna: 90370/1942 tok contract-playbook › positions › positions-review › review-panel • positions-1: pass contract-playbook › positions › positions-review › review-panel • positions: pass contract-playbook › positions › positions-review · review: pass contract-playbook › positions › positions-review ◂ pass (2 iter) contract-playbook · node positions: done (pass) contract-playbook · node negotiate: start contract-playbook › negotiate • negotiate contract-playbook › negotiate • negotiate: paused contract-playbook · node negotiate: done (paused) contract-playbook ◂ dag paused ``` ```json theme={null} { "status": "paused", "summary": "waiting for a person: Send these redlines to the other side?", "data": { "clauses": { "status": "pass", "summary": "All 7 contract clauses reviewed against playbook. 1 accepted (governing law), 4 require pushback (term auto-renewal, payment terms and price increases, liability cap too low, data processing without proper controls), 2 are never-sign blockers (uncapped indemnity, exclusivity requirement)." }, "redline": { "status": "pass", "summary": "Review panel: 1/1 reviewer(s) cleared." }, "positions": { "status": "pass", "summary": "Review panel: 1/1 reviewer(s) cleared.", "data": { "response": "Done. Fixed all six issues in review/positions.md:\n\n**Changes made:**\n\n1. **Clause 1 (Term)** - line 30: Changed from allowing 45 days notice concession to requiring both renewal by written agreement AND 60 days notice with no concession.\n\n2. **Clause 2 (Payment)** - lines 35-39: Changed from allowing 21 days concession to requiring 30 days minimum with no concession.\n\n3. **Clause 2 (Price)** - lines 43-48: Changed from allowing 7% cap and 60 days notice to requiring 5% or CPI (whichever is lower) and 90 days notice with no concession.\n\n4. **Clause 3 (Liability)** - lines 52-57: Changed from allowing nine or six months concession to requiring twelve months with no concession.\n\n5. **Clause 5 (Data)** - lines 61-66: Changed from allowing 60 days deletion to requiring 30 days deletion with no concession.\n\n6. **Negotiation Strategy** - lines 70-76: Rewrote to state all six redlines are required as written with no middle ground, removing the previous strategy that suggested accepting concessions.\n\nAll positions now match playbook requirements exactly." } }, "negotiate": { "status": "paused", "summary": "waiting for a person: Send these redlines to the other side?", "data": { "requestId": "negotiate#1#8cf706409cc45450f55cea668f1ab7a7c224e4efb2740004a63b091e92c22264", "gateId": "negotiate", "gateVersion": 1, "digest": "8cf706409cc45450f55cea668f1ab7a7c224e4efb2740004a63b091e92c22264", "decisionText": "Send these redlines to the other side?", "responseSchema": { "type": "object", "properties": { "approved": { "type": "boolean" }, "note": { "type": "string" } }, "required": [ "approved" ] }, "input": { "positions": "Review panel: 1/1 reviewer(s) cleared." }, "presentation": {} } } } } ``` ## The team's shape | step | does | done when | | --------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | clauses | Read contracts/msa.md and list every clause with the playbook rule it meets or breaks, one line each. | Every numbered clause of the contract is on the list. | | redline | For each clause that breaks a rule, write the replacement wording the playbook allows, with the rule it comes from. | Every breaking clause has a redline, no redline goes further than its rule, and a checker from another family has accepted the set. | | positions | Write the negotiating note: what to hold, what to concede and to what, and what is a walk-away. | Every redline has a position, and a reviewer from another family has accepted them. | | negotiate | Put the redlines and the positions in front of the lawyer. | The lawyer has decided. | Where a stage's gate names a file, the package checks the file after the job. Where it names an exit code, the command decides. Where it names a reviewer, the reviewer's decision decides. Where it names a person, the run pauses until the person answers. A model's own report of its work never passes a stage. ## Gotchas * **The checker holds the redlines to the playbook, both ways.** A never-sign clause with no redline sends the set back, and so does a redline that asks for more than its rule allows. * **The contract is a workspace file the brief names.** `files: ["contracts/msa.md"]` in the brief's front matter tells every seat the file exists and forbids the review seat from writing it. * **The playbook is the whole brief.** Everything a seat knows about what is acceptable comes from `briefs/playbook.md`; a rule that is not written there is not applied. ## Source The file is `examples/use-cases/business/contract-playbook.ts`; its proof, brief and sample inputs sit beside it. The [runtime package page](/packages/runtime) lists every input.