Everyone’s “using AI” on contracts now. Most of it is lipstick on a black box: you upload a 200-page PDF, the tool spits out a pretty paragraph, and no one can tell where the answer came from or whether it would stand up in a dispute.

That’s not good enough in mining and construction. Miss a time bar and you burn cash. Accept a bad clause and you inherit risk for years. You don’t need a slick paragraph—you need the clause, the link, and the next step. And you need a workflow that keeps a human in control.

This is the only AI contract review you can trust: clause-level citations with live links, clear next-step guidance, and a human-in-the-loop to decide and own the risk.

Why black-box AI fails in contracting

Black-box reviews look useful until the stakes get real. Here’s why they fail:

• No sources. If the tool can’t show the exact clause and where it came from, you can’t verify or defend the answer.
• No control. Auto-rewrites and “just send it” automations push risk to the tool. That’s fine for a blog post. Not for a notice that affects claims or liquidated damages.
• No repeatability. If you can’t re-run the logic and get the same result tomorrow, you don’t have a process—you have a coin flip.

In heavy industry, trust comes from evidence + control + repeatability. That means citations, approvals, and an audit trail.

The model that works: clause, link, action—human decides

A trustworthy review looks like this:

1. Upload the contract (final, executed version) and, optionally, your policy rules (tolerances, red flags, preferred positions).
2. Ask normal questions: “What’s the notice period for delay?” “Who bears weather risk?” “What triggers LDs?”
3. Get a structured answer:
   • The exact clause and sub-clause
   • A live link to the page in the source document
   • A plain-English summary and recommended next step
4. You decide: accept, edit, escalate, or capture as a departure. Nothing is auto-sent. Nothing moves without a human.

That’s it. The AI does the heavy lift—finding, citing, and drafting. The human uses judgment. You move faster without handing your fate to a mystery machine.

First-pass review in hours, not weeks

Traditional first-pass reviews take days. You read, highlight, extract, reconcile with your playbook, and then format a departures table. The delay isn’t from “thinking”—it’s from locating and formatting.

The clause-link model compresses this:

• Map to your playbook. Upload a simple CSV of what you care about: risk categories, thresholds, preferred positions.
• Answer + cite. For each policy item, AI returns the clause text, the link, and a short interpretation.
• Autofill departures. Tell the system your column layout (e.g., “Clause,” “Issue,” “Risk,” “Preferred Position,” “Proposed Wording,” “Status”). It fills the table with citations attached.
• You edit the tough ones. AI gives you 70–80% of the lift. You fix the nuanced 20–30% and sign off.

The result isn’t just speed. It’s a defensible output that any reviewer can pick up, check, and continue.

Surviving the rounds: V1…V4 without losing the plot

Reviews rarely end at V1. You’ll trade redlines, accept some, push back on others, and carry context across rounds. The mess usually lives in email threads and version soup.

The clause-linked workflow keeps you on rails:

• Track decisions at the clause level. Each departure carries the clause reference and the history of your position.
• Snapshot each round. V1, V2, V3 are stored as states—not scattered files. You can see what changed and why.
• Compare base vs executed. At the end, the system auto-compares the final to the base. You get a material changes summary for handover.

When you hand the project to delivery, they get the truth—not “I think legal agreed to something in that email.”

Delivery phase: where risk really bites

Most money is lost after award. Delays, variations, safety events, KPI misses—these start life as emails, daily reports, and meeting notes, not neat change orders. If you don’t catch them early and align to the contract, you lose leverage fast.

Here’s how the same clause-link logic saves you post-award:

• Project inbox monitoring. Route a project email (e.g., projectX@yourco) or forward reports. AI scans for contract-relevant triggers: access delays, weather, scope creep, instruction changes.
• Flag + cite + draft. Each trigger comes with the clause and a drafted next step (notice, RFI, early warning). You choose to send, escalate, or ignore.
• No autopilot. The tool does not auto-submit anything. That single human step is the risk control that keeps leaders comfortable and disputes defensible.

Supervisors don’t have time to read 200 pages. Give them the clause and the next step in 30 seconds, and you’ll stop losing to time bars.

What leaders care about: ROI without adding headcount

You don’t need a business case built on hype. This is simple, measurable value:

• Cycle time down. First-pass review in hours, not weeks. Faster bid/no-bid and earlier counter-positions.
• Fewer misses. Time bars, LD triggers, and scope shifts are flagged early with citations.
• Cleaner handovers. Delivery gets material changes and a guidance map, not folklore.
• Audit-ready trail. Every answer and draft links to the clause. If challenged, you can show the work.
• Do more with fewer people. Your best people spend time on judgment and negotiation—not document spelunking.

Translate that to cash: fewer disputes, stronger claims, better recoveries, and less rework.

Security and confidentiality, in plain English

Trust also depends on how the system handles your data:

• Your documents stay your documents. No training on your contracts.
• Data isolation. Customer data is logically segregated; access is permissioned and logged.
• Email controls. Project inboxes can be read-only. Drafts require explicit human send.
• Audit trail. Every answer shows the clause, link, timestamp, and approver.
• Exports on your terms. You can export reviews, departures, and handover packs to your repository of choice.

You don’t have to trade confidentiality for speed.

Real team workflows: who uses what, when

• Commercial/Contract Managers: Drive the first-pass review and shape the departures table. Approve notice drafts.
• Project Managers/Superintendents: Live in the inbox flow—see flags, approve sends, and track obligations.
• Executives: Monitor lead indicators (time-bar exposure, flagged risks) and review cycle times by project.
• Legal/Advisors: Step in on edge cases, refine policy rules, and support negotiations with cleaner inputs.

Everyone touches the same truth. No more “where’s that spreadsheet?” or “which version did we send?”

What this changes for your business

• Speed becomes defensible. Faster reviews without hand-waving.
• Knowledge stops walking out the door. Your playbook becomes a living asset, not tribal memory.
• Leaders sleep better. Approvals and audit trails replace “hope it’s fine.”
• Frontline teams get practical help. Not lectures. Not 200-page PDFs. Just clause + next step, right now.

That’s the difference between looking “innovative” and actually reducing risk.

The only AI contract review you can trust is the one that shows its work—and keeps you in control.

‍