Three readers per contract. Less risk, less time.
Drop in the agreement, get three independent reads with risk flagged and cited, and ship a redline you can defend.
Markup, not deal-breaker. Tie the termination right to defined material-breach triggers with a 30-day cure period. Otherwise the agreement is effectively at-will.
Push back on 'sole discretion' wording specifically. Replace with 'reasonable, documented breach' to align with the surrounding indemnity language.
In your jurisdiction, recent case law has narrowed sole-discretion clauses anyway. The economic risk is lower than the wording suggests, but the optics are still bad.
Markup, not deal-breaker. Replace 'sole discretion' with 'reasonable, documented material breach', tie to the existing indemnity definitions, and add a 30-day cure period. Note in cover that recent case law already narrows the original wording.
What changes for you
Every flag points back to the clause and, where useful, to the case law. Defensible, not handwavy.
What one model misses, another catches. Subtle indemnity exposure, drafting inconsistencies, jurisdictional quirks.
Documents stay in your workspace. No training on your data, ever.
Which mind to ask
Each model leans differently. Maya keeps the differences visible.
Best for careful contract reading, nuance in interpretive language, and long-document review.
Best for structural redlines, comparing template versions, and consistency across an agreement set.
Best for jurisdictional fact-checks and pulling in recent case-law context.
Where teams reach for it
Hear from three minds, get one verdict.
New accounts get $1 of trial credit. No card required to begin.