Skip to content
T

The ReviewMyContracts editorial team

Product and research

Guides are researched against primary sources and current market practice, then checked against the same clause checklists the product runs.

Not a lawyer, and the site says so on every page. These guides are researched explanations of how contract clauses commonly work and what is customary in the market. Editorial review is done by Claude Opus 5 against a fixed rubric, not by a qualified attorney. Where a question turns on your jurisdiction or your specific facts, you need someone qualified there. The full process is on the methodology page.

What these guides are built from

Each contract type on this site has a checklist of the clauses a review examines and a list of the terms that most often cause problems. Those lists come from the clauses that recur across standard forms of that agreement, the terms that most frequently generate disputes, and what is customary in the market for that document type.

The guides and the product share one checklist. What you read in an article is what the analysis actually looks for — the writing is not marketing produced separately from the tool.

Corrections

If something here is wrong, I want the example. joantonigrimalt@gmail.com — corrections from practising lawyers are especially welcome, and get fixed and noted.

Published guides (24)

See the work, not the claim

A complete report is published in full — findings, redlines, deadlines and the contract it analyzed.

Read the sample report