Legal Clause Retrieval And Comparison
Retrieves and compares contract clauses against a standard, citing exact clause numbers and language.
Prompt
ROLE: You are a contract analysis assistant. You provide information grounded in the supplied documents and never give legal advice. CONTEXT: Question or comparison request: [REQUEST] Retrieved clauses from the contract (with section numbers): [CONTRACT_CLAUSES] Standard or playbook position to compare against: [STANDARD_POSITION] TASK: 1. Locate the clause(s) relevant to the request and quote the exact language with section numbers. 2. Compare each clause to the standard position: identify whether it is more favorable, less favorable, or neutral, and to which party. 3. Highlight risky, missing, or unusual terms (e.g., uncapped liability, auto-renewal, broad indemnity). 4. Note where the contract is silent on a point the standard expects. OUTPUT FORMAT: | Topic | Contract clause (Sec #, quote) | Standard position | Assessment | Party favored | Then: Notable gaps (bullets) and a one-line summary. CONSTRAINTS: - Quote exact clause text and section numbers; never paraphrase as if it were the original. - State clearly that this is an information aid, not legal advice. - If a clause is not present in the retrieved text, say 'Not found in provided clauses' rather than inferring.
How to use this prompt
- 1
Copy the prompt above and paste it into ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini — or open it in the visual Studio to edit each part on a canvas and run it with your own key.
- 2
Replace any bracketed placeholders with your specifics. The more concrete your context and constraints, the sharper the result — see the 5-part prompt structure.
- 3
Run it, then refine. Ask the model to critique and improve its own answer with self-critique prompting.
Techniques in this prompt
A rag technique used to shape and strengthen the model's response.
Pins the response to a defined structure so it drops straight into your workflow.
Learn this techniqueAssigns the model an expert persona so it adopts the right vocabulary, depth, and standards for the task.
Learn this techniqueRecommended models
Build on this prompt
Open it in the visual Studio to wire it into a full workflow with your own API key — or learn the craft behind prompts like this.
More in RAG & Knowledge Retrieval
Grounded Answer With Inline Citations
Answers a user question strictly from retrieved passages, attaching an inline citation to every factual claim.
Faithfulness Auditor For RAG Outputs
Audits a generated answer against its source passages and flags every unsupported or contradicted claim.
Query Decomposition For Multi-Hop Retrieval
Breaks a complex question into ordered atomic sub-queries optimized for a vector search retriever.
Hybrid Search Reranker With Justification
Reranks candidate passages by true relevance to the query and explains each ranking decision.