Creating a playbook
Build a reusable review template that captures your house position on the clauses you care about most.
Updated 29 Jun 2026
A playbook is your team’s reusable review template. It’s a set of plain-English instructions that tell Clment AI:
- Which clauses to look for in a contract.
- What your standard / desired position is for each.
- What language to recommend when a clause falls short.
Once a playbook is published you can run it against any uploaded contract — the AI uses it as the reference standard during review.
Creating one
- Playbooks in the sidebar → + New playbook.
- Name + description — the description matters for picking the right playbook later, especially when your team has several.
- Instructions — the body of the playbook. Plain English; structure it however helps you (we’d suggest grouping by clause type).
- Save as draft to iterate, or Publish when you’re ready to use it on real reviews.
Drafts can be edited freely; only published playbooks appear in the Review with playbook picker.
Versioning
Publishing a playbook creates v1. Edits to a published playbook create a new draft revision; publishing again becomes v2. Existing reviews stay locked to the version they were started against — a review started yesterday with v1 still uses v1’s instructions even after you publish v2.
This is important: editing a playbook NEVER changes the findings of an already-run review. To re-review with the new version, start a fresh review on the same contract.
What good instructions look like
The AI is a strong reader. You don’t need a structured schema, XML tags, or rigid clause-by-clause headings — write the way you’d brief a new junior reviewer who’s smart but doesn’t know your house preferences yet.
What works well:
- Specifics over generalities. “Limit of liability should be capped at 12 months’ fees, 24 months preferred. Carve-outs for breach of confidentiality, IP infringement, gross negligence — uncapped.” is much more useful than “liability should be reasonable.”
- House language verbatim. If you have standard wording you want suggested in redlines, include it. The AI will use it verbatim when it recommends a change.
- What to ignore. Saying “30-day, 60-day, 90-day notice periods are all fine — only flag if no notice mechanism” stops the AI flagging variations you don’t care about.
- The reasoning, not just the rule. “We push back on auto-renewal because finance hates surprise renewals” gives the AI context to apply the rule sensibly in cases you didn’t anticipate.
What works less well:
- Vague positions. “Indemnity should be reasonable and customary” tells the AI to guess what you mean. Findings get vague to match.
- Very legalistic phrasing. “A Material Adverse Effect within the meaning of …” sometimes confuses the AI. Plain English does better.
- Placeholders in suggested wording. If you include a draft clause with “[X] months”, the AI may leave the placeholder in. Use a real default and a note about how to vary it.
Checking your playbook’s strength
When you open a saved playbook, a Playbook strength panel sits alongside the editor and rates how review-ready your instructions are — a quick check that you’ve covered the things that make reviews sharp.
You get an overall grade — Basic, Solid, or Strong — and a per-dimension rating against:
- Strategy & side — is it clear whose side you’re on, and how hard to push?
- Priorities — are your most important positions identifiable?
- Deal-breakers — are the non-negotiables named?
- Fallbacks — do your must-haves have an acceptable compromise?
- Specificity — concrete numbers and language, not “reasonable”?
- Coverage — are the key clause areas for this contract type addressed?
- Preferred wording — is there language a redline can reuse?
Each line carries a one-line tip on how to strengthen it. Use the count pills (e.g. 1 to improve) to focus on just the gaps, and Re-check after an edit to see the grade move.
It’s advisory only — it never blocks a review, and a deliberately minimal playbook is a valid choice. But the dimensions line up with what good instructions look like above: a stronger playbook produces sharper, more on-strategy reviews.
Iterating
You’ll get the most out of a playbook by editing it after running a few reviews:
- A finding that wasn’t really an issue? Add a line to the playbook telling the AI to accept that variant.
- A clause the AI missed? Be more explicit about what to look for.
- A redline that didn’t match your house style? Include the preferred wording in the playbook.
A playbook gets sharper over the first 5–10 reviews. After that it tends to stabilise.
Clment can do much of this for you. Refining a playbook from review data mines how your reviewers actually decided on each item and drafts the edits — so the playbook improves from real decisions, not guesswork.
One playbook per family
Most teams end up with one playbook per contract family — vendor, customer, NDA, employment, distribution, etc. Trying to make one playbook handle every contract type makes the instructions long and unfocused; small, specific playbooks produce more useful findings.
See also
- Refining a playbook from review data — let reviewer decisions improve the playbook for you.
- Reviewing contracts
- Understanding finding verdicts
- Generating redlines