AI-powered redline review

The redline comes back.
Now what?

Forty-one tracked changes, a rep who needs it by Friday, and no fast way to tell which four of them actually cost you something.

Redlync uses AI to read the whole markup in minutes, tell you what each change does to your position, route what needs a decision, and hand you the alternative language your legal team already approved. One pass instead of a week of email.

Request a demo See how it works

Works on the Word file your customer emails you. Nothing to integrate.

Tuesday · acme-msa-v3-ACME-markup.docx

9:12 am

A rep forwards the customer's markup. 41 tracked changes across 9 sections. Close date is Friday.

9:14 am

Redlync reads it. Four changes need a decision. The rest are on standard or in your favour — listed, not lost.

9:15 am

One is a walk-away: payment terms moved to 30 120 days. Their comment explains why. "Our AP cycle runs monthly. We need 120."

9:18 am

Legal pre-approved a Net 45 variant for exactly this. You paste it and send. No approval request, no waiting.

9:24 am

Two changes do need sign-off. Legal and Finance are asked at the same time, each seeing only what's theirs.

Same day

Position goes back. Every decision recorded with a name against it — including at renewal, eleven months from now.

What actually goes wrong

Nobody misses the obvious clause.

Every team catches an uncapped indemnity. The losses come from three quieter places — and none of them are carelessness.

Buried in volume

A forty-change markup holds four real decisions and thirty-six pieces of noise. Reading it all properly takes ninety minutes nobody has on the last day of the quarter.

Approved twice, or not at all

Round three re-marks a clause Legal cleared in round one. Ask again and lose two days; wave it through on memory and hope the wording didn't shift.

Found at renewal

A year later someone finds the uplift cap that got conceded to close a quarter. No record of who approved it, or whether anyone did.

What it does

AI where judgment is needed.
Plain code where it isn't.

Reading forty pages of markup and working out what it costs is judgment, and that is what the AI is for. But some checks must never be wrong, and those run as ordinary comparisons — no model involved, nothing to hallucinate.

The AI reads and judges

Pulls every tracked insertion, deletion and margin comment straight out of the Word file — including the author and the timestamp
Measures each change against your own standard, fallback, ceiling and walk-away, and says which of the five it lands in
Quantifies the movement. "Net 30 to Net 90, past your Net 45 fallback" rather than "payment terms changed"
Treats several edits to one sentence as one decision, because that is how the sentence will be read
Catches changes that look harmless alone and compound together — a shorter notice period plus a wider termination right
Reads their margin comments for the reason behind an ask, and never paraphrases them: you see their words

These checks are just code

A term you already agreed is compared character by character against the language that was approved
If it changed with no tracked change marking it, that is flagged first and loudest — the one thing a careful reader structurally cannot catch
Approval attaches to a position, not a clause. Finance approved Net 60; if round five arrives at Net 75, that approval no longer covers it
Terms settled in an earlier round are suppressed rather than re-approved, so nobody is asked twice
Pre-approved language is offered exactly as your legal team wrote it. Nothing rewords it, because rewording it would end the approval
Every finding cites a change that exists in the file. If it cannot, it is marked unverified rather than shown as fact

The failure mode of contract AI is not being wrong. It is being wrong fluently — an analysis that reads professionally and cites a clause nobody wrote. Splitting the work this way is how that is avoided.

Who it's for

Four teams, one document.

In a company of 150 people, the same marked-up agreement passes through four sets of hands — usually by email, usually with each waiting on the last. Redlync gives each of them their own view of it.

Deal desk

Triage in minutes, not an afternoon

Every change sorted by what it does to your position, with the four that matter at the top and the other thirty-seven accounted for rather than skipped.

Accept, reject, or counter with pre-approved language — and see which terms were already settled in an earlier round.

You stop reading forty pages to find four decisions.

Sales

Submit it and see where it stands

Drop the customer's file in with a note about what's driving the close date. No reformatting, no summarising clauses into an email.

Then watch the status: what's cleared, what's waiting, and on whom. No more asking deal desk for an update.

You stop chasing people for where the contract stands.

Contracts

One record of every round

Each version, each change, each decision, in order — with the customer's own margin comments carried through word for word.

When a settled term quietly changes in a later draft with no markup on it, that gets flagged. It's the one thing a careful reader can't catch.

You stop rebuilding the history from an inbox.

Legal

Asked once, about what's yours

Only the changes routed to you, in context, with the playbook position they depart from. Not a forwarded thread asking you to read forty pages.

Approve, deny, or reply with the wording you'd accept — and it becomes the counter, verbatim.

You stop being asked the same question twice.

Where it fits

Built for teams without a contracts department.

Enterprise CLM platforms assume you have a legal ops function, a six-month implementation, and thirty thousand a year to spend. Most companies selling enterprise deals have none of those — they have Word, email, and one person who knows what the standard terms are.

What Redlync does

Measures a customer's markup against your positions, not general market norms
Routes by your approval matrix, with your approvers and your thresholds
Offers the alternative language your legal team already signed off on
Answers a commercial question — what does this cost us — not a compliance one
Works alongside a CPQ or CLM if you have one. Doesn't need either.

What it doesn't

Hold your contract repository or run signature
Give legal advice or stand in for counsel
Draft agreements from scratch
Tell you what's market — it tells you what's yours
Require an implementation project to start

Request a demo

Bring a real redline.

Twenty minutes, run on your document rather than a canned one. Bring a marked-up agreement — scrubbed if you'd rather — and we'll set up enough of your playbook live to see what it catches.

If it doesn't surface something your team would have wanted to know, that's a useful answer too.

Or email rnovoa.us@gmail.com

Request received

You'll hear back within a business day. If you have a redline you'd like run, reply to that email and attach it — the demo is far more useful on a real document.

The redline comes back.Now what?