For the complete documentation index, see llms.txt. This page is also available as Markdown.

Understanding Review Playbooks in Vincent

Review Playbooks codify your firm's preferred, acceptable and unacceptable positions so Vincent can check any document against your own standards.

Summary

Review Playbooks let you codify your firm's preferred, acceptable, and unacceptable positions for a document type, then apply that standard to any future document of the same kind. Vincent evaluates the document clause by clause, flags where each term sits against your standards, and can apply tracked changes to bring unacceptable positions into line.

Why This is Important

Most firms already have a negotiating playbook. It usually lives in a PDF, a wiki page, or in the head of the partner who wrote it. The cost of that format is not the writing, it is the enforcement: every associate has to remember the standard, apply it consistently, and spot the clause that quietly falls below it.

A Review turns that document into something executable. The standard stops being guidance that has to be recalled and becomes a check that runs against every draft. In practice that means three things:

  • Consistency. A first-year applies the same position as the partner who set it, on every document, without being told.

  • Supervision capacity. A reviewer reads Vincent's assessment of where the document sits, rather than reading the whole document to find out.

  • Institutional memory. When the lawyer who wrote the playbook leaves, the standard stays.

How a Review is Structured

Every Review follows the same three-level structure. Understanding it makes both creation and execution predictable.

  • Clauses. Every clause you expect could appear in a future document of this type. Each clause carries a short code (C03) and a title (Confidential Information).

  • Terms. The specific negotiable points inside a clause. Every clause has at least one. A term carries a name, a favourable direction (higher is better, lower is better, or judged on substance), an optional unit such as months or percent, and optional notes.

  • Positions. Three per term, all required: Preferred, Acceptable and Unacceptable. Each is a sentence describing your organization's position on that term. For an NDA's confidentiality duration, that might read: Preferred, more than two years; Acceptable, one year; Unacceptable, less than one year.

Position
When it appears

Preferred

The contract term is equal to, or more favourable to your side than, your Preferred position.

Acceptable

The term sits between your Preferred and your Unacceptable positions.

Unacceptable

The term is equal to, or less favourable than, your Unacceptable position, a dealbreaker.

A term your contract does not address produces no finding. Vincent leaves it out rather than guessing, so the count you see reflects only the terms it actually found and assessed.

The Represented Party Comes First

The field accepts free text, so any sensible description works, and Vincent proposes options appropriate to the contract type. For NDAs the options are Mutual (both sides), Disclosing party, Receiving party, and Something else, with one marked as the default. You can skip the question, in which case Vincent applies the default and tells you the assumption it made.

Knowing which side you are on is also what lets Vincent fill gaps in your material with a defensible standard position rather than a guess.

Where Reviews Are Created and Run

Reviews use two surfaces, and each does one job:

  • Create in the web app. Reviews are built in Vincent on the web, either in conversation or from the Skills menu. Once created, the Review is saved as a Skill with a generated description and conditions, labeled with the party it favors.

  • Execute in Microsoft Word. Reviews run in the Vincent add-in for Word, against the document you have open.

Reviews are created in the Vincent web app and saved into your Skills list, alongside your other custom Skills.

Where each stage happens. You build and edit a playbook in the web app. You can run a playbook in the web app to get the analysis, but the web app does not edit your document. To apply the proposed changes as tracked redlines you need to run the playbook in the Clio for Word add-in.

What You Need Before You Start

  • The Builder or Admin role, to create or edit a playbook. Reading a playbook and running one against a document need no special role.

  • The Clio for Word add-in for Microsoft Word installed, to apply proposed changes as tracked redlines in your document. Get Started with Vincent in Microsoft Word

  • Review Playbooks enabled for your organization. This is set at the account level by your account team.

Who Can Do What

Review Playbooks inherit the customization permission model, so the role a user holds decides how far they get. Everyone in the firm can read and run Review Playbooks against contracts.

Action
User
Builder
Admin (shown as Publisher)

Read and list playbooks

Yes

Yes

Yes

Create a playbook

No

Yes

Yes

Edit a playbook they own

No

Yes

Yes

Edit any playbook in the firm

No

No

Yes

Delete a playbook

No

Own only

Any

Run a playbook against a document

Yes

Yes

Yes

Best Practices & Pro Tips

  • Start with your highest-volume, lowest-variation document type. NDAs, vendor agreements, and engagement letters are good first candidates: you see many of them, the clause set is stable, and the positions are already settled internally. Save bespoke transaction documents for once your team is comfortable with the format.

  • Write positions as thresholds, not as preferences. "Confidentiality survives for at least three years" is something Vincent can assess against a document. "We like longer survival periods" is not. The sharper the threshold, the more reliable the match, and the more useful Vincent's explanation is to the lawyer reading it.

What's Your Next Step?

Last updated

Was this helpful?