Reviewing a counterparty draft
Identifies where a proposed MSA aligns with or departs from the firm’s agreed positions. Provides clause-level grades and proposed wording for terms outside those positions.
— Legal & Contracts
MSA Review
Grades each MSA clause against your saved preferred, fallback and walk-away positions, then returns a negotiation plan ordered by leverage with markup drafted for the clauses that fail.
- Legal & Contracts
- Deterministic scoring
- Traceable reasoning
- Runs anywhere
half a day → ~15 minutes
For one complete, review-ready pass
No coding required
- Input
- Master Services Agreement text
- Output
- Clause-by-clause grading table against house positions
- Runs in
- Skillsize · ChatGPT · Claude · Copilot
- Export
- SKILL.md · MCP
- Time saved
- ~half a day per run
— USE CASES
What people use MSA Review for
Preparing for contract negotiations
Produces a negotiation plan prioritised by leverage, distinguishing preferred outcomes, acceptable fallbacks and walk-away issues. Gives advisers a clear basis for focusing negotiation effort.
Maintaining consistency across reviewers
Applies the same house standard across MSA reviews, grounded in the firm’s playbook and precedents. Makes the reasoning behind clause assessments easier to compare and scrutinise.
Assessing proposed contractual concessions
Tests proposed terms against fallback and walk-away positions. Highlights concessions that remain within the firm’s boundaries and those that warrant closer legal or commercial consideration.
What it works from
- Master Services Agreement text
- Negotiation playbook with preferred, fallback and walk-away positions
- House precedents and reference clauses
What you get back
- Clause-by-clause grading table against house positions
- Findings on departures from preferred, fallback and walk-away positions
- Negotiation plan prioritised by leverage
- Drafted markup for clauses outside agreed positions
— HOW IT BEHAVES
How MSA Review produces its result
The mechanics behind this specific template — what it reads, what it calculates, and where a human stays in the loop.
Every clause graded against one saved standard
Each clause is measured against a calibrated standard you own, so the bar for the contract portfolio stays identical between runs, assessors and months.
Composed as work product
Findings on the contract portfolio are written up as a document that reads like professional output, with each claim tied back to a clause.
Contracts and agreements broken into reviewable clauses
Long material is split into individual clauses, so each one is assessed on its own merits instead of buried in a document-level verdict.
Delivered as a working table
The clauses land as a clean table you can sort, filter or drop straight into the deliverable.
Why this is expensive by hand
MSA reviews can vary with the reviewer, time available and familiarity with the firm’s negotiating position. Reviewing a counterparty draft is the typical trigger — identifies where a proposed MSA aligns with or departs from the firm’s agreed positions. Provides clause-level grades and proposed wording for terms outside those positions. Done properly it is defensible; done at pace it becomes a judgement call nobody can retrace. And "properly" usually means half a day of manual work.
How this Skill produces it
As a Skill, the work is already sequenced. You bring the evidence, and the run produces clause-by-clause grading table against house positions plus findings on departures from preferred, fallback and walk-away positions. The judgement is built in — how items are broken up, what standard they are held to, and where the run stops for a human review. The practical effect: half a day of manual work becomes a ~15 minutes run, held to an identical standard on the tenth engagement as on the first.
Who it's for
- In-house legal and contract managers
- Commercial and procurement leads reviewing terms
- Operations teams handling contract volume
- Consultants advising on contractual risk
Run it in Skillsize — or export it anywhere
MSA Review exports as a structured SKILL.md file and is MCP-ready, so the same method runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or your own AI products. Adapt it to your methodology, and the intelligence stays yours — not locked to one vendor.
ChatGPTClaudeCopilotAI Products (MCP)
Related Skill Templates
More Legal & Contracts templates →Legal & Contracts
Renewal & obligation calendar
Reads each contract in your register for renewal dates, notice windows and standing obligations, then returns a timeline and an alert list of everything that must be actioned inside 90 days.
Legal & Contracts
Contract Comparison
Identifies every material change between two versions of an agreement and reads it commercially — what moved, in whose favour, and what must be accepted, pushed back or escalated before signature.
Legal & Contracts
NDA triage
Grades every clause in an incoming NDA against your saved house positions and returns a single verdict — sign, mark up (with the drafting done) or escalate.
Legal & Contracts
SOW generator from brief + transcript
Merges a client brief with the scoping-call transcript to extract scope, deliverables, fees and exclusions, pausing for review before drafting the SOW.
Legal & Contracts
Contract metadata extraction at scale
Enriches every row of a contracts export with parties, value, term, renewal basis and governing law, turning a messy list into a queryable contract database with the outliers named.
Legal & Contracts
Contract Deviation Report
Compares an executed agreement clause by clause against the approved template, logs each exception with severity and approval status, and flags the deviations that keep recurring.