C
Clment
Clment reviews incoming English language contracts against a team's rulebook and turns the resulting decisions into tracked changes in Word. Users upload PDF or Word files, choose the material to review, select a rulebook and set a review strategy. Findings quote the supporting clause, and reviewers can agree, disagree, supply their own wording or exclude a change. The system can propose rulebook revisions from repeated reviewer decisions, with approval required before a revision takes effect.
The workspace retains contracts, extracts dates and parties, sends renewal reminders and answers questions about one agreement or a portfolio. Word Online and Google Docs connections let users edit a copy and return it as a new version. An API, webhooks and an MCP server support automated reviews and access from other assistants.
Contract Eagle Limited, a New Zealand company, operates Clment as a separate product alongside its older contract management system. Clment serves legal teams, operations staff and people reviewing their own business agreements. It does not draft original agreements or provide a lawyer's sign off. Free, Pro, Business and Enterprise plans combine contract and user limits with metered AI usage. Customer data cannot train models under the service terms.
Clment, head to head
Side by side on the same 15 capability axes and 12 legal signals: where the two part company, and what neither one publishes.
Alternatives to Clment
Vendors in the same categories as Clment whose graded profiles look most alike, with a line on what each product does.
Similar is not the same, so check that each one does the job you need. No vendor pays for placement.
- RRobin AIRobin AI combines contract interpretation with a legal operations workspace.
- CContractbookContractbook brings contract drafting, signatures, data extraction and ongoing obligations into a shared workspace.
- TTomorroTomorro is a French contract lifecycle management platform, formerly Leeway, operated by Tomorro SAS from Toulouse.
- BBlackBoilerBlackBoiler is AI contract review software that applies a legal team's own negotiation standards to incoming contracts as first pass tracked changes in Microsoft Word.
- PPactlyPactly combines contract generation, Word review, approvals and a repository for corporate legal teams.
- AAgiloftAgiloft is an enterprise contract lifecycle management platform for legal and procurement teams.
Ordered by how closely the graded profiles match across the 15 capability axes, inside the same categories. See how each axis is graded in the methodology.
Capability grades
All 15 axes, graded from public sources on the date shown. Hover a grade to see what the letter means on that axis.
AI Centrality
How much of the product is actually AI. Whether the machine learning is the mechanism the buyer is paying for or a feature layered onto conventional software, and whether the vendor is specific about which is which.
AI powers contract classification, clause review, redlines, extracted dates and answers about agreements. A rulebook supplies the team's positions, while the chosen review strategy controls which findings enter a proposed markup. Single agreement questions use the full text, and portfolio questions retrieve relevant material from stored contracts. The application also retains a contract repository, versions, reviewer comments, key dates and calendar reminders.
Those records and collaboration functions remain useful independently of a new model response. Clment is separate from Contract Eagle's older lifecycle platform; the AI review product combines its own ongoing contract workspace with the model driven analysis.
Citation Accuracy and Hallucination Disclosure
Whether the vendor publishes measured accuracy on citations and assertions, grounds output to primary sources, and says plainly what its system does when it does not know. Legal has a documented public record of fabricated citations reaching filed briefs, so an untested claim of accuracy is not evidence.
Findings quote the clause behind the recommendation, and answers link to the source contract and page. Single document analysis uses a 200,000 token context window, while questions across the portfolio use retrieval augmented generation. Review rules and supporting attachments give the model additional context. When a point appears to require external authority that cannot be grounded in the supplied contract or rulebook, the finding is marked for human verification.
Classification carries confidence estimates, but those estimates do not measure citation correctness. No test set, reproducible accuracy result or error rate accompanies the current review system, and the terms warn that output may omit material issues.
Autonomy and Oversight Model
What the system decides on its own, what a lawyer must approve, and whether the vendor documents where the review point sits. A tool that drafts under review and a tool that files without one are different products and different risks.
Three review strategies set the default content of a redline. Understand and Negotiate includes findings of medium severity and above; High priority only includes high severity findings; Strict includes every deviation. A reviewer's explicit choice, custom wording or agreement with a finding takes precedence over that default. Reviewers can exclude a change, record their reasoning and generate a Word file with attributed tracked changes.
Unsupported external points return for human verification. Proposed rulebook refinements also require approval and retain versions. API keys can automate reviews and content changes, but cannot alter membership, billing, security settings or integrations; those actions require a signed in administrator.
Operational and Outcome Evidence
Named, dated evidence that the product works in production at real firms or legal departments. Case studies with figures and identified customers count. Unattributed testimonials and launch announcements do not.
The current application offers a free plan, paid subscriptions and step by step review workflows, but no named production customer or measured deployment result accompanies the Clment review product. Acme and Northwind agreements illustrate classification, liability findings, proposed changes and version comparison in the product demonstration. Those examples do not identify a customer's actual contract work. Contract Eagle's longstanding lifecycle product has separate customer stories, including ManpowerGroup, but those stories concern that older system. A study of review time, missed clauses or negotiated outcomes for the current Clment release is not available.
Privilege and Confidentiality Posture
How client confidences are handled: attorney client privilege and work product treatment, segregation of one client matter from another, whether client data trains any model, and what the vendor commits to in writing rather than in marketing.
The subscriber agreement prohibits Contract Eagle and its subprocessors from training machine learning models on customer data. It also treats customer data as confidential and limits staff access to people who need it for their duties. Each organization has an isolated workspace, with authentication and roles enforced by Clment. AI providers can retain input and output for up to 30 days, with longer retention or controlled staff review for flagged misuse and legal requirements.
Confidential information can be returned or destroyed on instruction, subject to legal retention. The agreement does not specifically address attorney client privilege or work product, and tenant isolation does not describe matter level walls.
UPL and Professional Responsibility Posture
Whether the vendor is clear that it supplies a tool rather than legal advice, who its audience is, and how it addresses unauthorized practice of law, competence and supervision duties, and jurisdiction limits. ABA Formal Opinion 512 is the reference point. Where the advice line is not the duty a product raises, the axis is read through the nearest professional duty it does raise: judicial conduct rules and the reviewing duty for products sold only to courts, and the duty to bill for time actually spent for products that draft time entries.
Clment reviews agreements supplied by the user and does not draft original contracts or provide an attorney's approval. Its terms describe informational software, disclaim legal advice and require independent checking and advice from a legal practitioner before relying on output. Reviewers control findings and wording, with an executive summary available for colleagues who are not lawyers. The product supports English language contracts and adapts rulebooks to governing law rather than treating every agreement as subject to one country's norms.
Named professional competence duties, supervisory procedures for law firms and a complete jurisdictional support boundary are not specified.
AI Governance and Bias Disclosure
Published governance over model behavior: who owns it inside the vendor, what is tested before release, and what is disclosed about disparate output across matter types, parties, or populations.
Review behavior is constrained by rulebooks, source grounding and a prohibition on treating unsupported external authority as established fact. The model should not strengthen a position merely because a user asks for a more combative response, and reviewers approve changes to the rulebook. These are controls on a particular contract review, separate from governance of the models themselves. An accountable AI governance owner, a release testing program and findings about uneven performance across contract types or groups are not specified.
The named founder and data protection contact do not have a stated responsibility for evaluating model bias or approving AI releases.
AI Safety and Data Stewardship
Retention, deletion, access control, and what happens to prompts and documents after they are processed. Whether the vendor states its subprocessors and its incident practice, or leaves the buyer to assume.
The data processing agreement names the hosting, AI, conversion, security, backup and payment providers, with at least 30 days notice for new subprocessors and an objection process. Access is limited by organization and role, with confidentiality obligations for staff and optional enforced multifactor authentication on paid plans. Encrypted backups remain for 90 days. Customers have 90 days after termination to export their data, followed by deletion, subject to legal and technical exceptions.
AI processing has a separate limit of up to 30 days with misuse and legal exceptions. Breach notices must arrive without undue delay, with assistance for the customer's reporting obligations and remediation of the cause.
AI Liability and Recourse
What the vendor stands behind contractually when its output is wrong. Indemnities, caps, carve outs, insurance, and whether any of it is published or only reachable through a negotiated agreement.
Paid subscribers receive an intellectual property indemnity for permitted use of the service, with exclusions including customer data, third party data, modifications and combinations. The general liability cap is the prior year's fees; Free has a cap of NZ$100. The IP indemnity, confidentiality breaches, fraud, willful misconduct, personal injury and required refunds sit outside that cap. A software conformity warranty carries commercially reasonable efforts to fix defects.
AI accuracy and suitability are expressly unwarranted, and users must check the result. Certain Azure related confidentiality losses are excluded, subject to the data agreement. No insurance commitment or specific remedy for an erroneous contract recommendation is stated.
Practice Systems Integration Depth
How deeply the product reaches into the systems legal work already lives in: document management such as iManage and NetDocuments, Word and Outlook, contract lifecycle management, matter management, e-billing, and court filing systems.
Each user connects a Microsoft or Google account to edit a contract or redline in Word Online or Google Docs. Clment places a copy in the connected drive, tracks the session and imports the edited file as a new Word version. Users can delete the drive copy and make the revision active during check in; only the session owner or an invited participant can finish that step. One editor can hold a version at a time. API keys provide regional access to contract work, signed webhooks report events, and MCP connects other assistants. Calendar feeds expose contract dates without permitting changes through the calendar.
Deployment Model and Data Residency
Where the software runs and where the data sits. Multi tenant cloud, single tenant, private deployment, on premises, and whether region of residence is a published option or an enterprise conversation.
Clment runs on Azure with separate regional workspaces in the United States, Frankfurt, London, Sydney, Auckland and Toronto. European Union storage is in Frankfurt, with AI inference in Sweden Central. For other regions, AI processing may occur outside the selected storage region; the complete processing locations are not specified. Backups stay within the chosen jurisdiction. New Zealand uses local Azure redundancy and a separate local backup provider because Azure has no second region there.
If that region becomes permanently unavailable, the terms offer recoverable data or redeployment to Australia at Contract Eagle's expense.
Security Certifications and Trust Center
Independent attestation a buyer can pull without a sales call: SOC 2, ISO 27001, penetration test summaries, a trust center with current reports and named scope rather than a badge image.
SOC 2 Type II covers security, availability and confidentiality, with the report available on request under a confidentiality undertaking. The service terms also commit to regular independent security testing, AES 256 encryption at rest, transport encryption, tenant isolation and limited staff access. Administrators can require Microsoft or Google sign in, disable passwords or enforce multifactor authentication for password users on paid plans.
Contract activity records identify the user, action, resource and time. The auditor, examination period and report date are not accessible alongside the attestation claim. Enterprise subscribers may negotiate audit rights beyond the standard report access.
Model Supply Chain Disclosure
Which models sit underneath, whose they are, where they run, and whether the vendor commits to telling customers when that changes. A legal buyer inherits every dependency it cannot see.
Claude language models run through Azure AI Foundry, while GPT language and embedding models run through Azure OpenAI Service. Microsoft supplies the inference infrastructure rather than the model companies' own hosting. Anthropic and OpenAI remain named in the subprocessor schedule, alongside Adobe and Aspose for optical character recognition and conversion. The agreement does not promise a particular model, provider or version and allows substitution without notice.
New subprocessors generally require 30 days notice, but that is a separate obligation from changing a model within the existing supply chain. Exact current model versions and the routing between them are not specified.
Commercial Transparency
Whether a buyer can learn what this costs without entering a sales process: published rates, the unit being charged, what sits behind an enterprise tier, and what implementation adds.
Pro includes five users, 250 contracts, ten rulebooks and 10,000 monthly AI units for $149 monthly or $1,490 annually. Business increases these allowances to 20 users, 1,000 contracts, unlimited rulebooks and 25,000 monthly units for $329 monthly or $3,290 annually. Enterprise is quoted separately. Uploads use one unit per page, questions ten, and a standard review 250 plus five per page. Extra packs start at $19 for 1,000 units and expire after 12 months.
The free plan has one user, 25 contracts and an initial allowance. Migration, data entry and template configuration are outside routine subscription support.
Firm and Practice Coverage
Who the product is actually built for. AmLaw, midlaw, small firm and solo, in house departments, government and courts, and which practice areas are supported rather than merely claimed.
The product serves legal teams, operations staff and people reviewing their own commercial agreements. It handles incoming English language contracts, including software agreements and commercial leases, with classification across 16 categories and more than 60 types. Reviews work from the agreement's governing law and the user's chosen rulebook. It does not create original agreements, provide an attorney's sign off or support non English contract estates.
Teams needing large enterprise procurement connections, matter management or bespoke lifecycle workflows are directed to other products. Precise law firm size segments, government uses and a complete list of supported legal jurisdictions are not specified.
8 public documents
The public pages on file for Clment, with the recorded signals each one supports and the date it was last read. Open any of them and check the reading against the record.
-
clment.com/terms-of-service5 signals
Client Data in Training, Prompt and Output Retention, Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice and 2 more
Read Oct 15, 2026
-
clment.com/dpa1 signal
Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness
Read Oct 15, 2026
-
clment.com/features1 signal
Primary Law Corpus Provenance
Read Oct 15, 2026
-
Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation
Read Oct 15, 2026
-
Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior
Read Oct 15, 2026
-
clment.com/help/security-and-sso1 signal
Court Disclosure Support
Read Oct 15, 2026
-
clment.com/how-reviews-work1 signal
Good Law Verification
Read Oct 15, 2026
-
Fabricated Citation Record
Read Oct 15, 2026
$124 per month, billed $1,490 annually
- A free plan supports one person and 25 contracts.
- Pro costs $149 monthly or $1,490 for a year.
- AI reviews use an allowance that depends on contract length.
- Extra capacity is sold in packs, and Enterprise needs a quote.
Pro costs $149 monthly or a displayed $124 per month billed as $1,490 annually. It includes five users, 250 contracts, ten rulebooks and 10,000 monthly AI units. Business costs $329 monthly or a displayed $274 per month billed as $3,290 annually, with 20 users, 1,000 contracts and 25,000 monthly units. Enterprise requires a quote. Free includes one user, 25 contracts and 1,000 initial units.
Implementation: Signup and the free plan require no sales process or payment card. The subscription includes routine support, fixes and minor enhancements. Data entry, migration and template configuration remain the customer's responsibility, with no fixed assisted implementation price.
Confidentiality and data terms: The service terms and Data Processing Addendum apply to subscribers. SOC 2 reports require a confidentiality undertaking. Enterprise customers can negotiate additional audit arrangements.
Note: Displayed monthly equivalents are rounded; the annual invoice amounts are $1,490 and $3,290. A standard review uses 250 units plus five per page, and a deep review uses 400 plus ten per page. Additional packs start at $19 for 1,000 units and expire after 12 months. Taxes are extra, price increases require at least 30 days notice, and cancellation requires 14 days notice before the billing period ends.
Legal Signals
What each signal meansA signal records what public sources say on the date shown. It is not a grade and it is not a recommendation. Where a signal reads Not addressed, it means the index did not locate the material in public sources on that date, which is a statement about disclosure rather than about the product.
Client Data in Training
Can material a lawyer puts into this product be used to train a model?
The published terms prohibit training on customer content. Not a policy page, the agreement.
The service agreement prohibits training any machine learning model on customer data and extends that prohibition to subprocessors. The data agreement repeats the ban for personal data. Contract Eagle may create anonymized aggregate analytics for internal product development, but the express model training restriction still applies. Reviewer decisions can improve a customer's versioned rulebook after approval; that feature changes instructions rather than granting permission to train a model.
Prompt and Output Retention
How long does the product keep what a lawyer typed, and can that be set to zero?
The customer controls the retention window, by product configuration or by contractual instruction, but zero retention is not stated as available.
Customers can instruct return or destruction of confidential information, with written confirmation of destruction within 30 days, subject to legal retention. A terminated account has a 90 day export period, and encrypted backups remain for 90 days. Separately, AI providers may retain inputs and outputs for up to 30 days, or longer for flagged misuse or legal duties. No customer setting eliminates all of these retention paths.
Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation
Does retrieval respect the firm’s ethical walls, or can the model read across them?
The product maintains its own permission model, documented, requiring the firm to keep it aligned.
Clment enforces its own organization boundaries on each read and write, with invitation based membership and administrative control over sign in methods. API keys operate in the organization's home region and can access workspace content but cannot change roles or security settings. Each person's drive editing connection is separate. A document management system's matter permissions are not inherited at retrieval time, and internal ethical wall arrangements are not specified.
Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice
If someone subpoenas the vendor for a firm’s data, does the firm hear about it first?
Terms commit to notice where lawfully permitted. No transparency report located.
The confidentiality clause requires notice as early as reasonably possible before legally required disclosure, together with reasonable action to avoid or limit the disclosure. A further provision requires prompt written notice where law permits it. The data agreement also requires notice before processing personal data to satisfy a legal requirement when permitted. A public transparency report describing received demands is not available.
Primary Law Corpus Provenance
Where does the law in this product come from, and does the vendor have the right to use it?
Sources are identified without stating the license or rights basis.
Answers use uploaded contracts, supporting material and the chosen rulebook. Single agreement questions use a full context window, while portfolio questions retrieve relevant passages from stored files. Rules may come from the customer, an AI drafting wizard or Clment's supplied rulebook. The customer retains ownership of its data and grants a service processing license. An external primary law collection, its rights basis and its refresh schedule are not identified.
Good Law Verification
Does the product tell you when the authority it just cited has been overruled?
No located public material addresses whether authority is checked for subsequent history.
Clment cites agreement passages and rulebook positions while reviewing contractual obligations. Its review method flags external authorities that cannot be grounded in the supplied material for human verification. That control does not check whether a case has been overruled or a statute amended. No licensed citator or subsequent history mechanism is specified for authorities that appear in contract material or reviewer instructions.
Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior
What does the product do when the answer is not in the corpus?
The vendor describes refusal or abstention behavior in public materials.
If a finding appears to depend on an external statute, case, regulation or standard that the supplied agreement or rulebook cannot support, Clment marks it as needing verification instead of asserting the authority as fact. This behavior applies across review strategies. Classification also exposes confidence estimates, but those are separate from the unsupported authority warning. No public evaluation demonstrates how consistently the warning catches unsupported assertions.
Fabricated Citation Record
Does a public court record exist addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations in output from this product?
No court order, opinion or disciplinary record addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations produced by this product has been located as of the date shown. This is a statement about the public record on that one subject, not a finding about the product, and this signal is not a litigation history.
The AI Hallucination Cases database contains no court or disciplinary record about fabricated legal citations attributed to Clment or Contract Eagle as of October 15, 2026. Clment primarily reviews supplied agreements and attaches contract passages to its findings. The database result does not measure the accuracy of those findings, the appropriateness of a suggested redline or the validity of legal authority supplied in a rulebook.
Bar Guidance Alignment
Has the vendor engaged in public with the ethics opinions its buyers are bound by?
No located public material engages with bar or ethics guidance.
The terms require independent checking and advice from a legal practitioner before relying on contract output. The product also keeps reviewer decisions and makes users responsible for the agreement they accept or amend. These provisions address use of the tool without mapping its controls to a named bar opinion or professional ethics rule. No jurisdiction specific ethics guidance for lawyers is identified.
Billing and Fee Posture
Does the vendor address what happens to the bill when the work takes an hour instead of six?
The product does not touch a fee between a lawyer and a client. It operates before an engagement exists, or it is bought by a team that bills no client for the work. Savings claims aimed at the buyer’s own cost are recorded in the summary and do not make the row a savings claim, because no client bill is in the loop.
Clment's current packaging addresses organizations reviewing their own commercial agreements, including legal and operations teams and individuals handling business contracts. The terms limit use to internal business or personal purposes. Review automation and reusable rulebooks reduce that internal work. The product does not describe a law firm time billing workflow, client fee adjustments or disclosure of AI savings on an invoice to a legal client.
Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness
Can a firm get this vendor through a client’s AI clause without a bespoke negotiation?
A current subprocessor or model provider list is published.
The data agreement names Microsoft Azure, Anthropic, OpenAI, Cloudflare, Aspose, Adobe, Catalyst Cloud and Airwallex, with their functions and regional scope. Claude and GPT inference currently runs on Azure infrastructure. Customers receive advance notice of new subprocessors, with emergency exceptions and an objection route. The service agreement and data agreement are available before signup, but a client facing AI consent or outside counsel disclosure pack is not specified.
Court Disclosure Support
If a judge’s standing order requires an AI disclosure, can the product produce one?
Some elements of the record are available, short of a document level export.
Contract activity records the user, action, resource and timestamp. Review findings retain decisions, comments and source passages, and generated Word changes carry attribution and a review reference. Support can supply an organization wide activity export for a requested period. These records preserve parts of the work, but no document level export combines the exact model version, retrieved sources and human verification into a court disclosure record.