How to review contract revisions with an AI agent Leave feedback

A counterparty returns “a few small edits” as a fresh document with no track changes. The question is always the same: what actually moved, and does it matter? This is the workflow that answers it without the document leaving your machine.

Note

The commands and config snippets on this page are for the .NET build of the server — the only platform available today. Installation and client setup: MCP server for .NET. Other platforms will expose the same tools with their own launch command; everything else on this page applies unchanged.

Put both versions in your storage folder:

D:/Storage/Documents/
  contract-v1.docx      <- what you sent
  contract-v2.docx      <- what came back

Register the server in your client (exact config) and point GROUPDOCS_MCP_STORAGE_PATH at that folder.

Compare contract-v1.docx with contract-v2.docx. List every change, and flag anything touching payment terms, liability, or termination.

The agent calls analyze_changes and gets back every difference as structured data — including the changed fragment and the text around it. It then does what it is good at: reading that list against your three criteria and telling you which changes are substantive.

Because each entry carries its page and component — and its table cell when the change is in a table — the agent can say “the payment schedule in the table on page 4 moved from 30 to 45 days” rather than “something changed on page 4”.

Now give me the marked-up version I can send to legal.

This time the agent calls compare, which renders the result and saves it as contract-v1_compared.docx in your output folder. Your reviewers open it in Word and see the differences highlighted — no MCP, no AI, no new tool for them to learn.

The change list is still in the conversation, so follow-ups cost nothing:

Did anything change in section 7? Were any clauses deleted outright? Show me only the style changes — I want to know if emphasis moved.

In evaluation mode only the first two pages are compared. On a twenty-page contract that silently produces a short, reassuring change list — the most dangerous possible failure for this workflow. Confirm the mode before you trust a review:

What is the license status of the comparison server?

The agent calls get_license_status; "mode": "evaluation" means you are seeing two pages’ worth of truth. Licensing removes the cap.

Contracts under negotiation are exactly the documents that must not be uploaded to a third-party service. The comparison runs in a child process on your machine, against files in a folder you chose; the only thing that reaches your model provider is the text of your prompt and whatever fragments the agent quotes back to you. See On-premise architecture for the full boundary — it is the page to send to a security reviewer.