Rédigez chaque clause à partir d'une page blanche, vérifiez-la, puis affichez le comparatif généré par l'IA avec la clause type.
Type: Exercise block
What it does: Drafting blocks ask learners to write a document clause by clause from a blank page, with separate instructions and AI review for each provision.
When it is useful: Use a Drafting block when the learner must produce new wording themselves rather than correct an existing draft.
Related tools: Text Editors, Blueprints, and Drafting form one document sequence. Use a Text Editor to work inside an existing document, a Blueprint to design the document from precedents, and Drafting to create the document from scratch.
Blank page, real instructions: A Drafting block gives the learner a document title and an ordered set of clauses to produce. Each clause opens as an empty editor beside its own task panel, which states the commercial objective, the facts the wording must reflect, and the protection the client needs. Nothing is pre-written, so the learner has to commit to actual language.
Clause by clause: The document is completed one provision at a time. Authors decide the order, so the block can follow the way a real agreement is built â the substantive protection first, then the mechanics that make it operable. Later clauses can rely on defined terms and positions the learner established earlier.
Guidance on demand: Before drafting, a learner can ask for a starting point. The block generates a short prompt from the clause instructions, the sample answer, and any connected Playbook Plays, describing how to approach the provision without supplying the wording. Where Plays are connected, a learner can open the underlying guidance and its structured Insights beside the editor.
Marked-up AI review: When the learner checks a clause, the block returns a short written assessment and then, on request, the draft itself in redline. Phrases that need work are flagged with specific feedback, wording that should be removed is struck through, and suggested replacements are inserted, all judged against the author's sample clause and drafting recommendations. Editing after a check clears the review so the learner can submit a revised draft.
The situation: Alder Group has agreed to buy the entire share capital of Northstar Mobility Ltd. Due diligence has closed with two unresolved points: an open HMRC enquiry into the target's historic R&D claims, and code written by early contractors whose assignments were never documented. The partner wants the share purchase agreement to deal with both before the drafts are exchanged on Friday.
The problem: Neither issue is solved by a general warranty. The tax enquiry is a known risk that must sit with the sellers on a pound-for-pound basis, the IP gap must be disclosed accurately while still giving the buyer a remedy, and neither protection is usable unless the agreement says who controls the claim and how it is paid.
The simulation: The learner drafts three provisions in order: a specific tax indemnity, an intellectual property warranty, and a conduct-of-claims mechanic. Each clause carries its own instructions, and the AI reviewer marks the submitted wording against a sample clause and drafting recommendations before the learner moves on.
The result: Lawyers practise converting an identified risk into operative contractual wording â allocating it to the right party, defining the trigger, and making the remedy work in practice instead of describing the problem in a note.