OpenAI Commercial and Professional Services North America

Sullivan & Cromwell

Document Processing · Risk Management

Sullivan & Cromwell needed to review draft agreements against relevant precedents, client priorities, and market practice in one workflow so lawyers could do deeper legal analysis without losing transparency into sources, uncertainty, or final human judgment.

Reported impact

Business outcome

Agreement Analyzer helps Sullivan & Cromwell lawyers identify potential issues, compare terms across precedents, produce proposed changes with visible supporting authority, and spend more time on the legal questions where human judgment matters most while delivering a higher-quality product for clients.

  • Productivity Improvement
  • Risk Reduction

Solution

In collaboration with OpenAI, Sullivan & Cromwell built Agreement Analyzer to concentrate agreement review in a single AI-assisted workflow. A lawyer inputs a draft agreement, then adds selected precedents, a negotiating playbook with firm and client positions, and market-practice context. Agreement Analyzer uses ChatGPT Enterprise to run multiple review cycles from different perspectives, compare corresponding provisions across precedents, surface clause interactions, and synthesize the findings into a memorandum plus proposed tracked changes. The implementation emphasizes transparency rather than autonomous action: supporting authority and sources remain visible so claims about market practice can be inspected, refined, accepted, or rejected by a lawyer. The system evolved from a single-user proof of concept into a parallelized, multi-lawyer tool that brings more of the firm's internal expertise into complex agreement analysis while keeping lawyers responsible for final judgment.

Data flow

A lawyer uploads a draft agreement into Agreement Analyzer, adds selected precedents plus a negotiating playbook with firm and client positions and market-practice context, and sends the package through multiple ChatGPT Enterprise review cycles. Agreement Analyzer synthesizes the results and returns a memorandum and proposed tracked changes with supporting authority for a lawyer to inspect, adapt, or reject.

Solution architecture

2 components · 2 layers
  1. Compute
    • ChatGPT Enterprise Performs the multi-perspective analysis and helps generate the memorandum and proposed tracked changes for lawyer review.
  2. Orchestration
    • Agreement Analyzer Orchestrates agreement review by combining draft agreements, precedents, playbooks, and synthesized model output in a lawyer-facing workflow.

Architecture clues

  • Agreement Analyzer started as a single-user proof of concept built with Codex before OpenAI helped turn it into a multi-lawyer tool.
  • Lawyers can add selected precedents plus firm and client positions and market-practice information for each review.
  • The application integrates Sullivan & Cromwell workflows, curated firm precedents, negotiating playbooks, and ChatGPT Enterprise.
  • The tool performs multiple review cycles from different perspectives, synthesizes the outputs, and returns a memorandum with proposed tracked changes.
  • The workflow is designed to keep sources and uncertainty visible so lawyers can inspect the authority behind market-practice claims.

Evidence from the source

"Agreement Analyzer integrates Sullivan & Cromwell's workflows, curated firm precedents, negotiating playbooks and ChatGPT Enterprise."
"If an AI tool makes a claim about market practice, you need to be able to see the source of that information."
"Sullivan & Cromwell partner John Savva developed Agreement Analyzer as a single-user proof of concept built with Codex."
"The firm's Agreement Analyzer brings those inputs into a single review workflow, producing analysis and proposed changes that lawyers can inspect and refine."
"The tool performs multiple review cycles from different perspectives, synthesizes the outputs, helps identify potential issues and returns a memorandum and proposed tracked changes for a lawyer to review, adapt or reject."
Transparency Evidence & methodology 66/100 reference value · 91% confidence · 1 source

Review how this reference was scored and trace each normalized claim back to its documented source.

01

Scoring methodology

How scores are calculated

Customer Reference Value measures usefulness as a customer reference. Evidence Confidence measures the quality and traceability of available evidence, not independent verification.

Customer reference value66/100
  • Problem clarity20/20
    Measures whether the customer's operational problem is specific enough to compare.
  • Implementation depth25/25
    Rewards named components, data flow, integrations, and architecture detail.
  • Outcome specificity16/20
    Measures whether the reported benefit is concrete rather than a generic claim.
  • Quantified impact0/25
    0 metrics describe measurable impact.
  • Deployment scale5/10
    Rewards evidence of a live or scaled deployment and meaningful integration scope.
Evidence confidence91%
  • Source authority20/25
    The main evidence is an official vendor-published customer story.
  • Claim traceability23/25
    11 of 12 key fields link to a named source.
  • Direct evidence20/20
    5 direct source quotes retained.
  • Date provenance10/10
    The publication date comes from the source page or publisher.
  • Source transparency10/10
    1 source reference document publisher, URL, authority, retrieval, and supported fields.
  • Implementation specificity8/10
    Rewards source-backed components, data flow, quantified impact, and a specific outcome.
02

Traceability

Sources & provenance

Field coverage shows which facts each source supports. Dates are shown only when documented by the source.

  1. OpenAI

    Sullivan & Cromwell brings legal expertise into agreement review | OpenAI

    First-party
    https://openai.com/index/sullivan-cromwell/
    Source type
    Vendor-published customer story
    Published
    Oct 15, 2026
    Supports
    • Customer
    • Industry
    • Region
    • Company size
    • Business problem
    • Solution
    • Products
    • Solution components
    • Data flow
    • Integrations
    • Business outcome
    • Architecture
    • evidence quotes
    • Publication date

Date evidence

  • Published on source page Oct 15, 2026 · OpenAI · First-party
    Open date source
Not separately sourced Metrics. Treat these normalized attributes as lower-confidence until a dedicated source is added.