Why it matters
Contracts turn high-stakes domains into executable rules: required citations, approved claims, prohibited phrases, numeric assertions, escalation when evidence is missing. They settle cross-functional arguments once and test forever.
Refunds, pricing, SLAs, and security claims benefit first. Contracts are how legal precision survives automation volume.
Readable contracts increase adoption. Legal and support should understand rules without engineering translation.
Contracts fail adoption when only engineers can read them. Dual-readable contracts for legal and support increase enforcement consistency.
Domains beyond refunds need contracts over time: data retention, security claims, export rights. Start risk-ranked, expand deliberately.
How it works
Author contracts per domain with modules for citations, claims, refusals, and assertions. Version contracts alongside policy releases.
Wire contract failures to release blocks and alerting. Failures include example prompts for authors.
Start with riskiest domains, expand as maturity grows. Do not boil the ocean day one.
Review contracts with support leads who hear customer phrasing daily.
Attach failure examples to internal author guides so writers see how language triggers blocks.
Wire contract failures to author-facing examples showing which phrases triggered blocks.
Review contracts with support leads who hear real customer phrasing, not only legal drafting Latin.
Example
Nintendo refund contract requires Refund Policy citations, blocks full refund guaranteed phrasing, and asserts 14-day window language for annual plans. Contract failures block chatbot deploy.
Common mistakes
- 1Contracts written once without owners
- 2Assertions too brittle on paraphrase for non-numeric text
- 3Contracts covering refunds but not adjacent billing intents
- 4No contract version diff on policy updates
Important answers deserve rules and receipts.
Define approved claims, required citations, and assertion tests for high-stakes answers.
Explore Knowledge Contracts