Predictika · approvals, filings, disclosures and approval authority in an in-house legal team

An AI legal agent's action, checked before it is released

Northgate Industries, a fictional company, lets AI agents prepare actions in its legal-ops suite. Before an action is released, the agent sends it to Predictika’s validator, which checks it against ethical walls, privilege review, approval limits, segregation of duties and filing deadlines, compares any contract value the agent states with the record, and returns a verdict with every reason.

Scope: approve-contract, file, disclose and change-authority actions in an in-house legal-ops suite. See everything this validator covers

This validator checks one proposed action at a time against a snapshot of the suite: who is acting and for whom, the matter, the contract or document, and the approval limits. It handles any contract, matter or document routed through these four action types, not just the scenarios shown below. It produces no price build-up, so there are no line items to show.

  • Contract approvals — Approving a contract against the approver's authority limit (a soft limit that needs escalation, and a hard ceiling at double the limit), against the matter's ethical wall, and against segregation of duties: the principal who negotiated a contract above $250,000 cannot approve it. Optionally the agent states the contract value and the validator checks it against the record.
  • Filings — Filing a document against the matter's deadline and ethical wall: a time-barred filing is blocked and escalated.
  • Disclosure and production — Producing a document in discovery: a privileged document cannot be disclosed until privilege review has cleared it, and the ethical wall still applies.
  • Changes to approval authority — Changing someone's approval limit: an agent can never change authority, and nobody can change their own limit.

It does not cover clause-level redline review, legal research or the merits of a matter, and it does not replace attorney judgment.

The AI legal agentPrepares an action in the legal-ops suite and says it is ready to release.
Predictika validatorChecks the action against ethical-wall, privilege, authority and deadline rules and returns every finding it has.

9 scenarios in 4 groups · each group runs from the agent’s first attempt to the outcome · click one to switch

What the agent proposes

The AI sales agent says

Illustrative agent statement. The validator receives the structured request below.

Proposing agent: AI sales agent (scripted)

Before sending, the agent must call Recorded run

Predictika validator


      
Waiting for the call.

Where rules-based approval workflows get it wrong

Click to expand

Our assessment of what a typical rules-based approval workflow (the kind built into contract-management and matter-management suites) does with the same cases. It is a judgment about effort and reliability, not a claim that nothing can be built.

What the validator catchesTypical rules-based approval workflowPredictika
Ethical wall checked at the moment of actionOnly with care
Walls usually live in a conflicts database, so each approval, filing and disclosure step needs its own lookup.
Every action is checked against the matter's barred principal, whatever the action type.
The negotiator cannot also approveOnly with workarounds
Needs a rule per approval path that compares two records, and it is easy to miss one path.
The approver is compared with the negotiator on every contract above the threshold.
Privilege review before disclosureOnly with care
Review is often a workflow state, so any path that skips the step can still reach the release button.
Cleared review is a precondition of the disclosure action itself.
Filing deadline against todayOnly with workarounds
A deadline check is a separate date rule on each filing type.
The matter's deadline is compared with today on every filing.
Agents never change authority; nobody raises their own limitOnly with workarounds
Role permissions say who may click, but comparing the actor with the person whose limit changes is a custom rule.
Both are hard rules, checked independently, so a request can fail both at once.
The contract value the agent statesOnly with workarounds
Approval rules rarely run on a figure the requester typed, so a wrong figure passes unless someone checks.
The stated value is a field in the request and is compared with the record.
Every problem returned in one answerOnly with workarounds
Rules tend to fire one step at a time, so a requester fixes one error and meets the next.
All findings come back together, blocks first, then approval items.

What this validator catches

Click to expand

Every rule is checked on every call, in whatever order the choices arrive, and one problem never hides another. Blocking findings stop the action; approval findings need a person to sign off.

RuleEffectWhat it checks
Stated contract valueblockThe value the agent states must match the contract record within $1.
Ethical wallblockThe actor's principal must not be the matter's barred principal (approvals, filings, disclosures).
Same person negotiated and approvesblockThe principal who negotiated a contract above $250,000 cannot approve it.
Far above approval limitblockA contract worth more than double the approver's limit must go to General Counsel.
Above approval limitneeds approvalA contract above the limit, up to double, needs escalation to the next authority tier.
Filing deadline passedblockA filing after the matter's deadline is time-barred and must be escalated.
Privileged document not yet clearedblockA privileged document cannot be disclosed until privilege review is cleared.
Agents cannot change approval authorityblockAn agent may never change approval limits or approval chains.
No one can raise their own limitblockA principal cannot change their own approval limit.

Scenarios and results

Click to expand

The recorded result of the validator for each scenario on this page: the request the AI agent sent, the verdict, and every finding, in the order they appear above.

1. The contract value the agent states: Regional distribution, $250,000

The agent's request. Approving the Regional distribution agreement with Meridian Distribution LLC on behalf of Dana Reyes, Senior Counsel. Contract value $250,000. Ready to release.

Verdict: Blocked.

  • Stated contract value differs from the record. The contract value of $250000.0 stated in the request does not match the $300000.0 on record for Regional distribution agreement.
  • Above approval limit. This $300000.0 contract exceeds Dana Reyes - Senior Counsel's $250000.0 approval limit. Escalation to the next authority tier is required.

2. The contract value the agent states: Regional distribution, $300,000

The agent's request. Approving the Regional distribution agreement with Meridian Distribution LLC on behalf of Dana Reyes, Senior Counsel. Contract value $300,000. Ready to release.

Verdict: Needs approval.

  • Above approval limit. This $300000.0 contract exceeds Dana Reyes - Senior Counsel's $250000.0 approval limit. Escalation to the next authority tier is required.

3. The contract value the agent states: Approved by Deputy GC

The agent's request. Approving the Regional distribution agreement with Meridian Distribution LLC on behalf of Grace Park, Deputy General Counsel. Contract value $300,000. Ready to release.

Verdict: Allowed.

4. Ethical wall: Senior Counsel approves

The agent's request. Approving the Rival Systems term sheet on behalf of Dana Reyes, Senior Counsel, under the Rival Systems acquisition diligence matter. Contract value $400,000. Ready to release.

Verdict: Blocked.

  • Ethical wall. Rival Systems acquisition diligence is behind an ethical wall - principal REYES is barred from this matter. The action cannot proceed.
  • Above approval limit. This $400000.0 contract exceeds Dana Reyes - Senior Counsel's $250000.0 approval limit. Escalation to the next authority tier is required.

5. Ethical wall: Deputy GC approves

The agent's request. Approving the Rival Systems term sheet on behalf of Grace Park, Deputy General Counsel, under the Rival Systems acquisition diligence matter. Contract value $400,000. Ready to release.

Verdict: Allowed.

6. Privileged document: Memo in privilege review

The agent's request. Producing the Outside counsel strategy memo in the Harborview supply dispute on behalf of Marcus Oduya, Associate General Counsel. Ready to release.

Verdict: Blocked.

  • Privileged document not yet cleared. Outside counsel strategy memo is privileged and its privilege review is still pending. It cannot be produced or disclosed until review clears it.

7. Privileged document: Memo after review

The agent's request. Producing the Outside counsel strategy memo (cleared) in the Harborview supply dispute on behalf of Marcus Oduya, Associate General Counsel. Ready to release.

Verdict: Allowed.

8. Approval authority: Agent changes a limit

The agent's request. Raising Dana Reyes's approval limit to $500,000 on behalf of Dana Reyes, Senior Counsel. Ready to release.

Verdict: Blocked.

  • Agents cannot change approval authority. Contract review agent (for Dana Reyes) is an agent. Agents may never change approval limits or approval chains.
  • No one can raise their own limit. Principal REYES cannot change their own approval limit.

9. Approval authority: Deputy GC changes a limit

The agent's request. Raising Dana Reyes's approval limit to $400,000 on behalf of Grace Park, Deputy General Counsel. Ready to release.

Verdict: Allowed.

Narration transcript

Click to expand

The text of the narrated walkthrough, step by step.

  1. Welcome to a demo of Predictika's Validator. Northgate Industries, a fictional company, lets AI agents prepare actions in its legal-ops suite. Before an action is released, the agent sends it to Predictika’s validator, which checks it against ethical walls, privilege review, approval limits, segregation of duties and filing deadlines, compares any contract value the agent states with the record, and returns a verdict with every reason.
  2. I will start with the first request by the agent.
  3. The agent says. Approving the Regional distribution agreement with Meridian Distribution LLC on behalf of Dana Reyes, Senior Counsel. Contract value $250,000. The rest of the request is on screen.
  4. Before it goes out, the agent calls the validator.
  5. Blocked, with one finding and one approval, all in one answer. The contract value of $250000.0 stated in the request does not match the $300000.0 on record for regional distribution agreement.
  6. The validator returned one blocking finding and one approval in one answer. A check that reads one field at a time would pass most of this; it shows only when the choices in the quote are checked against each other.
  7. What this shows: for the contract value the agent states, a rules-based approval workflow can do this only with workarounds.
  8. Now the agent resubmits.
  9. The corrected request. It changes the stated value as to 300000.
  10. It calls the validator again.
  11. Not blocked, but held for a person.
  12. The one blocking finding is cleared; one approval remains for a person: above approval limit.
  13. The agent resubmits once more.
  14. The revised request. It changes the actor to Grace Park - Deputy General Counsel.
  15. It calls the validator once more.
  16. This time the validator clears it.
  17. The earlier finding is cleared.
  18. Two problems caught in one call, fixed in two passes, and a clean quote. That is the value of Predictika's validator: catching mistakes before they reach the customer.