I've identified several issues in a document (or you can identify them first using the Issue Spotter prompt). Now I need you to tier them by risk severity. **Here are the issues:** [PASTE YOUR LIST OF ISSUES HERE, or] [ATTACH THE FULL DOCUMENT OR PASTE ITS TEXT HERE — identify and tier issues from scratch] --- **Your task:** For each issue identified, assign a risk tier and explain why. **Use this tiering framework:** **HIGH RISK:** Exposure to significant liability, financial loss, operational disruption, or legal violation; immediate attention required. **MEDIUM RISK:** Potential exposure that's non-trivial but manageable; should be addressed before execution but not blocking. **LOW RISK:** Clarification or optimization opportunity; nice to address but not a blocker. --- **Format your response as:** **HIGH RISK** - [Issue title] — [1-2 sentence explanation of why this is High] - Specific exposure: [What goes wrong if we proceed as written?] - How to fix: [Minimal suggestion for remediation] **MEDIUM RISK** - [Issue title] — [1-2 sentence explanation] - Specific exposure: [What goes wrong?] - How to fix: [Suggestion] **LOW RISK** - [Issue title] — [1-2 sentence explanation] --- **Critical instruction:** Do NOT assign a risk tier without explaining specifically what makes it High/Medium/Low. A bare assertion ("This is high risk") is worthless. You must articulate the actual downside. If you're uncertain about the risk level, note that: "This appears High Risk, but I'm flagging uncertainty about [specific gap]." --- **My context (if relevant):** - Type of agreement: [e.g., "service contract"] - My role: [e.g., "buyer," "service provider"] - Key concerns: [e.g., "liability exposure," "confidentiality"]

I have a redlined document. I need you to explain the redlines: what changed, what it means, and what (if anything) I should push back on. **The redlined document (show changes with + for additions, - for deletions, or paste with track changes visible):** [ATTACH THE REDLINED DOCUMENT OR PASTE THE TEXT WITH CHANGES MARKED] --- **Your task:** For each substantive redline: 1. Explain what changed (in plain English) 2. Why it might matter 3. Whether it's a real issue or minor wordsmithing 4. What to do about it (push back, accept, propose alternative) **Format as:** **Redline 1: [Section/clause affected]** - What changed: [Original text] → [New text] - What it means: [In plain English, what's the practical effect?] - Why they made this change: [Their likely motivation] - Does it matter? [HIGH PRIORITY / MEDIUM / LOW / NONE] - My recommendation: [Accept / Push back / Propose alternative — and why] [Repeat for each redline] --- **Summary:** - Total redlines: [Count] - Must fight: [Which are deal-breakers?] - Can live with: [Which are acceptable?] - Room to negotiate: [Which can you trade for something else?] --- **Critical instruction:** - Flag when the significance of a change is ambiguous. Don't guess. - If a redline is tied to other provisions or creates contradictions, note that. - Be strategic: note which redlines are worth your negotiating capital and which aren't. - If a redline is unclear, say so instead of guessing.