Skip to content
Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Sign Up
Sign Up

Compare AI vibes, not scores. Side-by-side outputs across the world's best models.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • RIVAL Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival
Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Sign Up
Sign Up

Compare AI vibes, not scores. Side-by-side outputs across the world's best models.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • RIVAL Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival
  1. Home
  2. Models
  3. Claude Sonnet 4
  4. Adversarial Contract Review

See how Claude Sonnet 4 compares on this challenge:

  • Claude Sonnet 4 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
  • Claude Sonnet 4 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
  • Claude Sonnet 4 vs Z.ai: GLM 5

4 models have responded to the "Adversarial Contract Review" challenge. Compare their approaches side-by-side on RIVAL. This response is part of RIVAL's open dataset of 5,600+ AI model responses.

Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Sign Up
Sign Up
Back to Claude Sonnet 4

Adversarial Contract Review

Claude Sonnet 4's response to the 'Adversarial Contract Review' challenge.

Claude Sonnet 4
February 3, 2026
Text

?
Prompt

Here is a contract for a software consulting engagement: --- SOFTWARE CONSULTING AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into between TechCorp Solutions Inc. ("Client") and [Contractor Name] ("Contractor"). 1. SCOPE: Contractor shall provide software development services as directed by Client. Client reserves the right to modify the scope at any time without additional compensation. 2. PAYMENT: Contractor shall be paid $150/hour, invoiced monthly. Payment is due within 90 days of invoice receipt. Client may withhold payment if deliverables are deemed "unsatisfactory" at Client's sole discretion. 3. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: All work product, including any tools, libraries, or methodologies developed during the engagement, shall be the exclusive property of Client in perpetuity, including any work created using Contractor's pre-existing IP. 4. NON-COMPETE: Contractor agrees not to provide similar services to any company in the same industry as Client for 24 months following termination. 5. TERMINATION: Client may terminate this agreement at any time without notice. Contractor must provide 60 days written notice. Upon termination, Contractor must immediately deliver all work in progress without additional compensation. 6. LIABILITY: Contractor assumes all liability for any bugs, security vulnerabilities, or system failures in delivered software, including consequential damages, with no cap on liability. 7. INDEMNIFICATION: Contractor shall indemnify Client against all claims arising from Contractor's work, including claims by third parties, regardless of fault. 8. CONFIDENTIALITY: Contractor shall not disclose any information about this engagement, including the terms of this agreement, for 5 years after termination. 9. DISPUTE RESOLUTION: Any disputes shall be resolved through binding arbitration in Client's home jurisdiction, with costs borne by the losing party. --- Find all clauses that could be exploited against the contractor, suggest specific modifications, and explain the legal reasoning.

Claude Sonnet 4
Response

claude-sonnet-4 logo
Claude Sonnet 4Adversarial Contract Review
claude-sonnet-4 logo
Claude Sonnet 4

This contract is heavily skewed against the contractor with multiple exploitative clauses. Here's my analysis:

MAJOR PROBLEMATIC CLAUSES

1. SCOPE (Unlimited Scope Creep)

Problem: Client can modify scope "at any time without additional compensation" Legal Risk: Contractor could work indefinitely for fixed hourly rate regardless of scope expansion

Suggested Fix:

"Material scope changes exceeding 20% of original project estimate require written agreement and adjustment to timeline/compensation. Minor modifications may be accommodated within existing scope."

2. PAYMENT (Predatory Payment Terms)

Problems:

  • 90-day payment terms (industry standard is 30 days)
  • "Unsatisfactory" withholding at client's "sole discretion"

Legal Risk: Client can indefinitely withhold payment without objective criteria

Suggested Fix:

"Payment due within 30 days of invoice. Client may only withhold payment for deliverables that objectively fail to meet written specifications. Disputed amounts must be identified in writing within 10 days."

3. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (IP Grab)

Problem: Claims contractor's pre-existing IP and all methodologies Legal Risk: Could lose valuable proprietary tools/methods developed before engagement

Suggested Fix:

"Client owns work product created specifically for this project. Contractor retains all pre-existing IP, general methodologies, and tools. Contractor grants Client license to use pre-existing IP incorporated in deliverables."

4. NON-COMPETE (Likely Unenforceable but Risky)

Problem: 24-month industry-wide restriction Legal Risk: Could prevent contractor from earning livelihood

Suggested Fix:

"Contractor agrees not to work directly with Client's customers on competing projects for 6 months, limited to projects substantially similar to work performed under this agreement."

5. TERMINATION (Asymmetric Terms)

Problem: Client can terminate instantly; contractor needs 60 days notice Legal Risk: Immediate income loss with no reciprocal protection

Suggested Fix:

"Either party may terminate with 30 days written notice. For immediate termination, Client must pay contractor for all completed work plus 30 days additional compensation."

6. LIABILITY (Unlimited Exposure)

Problem: No liability cap and includes consequential damages Legal Risk: Contractor could face bankruptcy from unlimited damages

Suggested Fix:

"Contractor's liability is limited to amount paid under this agreement in the 12 months preceding the claim. Excludes consequential damages. Client maintains appropriate insurance for business operations."

7. INDEMNIFICATION (Blanket Protection)

Problem: Contractor indemnifies "regardless of fault" Legal Risk: Must defend client even for client's own mistakes

Suggested Fix:

"Contractor shall indemnify Client only for claims directly resulting from Contractor's negligent acts or willful misconduct, excluding claims arising from Client's modifications or misuse of deliverables."

ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED ADDITIONS

Force Majeure Clause

"Neither party shall be liable for delays caused by circumstances beyond their reasonable control, including natural disasters, government actions, or pandemics."

Governing Law

"This agreement shall be governed by [Contractor's state] law, with disputes resolved in [neutral jurisdiction] courts."

Severability

"If any provision is deemed unenforceable, the remainder of the agreement shall remain in effect."

LEGAL REASONING

  1. Unconscionability Doctrine: Courts may void contracts with extremely unfair terms
  2. Mutuality: Contracts should have reasonable reciprocal obligations
  3. Industry Standards: Deviations from standard practices may indicate exploitation
  4. Restraint of Trade: Overly broad non-competes violate public policy
  5. Good Faith Dealing: Implied covenant requires fair dealing in contract performance

RECOMMENDATION

This contract should be substantially rewritten before signing. Consider engaging a contract attorney, as the current terms create significant financial and legal risks that could exceed the engagement's value.

Adversarial Contract Review

Turn this model response into notes, narration, or a short video

Auto NotesTranscriptNarrateVideo Cut

Partner link

This output is part of our open dataset — 5K+ AI responses across 200 models

About Claude Sonnet 4

Capabilities

ConversationReasoningCode GenerationAnalysisAgentic Tool UseMemory

Categories

TextCodeMultimodal

Specifications

Provider
Anthropic
Released
2025-05-22
Size
LARGE
Parameters
Not disclosed
Context
200,000 tokens

Keep exploring

SAME PROMPT

Claude Sonnet 4.6's version

Same prompt, different result

COMPARE

Claude Sonnet 4 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Both outputs, side by side

Compare AI vibes, not scores. Side-by-side outputs across the world's best models.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • RIVAL Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival