| # Contract Risk Analyzer (CRA) — Profile Gap Report |
|
|
| This gap report evaluates the profile and data completeness of the Contract Risk Analyzer (CRA) compared to the historical Legal Document Verifier (LDV) knowledge base. |
|
|
| --- |
|
|
| ## 1. Profile Completeness Scores |
|
|
| Every contract profile registered in the system has been scored across six key data vectors: |
|
|
| | Profile ID | Required Clauses | Risk Rules | Recommendations | Business Impact | Legal Citations | Benchmark Fixtures | Overall Completeness | |
| | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | |
| | **employment_contract** | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | **100%** | |
| | **lease_agreement** | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | **100%** | |
| | **non_disclosure_agreement** | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | **100%** | |
| | **service_agreement** | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | **100%** | |
| | **general_contract** | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | **100%** | |
| | **consulting_agreement** | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% (Missing) | **83%** | |
| | **commercial_agreement** | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% (Missing) | **83%** | |
| | **loan_agreement** | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% (Missing) | **83%** | |
| | **partnership_agreement** | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% (Missing) | **83%** | |
| | **purchase_agreement** | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% (Missing) | **83%** | |
| | **software_license** | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% (Missing) | **83%** | |
|
|
| --- |
|
|
| ## 2. Identified Data Gaps |
|
|
| ### 2.1. Missing Contract Profiles |
| * **SaaS Agreement**: Referenced in `required_clauses_MASTER.csv` but lacks a dedicated JSON profile definition in `detector/profiles/`. |
| * **IT Service Agreement**: Referenced in `required_clauses_MASTER.csv` but lacks a dedicated JSON profile. |
| * **Construction Agreement**: Referenced in `required_clauses_MASTER.csv` but lacks a JSON profile. |
| * **Insurance Agreement**: Referenced in `required_clauses_MASTER.csv` but lacks a JSON profile. |
|
|
| ### 2.2. Unmapped Required Clauses (Orphans) |
| There are 14 contract-specific required clause IDs (such as `lease_term`, `rent_amount`, `security_deposit`, etc.) defined in `rules_classification.json` that do not map to Ilham's CSV `Clause_Name`s. They correctly fall back to default missing-clause weights, but they represent a minor data gap in terms of specific recommendations and business impacts. |
|
|
| ### 2.3. Missing Benchmark Fixtures |
| The following 6 active profiles lack dedicated verification files in the test suite: |
| * `consulting_agreement` |
| * `commercial_agreement` |
| * `loan_agreement` |
| * `partnership_agreement` |
| * `purchase_agreement` |
| * `software_license` |
|
|
| --- |
|
|
| ## 3. Recommended Remediation Plan |
|
|
| 1. **Generate Missing Profiles**: Create `saas_agreement.json`, `it_service_agreement.json`, `construction_agreement.json`, and `insurance_agreement.json` to complete the catalog. |
| 2. **Verify Orphan Clauses**: Align the 14 unmapped clause IDs with Ilham's CSV database to ensure specific legal guidance matches when they are flagged. |
| 3. **Deploy Benchmark Files**: Provision 2 test files (PDF and DOCX) for each of the 6 missing-fixture profiles to ensure full integration coverage. |
|
|
