LEXNUS - Your legal policy, enforced on every contract

Founders comment from our Product Developer Oscar Klink: Hi Product Hunt, I've spent almost a decade as CPTO building Contract Lifecycle Management platforms the way it was supposed to be built. I read the win and loss notes on a few hundred deals in that time, and the losses had a shape to them. A legal team would buy a system, spend four months configuring it, and come out with a faster way to route documents while the same handful of problems kept reappearing every quarter. A liability cap sat outside the approved range. An indemnity had been edited by someone in sales eight months earlier and nobody heard about it until renewal. We were not building bad products. We built them around the contract as the object worth managing, so everything we automated happened around the document. The standard that decides whether a contract is acceptable lives somewhere else, normally inside a Word template and inside the head of whoever has been on the team longest. A template can describe what good looks like. It cannot stop the wrong thing from being signed. That is why in-house lawyers still read everything that crosses their desk. Nothing in their stack knows the rules. Lexnus works from the other direction. You import the clause document you already use, Lexnus segments it into individual clauses, and you approve what goes into your library. Then you write rules against those clauses. What the acceptable range is for a liability cap, which governing law you will sign under. That set of rules is your playbook. When counterparty paper comes in, it gets read against the playbook, every rule comes back marked as passing or as a violation, and anything your policy requires that is missing from the document shows up as a gap. The division of labour matters more than it sounds. The AI reads the contract and works out what each clause means. It does not decide whether that clause is acceptable. Your rules do that, and they run identically every time. If a cap above five million euros needs your sign-off, it needs your sign-off in March and it needs it again in November when the same counterparty comes back with the same paper. The harder version of this is already happening, which is your commercial team drafting contracts with whatever AI assistant they have open. Banning that has never worked in any company I have seen. Connect Lexnus over MCP and the assistant works from your approved clause language and puts whatever it produces through your playbook before it goes anywhere. Sales keeps the speed, and you still find out whether what came out is something you would have signed. Live today is that whole loop, from clause import through to a scored analysis of an incoming contract, plus assembly so the business can generate its own contracts from language you already approved. There is a two-week trial with 200 analyses included. If you run legal at a company somewhere between 50 and 1,000 people, I want to hear where your policy is written down today and what stops people following it. If you build in this space, tell me where you think a deterministic rule layer falls over. I will be here all day.