Share promptsSign inExplore benchmarks
← Best AI for a task

Best AI for contract drafting and review (Oct 2026)

As of Oct 2026, the highest reported score on Legal Benchmarks: Contract Workflows is shared by Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic), Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic) and Muse Spark 1.3 (Meta) at 48.4%, per Legal Benchmarks.

Results from published AI leaderboards. Compare models within each benchmark; scores from different tests aren’t directly comparable. How we collect these results

What this benchmark tells you

  • How often a model completes lawyer-written contract drafting tasks with every applicable criterion met, in both of two independent attempts.
  • How many individual criteria it meets, how its output scores on form (clarity, length, structure), and what each task cost to run, as published.

What it doesn’t tell you

  • It does not test your own templates, your jurisdiction or your negotiating position.
  • It scores drafting tasks; it is not a clause-by-clause comparison or redlining test, which is what the prompts below help with.
  • A pass rate below 100% means some tasks missed at least one requirement even for the top model, so a lawyer should still review the output.

Prompts for contract drafting and review

Run the same prompt on your own material with two models and compare the results.

ReviewsClaudeCompare two documents clause by clauseChecking a filled-in contract or proposal against its template.View prompt ProposalsChatGPTClarify commercial termsPricing, commission or partnership fees are being misread.View prompt

Questions people ask

Which AI has the highest reported score for contract drafting and review?

As of Oct 2026, the highest reported score on Legal Benchmarks: Contract Workflows is shared by Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic), Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic) and Muse Spark 1.3 (Meta) at 48.4%, per Legal Benchmarks.

How recent are these results?

Legal Benchmarks: Contract Workflows: leaderboard dated Oct 2026; we last checked it on 21 Oct 2026.

What does the top-scoring model cost to run on these tests?

On Legal Benchmarks: Contract Workflows, Claude Opus 5.5 costs $1.47 and Claude Fable 5.1 costs $1.50 and Muse Spark 1.3 costs $0.20 (cost per task), as published by Legal Benchmarks. That is API cost on the benchmark’s own tasks, not a subscription price.

Who runs Legal Benchmarks: Contract Workflows?

Legal Benchmarks: Contract Workflows is run by Legal Benchmarks. ChatJudge does not run the tests; we copy the published scores with a link to the source.

What don't these benchmarks tell you about contract drafting and review?

It does not test your own templates, your jurisdiction or your negotiating position. It scores drafting tasks; it is not a clause-by-clause comparison or redlining test, which is what the prompts below help with. A pass rate below 100% means some tasks missed at least one requirement even for the top model, so a lawyer should still review the output.