Reported operating use · IT services and contract operations
AI contract obligation tracking: Birlasoft example
Birlasoft uses Contract.ai, according to Microsoft, to extract source-linked contractual obligations, flag inconsistencies and track commitments in internal delivery work on Microsoft Azure. Specialist agents work under a planner, and delivery staff retain oversight. No independent audit is published.
Extract and track contractual delivery obligations
Birlasoft
Reported operating internal delivery workflow
A published third-party example, not a Nuvepro customer case or evidence of a partnership.
The workflow at a glance
Extract and track delivery obligations
Illustrative summary of the published account
Reported work components. Their arrangement does not imply a fixed execution order or simultaneous work.
- Documents
Source agreements and commitments
Contract.ai extracts obligations linked to their sources.
- Agents
Planner and specialists
Specialist agents flag inconsistencies and track commitments under a planner.
- People
Delivery staff oversight
Delivery personnel retain oversight of the internal workflow.
What the source reports
Microsoft reports that Birlasoft uses Contract.ai to extract source-linked obligations, flag inconsistencies and track commitments. Specialist agents work under a planner; delivery staff retain oversight.
Reported technology: Microsoft Azure. Scope and outcomes are source-reported.
What the enterprise environment would need
The following is a proposed project design for an enterprise doing similar work. Published details are marked; the remaining systems, data and scenarios would be agreed for your project.
Proposed practice environment
Build a traceable obligation register
Illustrative project design to scope with your enterprise.
- 1 · Set up the environment
Versioned contract exercise
Provide approved agreements, amendments, assigned owners and delivery milestones.
- 2 · Preparation and agent contributions
Agent extracts duties and conflicts
Prepare source-linked obligations and identify changed deadlines or missing owners.
- 3 · Independent checks
Independent register comparison
Compare with reviewed expected duties and the governing document; retain disputed interpretations.
- 4 · People decide acceptance
Delivery stakeholders review responsibility
Accept coverage, owners and exceptions before using the register.
A reviewable evidence package
An obligation register with source references, owners and unresolved conflicts.
If a check fails → withhold acceptance.
An amendment changes a deadline. Retire the superseded obligation and recheck the register.
Failure or owner rejection returns to review
- Hold
- → 2 · Revise work
- → 3 · Rerun independent checks
- → 4 · Owner review
Operating boundary. Tracking only; no contract modification authority.
- Proposed contract exercise
- Approved agreements, amendments, source versions, assigned owners and delivery milestones.
- Proposed exceptions
- Conflicting clauses, cross-document references, missing owners and changed deadlines.
A proposed simulation
An illustrative practice design derived from this work, not an executed assessment.
Prepare a source-linked obligation register for a delivery owner.
Review gate: Authorized stakeholders review omissions, conflicts and responsibility assignments.
Challenge the result: An amendment changes a deadline; the superseded obligation must not remain authoritative.
What needs checking
- Compare extracted duties with an independently reviewed obligation register.
- Trace findings to the governing document; preserve disputed interpretations for review.
- Check changed obligations and overdue status without granting contract-change authority.
Review environment fidelity, human capability and agent performance separately. The enterprise’s accountable owners decide acceptance of the shared workflow and any operating use.
Questions about this example
- What does Birlasoft use AI for in contract tracking?
- Microsoft reports that Birlasoft uses Contract.ai to extract source-linked obligations from contracts, flag inconsistencies and track commitments. Specialist agents work under a planner. The use is an internal delivery workflow on Microsoft Azure.
- Who oversees Birlasoft's contract obligation tracking?
- The source says delivery staff retain oversight. It does not publish a complete approval design. As a proposed check from Nuvepro, authorized stakeholders review omissions, conflicts and responsibility assignments, and the system gets no authority to change contracts.
- How strong is the evidence for Birlasoft's workflow?
- Evidence is reported use, from a vendor and customer account rather than an independent audit. There is no public acceptance dataset, miss rate or complete approval design, and the proposed environment and checks on this page have not been built or assessed.
- What would an enterprise need to build something similar?
- This is Nuvepro's proposed design, not Birlasoft's. It would use approved agreements, amendments, source versions, owners and milestones, include conflicting clauses and changed deadlines, and compare extracted duties with an independently reviewed obligation register traced to the governing document.
Shape this around your enterprise
Bring a similar workflow and the people responsible for it. Together, define the records and systems to use, the result your team will build or configure, and how its owners will check it. Nuvepro scopes the simulation, environment and preparation. Agree any existing-agent evaluation, implementation assistance and production responsibilities separately.
Sources and limitations
Curation review: . This is the date this source example was reviewed, separate from source publication dates.
- Vendor/customer account, not an independent audit.
- No public acceptance dataset, miss rate or complete approval design.
- The proposed environment and checks have not been built or assessed for this example.
- Microsoft: How Birlasoft turned contract obligations into a delivery advantageSource publication: 2026-10-21
More legal examples
- AI agreement review: Sullivan & Cromwell exampleSullivan & Cromwell
- AI legal intake review: Anthropic exampleAnthropic
- AI legal research and drafting: LexisNexis exampleLexisNexis Legal & Professional
- AI NDA playbook review: Legora exampleLegora