Milestone map
Milestone map
3 milestones
Draft a complete contract for a real transaction
4 weeks
Draft a complete contract for a real transaction or a clearly specified hypothetical — a freelance services agreement, a software licence, a non-disclosure agreement, or a simple goods supply contract. The draft must cover: parties and their obligations, payment terms, intellectual property ownership, limitation of liability, termination conditions, and dispute resolution. No blank fields or placeholder text — every clause must be populated with specific terms, not 'to be agreed'.
Proof required
Complete contract draft with all clauses fully populated (no blanks), covering: parties and obligations, payment terms, IP ownership, liability limitation, termination, and dispute resolution — with a one-paragraph note on the jurisdiction whose law governs the contract and why.
What gets checked
- All clauses are fully populated — no 'TBD' or placeholder text in the final draft
- Limitation of liability clause is present and specifies the cap or exclusions — not just 'liability is limited'
- Governing law and jurisdiction are specified with a brief justification
Common mistakes
- Copying a contract template and changing the party names without engaging with the specific terms — each clause must be consciously selected for the specific transaction
- Omitting IP ownership provisions — this is the most commonly contested clause in services contracts and cannot be left to implication
- Using 'commercially reasonable efforts' or similar vague obligations without defining them — ambiguous obligations are the primary source of contract disputes
Powstik Guide
A complete contract draft with no blanks.
Steps
- Name the parties and obligations.
- Set payment and termination terms.
- Fill every clause.
- Get a qualified reviewer to check it.
Template
Parties: Obligations: Payment: Termination: Other clauses: Reviewed by:
What gets sent back
- Blank clauses.
- Template copied unchanged.
- Presented as legal advice.
Resources
Foundationstart here
What a verifier looks for
- Check that all clauses are fully populated — no TBD or blank fields
- Review the limitation of liability clause — confirm it specifies a cap or specific exclusions
- Verify governing law and jurisdiction are specified
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Analyse and critique a real contract for gaps and risks
3 weeks
Obtain a real publicly available contract (from SEC EDGAR filings, a disclosed government contract, or a standard-form published consumer contract) and produce a written risk analysis: identify the three highest-risk clauses or gaps, explain what the risk is, who bears it, and how it would be addressed in a redraft. The analysis must demonstrate understanding of how contract clauses interact — a limitation of liability clause may be undermined by an indemnity clause in the same contract.
Proof required
Contract risk analysis (500+ words) identifying three specific high-risk clauses or gaps with the risk explained (who bears it, when it materialises), plus a proposed redraft of each clause or gap, with the source of the analysed contract cited.
What gets checked
- Three risks are identified with specific clause references — not general concerns about the contract
- Each risk explains who bears it and the scenario in which it materialises
- Proposed redraft addresses the identified risk specifically — not generic alternative language
Common mistakes
- Identifying risks that are obvious without engaging with the contract language — 'there is no IP clause' is an observation, not a risk analysis
- Analysing clauses in isolation without considering their interactions — a clause that looks protective in isolation may be voided by another clause
- Proposing generic replacement language rather than language tailored to the specific transaction — the redraft must be as specific as the identified risk
Powstik Guide
A 500-word risk analysis of three clauses in a real contract.
Steps
- Pick a published real contract.
- Find three high-risk clauses or gaps.
- Explain each risk.
- Suggest a redraft for each.
Template
Contract (source): | Clause | Risk | Suggested redraft | |--------|------|-------------------|
What gets sent back
- Under 500 words.
- Fewer than three clauses.
- No source.
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
What a verifier looks for
- Confirm the analysed contract is a real publicly available contract — request the source citation
- Review the three risks — confirm each is referenced to a specific clause with the risk scenario explained
- Check proposed redrafts — confirm they address the identified risks specifically
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Defend contract drafting decisions under lawyer review
1 week
Present both the drafted contract from M1 and the risk analysis from M2 to a qualified lawyer for a Q&A challenge. The reviewer must introduce a scenario where the drafted contract would fail — 'what happens if the service provider misses the deadline and the client claims consequential losses?', 'your IP ownership clause — does it cover work created before the contract was signed?' — and probe specific drafting choices. Document the challenges and your responses. This Q&A satisfies the ADVERSARIAL VERIFICATION RULE.
Proof required
Q&A notes (250+ words) documenting the reviewer's legal credentials, at least three specific scenario-based challenges to the contract drafting, your responses, and at least one clause redraft committed to based on the session.
What gets checked
- Reviewer is a qualified lawyer with contract law experience in the relevant jurisdiction
- At least three scenario-based challenges are documented — not general drafting feedback
- At least one specific clause redraft is committed to based on the session
Common mistakes
- Presenting to a non-lawyer who approves the structure without challenging the legal effect of specific clauses
- Not being able to identify which clause would govern a given scenario — contract drafters must be able to navigate their own contracts under challenge
- Acknowledging a gap without committing to a specific redraft — recognising a problem is only halfway to demonstrating competency
Powstik Guide
Your contract, stress-tested with scenarios by a lawyer.
Steps
- List three scenarios where the deal could go wrong.
- For each, find the clause that would govern.
- Book a qualified lawyer.
- Ask them to add a failure scenario you missed.
- Redraft at least one clause after the session.
Template
Challenge session log Date: Duration: Reviewer name: Reviewer role and credentials: Challenge 1 (a failure scenario): What they asked: My answer: Did it hold? Challenge 2: What they asked: My answer: Did it hold? Challenge 3: What they asked: My answer: Did it hold? Update I am committing to: Clause redraft Before: After:
What gets sent back
- A non-lawyer reviewer.
- Not knowing which clause governs a scenario.
- A gap admitted but no redraft.
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
What a verifier looks for
- Confirm the reviewer is a qualified lawyer with contract law experience
- Review Q&A notes — confirm at least three scenario-based challenges are documented
- Check that at least one specific clause redraft is committed to based on the session
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.