ChatGPT prompt for summarizing a contract in plain language

This is the prompt we run before signing a contract, or when digging one out mid-dispute. It translates it into plain language, clause by clause, for a non-lawyer. Its rule: it is not legal advice, and where a clause is ambiguous or high-stakes, it flags it “worth a lawyer’s review” instead of interpreting it for you.

The prompt to copy

Summarize this contract in plain language for a non-lawyer:
1. Parties, term, and money — one line each.
2. What we must do; what they must do.
3. Termination — how each side gets out, notice periods, penalties.
4. Liability, IP, and confidentiality — quote the clause number for anything unusual or one-sided.
5. Anything normally present in a contract like this that seems to be missing.
Cite clause numbers for every point. **This is not legal advice** — where a clause is ambiguous or high-stakes, flag it as "worth a lawyer's review" rather than interpreting it. Contract: {paste}

Replace the field in curly braces with the contract text, then run.

When to use it

Before signing anything, or when digging a signed contract back out the moment a disagreement surfaces. In a few minutes, you go from pages of jargon to a readable summary that tells you where to look closely and what deserves a professional’s opinion.

What you get back

1. The parties, term, and money in one line each.
2. Each side’s obligations, in plain language.
3. The exit terms: notice periods, penalties, termination mechanics.
4. Sensitive or one-sided clauses, cited by number and flagged for a lawyer’s review.

Real example: service contract → readable summary

Input: at Brightside Studio, an 8-person brand agency, Lea reviews a subcontracting agreement before signing. She pastes the full text; here is the part that matters in the output:

This is not legal advice.

Parties, term, money: Brightside Studio and the contractor; 12 months, renewable; £1,800 per month (clause 4).

Termination: either party may terminate with 60 days’ notice (clause 9). No exit penalty mentioned.

Intellectual property: clause 11 assigns rights in the deliverables to the contractor until full payment. Wording is ambiguous on what happens if terminated before final payment: worth a lawyer’s review.

What seems to be missing: no confidentiality clause, unusual for this kind of work.

Notice what the AI did not do: faced with the ambiguous clause 11, it did not rule on who holds the rights if the deal ends early. It flagged the point “worth a lawyer’s review” and cited the clause number, so Lea can find the exact text. That is the prompt working: it lights up the contract without ever posing as a lawyer.

This prompt is part of the library that ships inside the kit, with its usage note.