> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.chamelio.ai/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Sanity check un-redlined sections

> Use AI for a second layer of review to catch potential issues in sections that weren't initially redlined

After completing your playbook-based review and redlines, there may be document sections that weren't flagged for changes. Use Chamelio's Agent for a secondary review of these un-redlined sections to ensure nothing slips through the cracks.

<Warning>
  Even sections that initially seem fine can contain hidden risks or opportunities for improvement. A sanity check provides crucial additional coverage.
</Warning>

## When to use sanity checks

Use this feature when:

* You've completed your primary playbook-based review
* Some document sections received no redlines or comments
* You want to ensure comprehensive coverage of the entire document
* Time permits for an additional layer of due diligence

## How it works

<Steps>
  <Step title="Complete initial review">
    Finish your playbook-based review and redline process
  </Step>

  <Step title="Identify un-redlined sections">
    Select document sections that received no changes or comments
  </Step>

  <Step title="Run sanity check">
    Let the Agent review these sections with fresh eyes
  </Step>

  <Step title="Address flagged issues">
    Review any potential red flags or improvement opportunities
  </Step>
</Steps>

<Frame>
  <div style={{position: "relative", paddingBottom: "56.25%", height: 0}}>
    <iframe src="https://www.loom.com/embed/3da19896bc28423c9e44cb4979d8db9b?sid=a1b2c3d4-e5f6-7g8h-9i0j-k1l2m3n4o5p6" frameBorder="0" allowFullScreen style={{position: "absolute", top: 0, left: 0, width: "100%", height: "100%"}} />
  </div>
</Frame>

## What the Agent looks for

During a sanity check, the Agent can flag:

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Hidden risks" icon="triangle-exclamation">
    Subtle language that could create unexpected liabilities
  </Card>

  <Card title="Inconsistencies" icon="arrows-left-right">
    Conflicts between different sections of the document
  </Card>

  <Card title="Missing protections" icon="shield">
    Standard safeguards that should be included but are absent
  </Card>

  <Card title="Ambiguous terms" icon="question">
    Language that could be interpreted multiple ways
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

## Common discoveries

<Accordion>
  <AccordionItem title="Cross-reference issues">
    Definitions or terms referenced in one section but not properly defined or used elsewhere.
  </AccordionItem>

  <AccordionItem title="Boilerplate risks">
    Standard clauses that may contain unfavorable terms often overlooked in initial reviews.
  </AccordionItem>

  <AccordionItem title="Scope creep potential">
    Language that could be interpreted more broadly than intended, expanding obligations or risks.
  </AccordionItem>

  <AccordionItem title="Termination gaps">
    Missing or incomplete termination rights that could create problems later.
  </AccordionItem>
</Accordion>

## Benefits of secondary review

<CardGroup cols={3}>
  <Card title="Comprehensive coverage" icon="magnifying-glass">
    Ensure no section goes unexamined
  </Card>

  <Card title="Fresh perspective" icon="eye">
    Catch issues missed in the initial review
  </Card>

  <Card title="Risk mitigation" icon="shield-halved">
    Identify potential problems before signing
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

## Best practices

<Tip>
  Focus sanity checks on sections with standard or boilerplate language, as these often contain hidden risks that get overlooked.
</Tip>

* **Prioritize high-risk sections** - Start with termination, liability, and indemnification clauses
* **Check cross-references** - Ensure defined terms are used consistently throughout
* **Review standard language** - Don't assume boilerplate clauses are always favorable
* **Consider business context** - Think about how un-redlined sections interact with your specific deal

## Integration workflow

This feature works best as part of a comprehensive review process:

1. **Primary review** using [Document Review](/features/negotiate/document-review) and [Playbooks](/features/core/playbooks)
2. **Redline responses** using [Draft redline responses](/guides/draft-redline-response)
3. **Sanity check** of remaining sections (this guide)
4. **Final review** and approval

## Related guides

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Drafting redline responses" href="/guides/draft-redline-response" icon="comment-dots">
    Learn how to respond to counterparty changes
  </Card>

  <Card title="General review process" href="/guides/general-review" icon="clipboard-list">
    Understand the complete document review workflow
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

<Note>
  A thorough sanity check provides a second layer of protection, helping ensure that your contract review is comprehensive and your interests are fully protected.
</Note>
