Contract Templates: a Tokeny case study
Generate standard contract document templates by business type with necessary clauses and formatting. Follow the recorded task, execution screenshots, actual files and verification notes.
By the Tokeny team · Windows · Tokeny 1.7.8 · gpt-6-sol
Prepare the inputs
Create a separate workspace in Tokeny, download and unpack the sample inputs, then select a model that supports tools. The sample uses synthetic data or the public sources named in the article.
- terms.md
Send the task to Tokeny
The original task was executed in Chinese. Copying these instructions reproduces the same task; the results below include an English report.
根据虚构软件服务合作条件生成 Word 合同草稿，包含服务范围、验收、费用、付款、保密、终止与争议条款；未知法律主体和日期使用待填写占位。 交付文件：contract-draft.docx、review-checklist.md。 验收要点： - 付款 18000/24000/18000 - 未知信息保留占位 - 标注审阅草稿 这是使用合成演示输入或指定公开资料的真实操作案例。请先读取工作空间输入，再实际生成文件并自检。所有写入、脚本与临时服务限于当前工作空间；临时服务只监听 127.0.0.1，执行后关闭；不触达外部收件人、不发布、不付款、不更改系统设置，不调用子智能体。需要公开资料时可读取给定 URL。只启用完成任务必需的工具。另写 report.md（中文）和 report.en.md（英文），简洁、完整，包含输入、处理步骤、真实结果、检查方式和局限；失败或未验证部分如实记录，不能宣称成功。最终回复用中文列出产物、关键结果与待核实项。 排版检查：Word 主标题仅出现一次，标题为黑色且与后续正文或表格保持同页；Excel 表头和长文字不能被窄列截断，合理设置列宽、换行、行高；HTML 在 390px 视口不能整页横向溢出。报告没有固定字数要求，不要为字数反复改写。
Follow-up instructions after review (2)
已用 Microsoft Word 原生分页导出检查：合同签署表的前两行在第 3 页，剩余三行在第 4 页，签署区被拆开。请只修正分页，把“以下无正文”和完整甲乙方签署表保持在同一页（可在签署区前分页）；表格行不要跨页拆分。合同条文、金额和占位保持原样。更新报告说明本次原生分页复核与修正。
上次因模型连接中断结束。请继续完成上一条签署区域分页补修：合同的签署表及签署标题必须完整在同一页，不将同一签署行拆到下一页。检查真实生成的 contract.docx 和两个报告；不要重做已正确正文。将本次实际验证及局限写入报告后完成。
The recorded run used an isolated demonstration workspace. Review the commands and file paths before approving operations in your own workspace.
What actually ran
The task was submitted through the Tokeny input box. An online model read the inputs and executed tools. This run covers the local sample task and its actual files. Results and checks are recorded below.
Results and verification
Inputs
The workspace inputs terms.md and ENVIRONMENT.md were read. The source terms state that the legal names and addresses of both parties are pending; the service is a six-week appointment-system development project; the total fee is RMB 60,000, payable as RMB 18,000 / 24,000 / 18,000; hardware is excluded; and the dispute forum, data responsibilities, and detailed acceptance criteria require human confirmation.
Processing Steps
- Converted the source terms into a software services agreement structure covering scope, schedule, acceptance, fees and payment, confidentiality, intellectual property and data responsibility, termination, dispute resolution, and signatures.
- Kept unknown legal entities, addresses, dates, bank details, dispute forum, and detailed acceptance criteria as fill-in placeholders.
- Marked the document as “审阅草稿（非最终签署版本）” below the title.
- Generated
contract-draft.docx,review-checklist.md, this report, and the Chinese reportreport.md. - Based on the Microsoft Word native pagination review, confirmed that the original signature area had split across pages 3 and 4; added a page break before “（以下无正文）”, prevented all 5 signature rows from splitting, and kept the first 4 rows with the following row.
- Rechecked the actual
contract-draft.docxand strengthened only signature-area pagination controls; the contract body was not regenerated.
Actual Results
The contract draft and review checklist were generated. The contract states the three payment amounts of RMB 18,000, RMB 24,000, and RMB 18,000, totaling RMB 60,000, and states that hardware is excluded. Unknown information remains marked for completion.
Checks Performed
The actual contract-draft.docx was checked with standard-library ZIP/XML parsing and reopened with python-docx. Checks confirmed a page break before the signature heading, keep-with-next on that heading, cantSplit on all 5 signature rows, and keep-with-next on the first 4 rows. The single main title, payment amounts, placeholders, and unchanged contract text were also verified. The user confirmed the prior page-3/page-4 split using Microsoft Word native pagination export; this revision targets that issue. The skill-provided validator could not run because defusedxml is unavailable, so it was not counted as passing.
Limitations
No real party details, project attachments, technical specification, tax information, data-processing arrangement, or dispute forum were provided. Those items require human and legal review. Because a validator dependency was unavailable, its full schema validation was not completed; the standard-library/XML and python-docx checks do not replace actual Office rendering. The revised file has not yet been exported again with Microsoft Word native pagination, so the signature area's actual single-page placement remains to be verified in Word. No signing, payment, publication, or external transmission was performed; the draft is not legal advice.
Download and inspect the outputs
The archive contains the files created during this run. Use these checks when adapting the example to your own data.
- Reconcile the reported results against the downloadable sample inputs.
- Open the generated files and check the contents relevant to your task.
- Review the limitations and any unverified steps in the report.