A signed contract may refer to several annexures while the uploaded folder contains a mixture of drafts, scans and similarly named attachments. The fact that the main contract is present does not establish that its listed pack is complete. An assistant can identify those documentary gaps without deciding what they mean legally.
This article proposes a signed-pack checklist for professional review. The example is fictional. The workflow compares source references with supplied files, leaving signature authenticity, interpretation and legal effect to the responsible professional and the firm's approved process.
Select the signed source through the approved process
Record which contract the responsible professional has selected for this check, its matter reference, version and source location. Do not choose the latest upload automatically. A later file can be an unsigned draft, a partial copy or a different agreement with a similar title.
Keep amendments and other potentially relevant documents in the inventory with their status. The professional decides which source set applies. The assistant can flag apparent differences but should not merge terms or replace pages to create a complete-looking signed pack.
Preserve the selected original unchanged. Work from an authorised copy or extraction, maintain source references and store the checklist separately. Renaming, annotating or recombining signed source pages is not required to identify a missing annexure.
Extract annexure references with their context
Look for the annexure label, title, version or date where stated, and the clause that refers to it. A mention in a draft comment is different from a reference in the selected signed source. Preserve that distinction rather than collecting every attachment-like word into the required list.
Google's Document AI overview describes OCR, text and layout extraction, document classification and structured field processing. These capabilities can support reference extraction, but do not establish signature validity or the legal status of an attachment. Source: Google Document AI overview
If a reference is partly unreadable, record the exact limitation and source location. Do not guess Annexure B because the previous page mentions Annexure A. A coherent-looking sequence is not evidence of the missing label.
Signed-pack completeness checklist
Use this complete hypothetical checklist for TEST-AGREEMENT-A, selected by the fixture professional. The main source and attachments are fictitious; no legal conclusion follows from the dispositions.
| Signed-source reference | Supplied file evidence | Documentary disposition | Review action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clause 2 lists Annexure A, Site plan version 1 | FILE-A has matching title and version, with readable content | Matched candidate, subject to reviewer confirmation | Reviewer confirms identity and records the accepted source |
| Clause 3 lists Annexure B, Service schedule | FILE-B1 and FILE-B2 have similar titles but different content and no confirmed relationship | Ambiguous match | Professional identifies the intended file or requests the authorised source |
| Clause 4 lists Annexure C, Pricing schedule | No supplied file matches the verified reference | Missing from supplied pack | Request the necessary source through the approved matter process |
| Clause 5 refers to an appendix with partly unreadable label | FILE-D might be relevant, but the label cannot be verified | Reference unreadable; match unresolved | Obtain a readable source before closing the item |
| FILE-E exists but is not linked by the extracted signed-source references | Additional uploaded draft | Unreferenced supplied file, not automatically part of the signed pack | Professional determines relevance; keep separate from matched annexures |
The source register includes selected contract reference, professional selection record, extracted reference and clause, expected label or title, stated version, candidate file references, extraction status, match evidence, reviewer, decision and unresolved limitation. Retain source access through the authorised system rather than attaching every original to a broad notification.
Classification rules: matched means documented identity evidence, not legal incorporation. Missing means no verified match in the supplied approved inventory, not proof that the document never existed. Unreadable means the available source cannot be checked adequately. Ambiguous means multiple or uncertain candidates. Unreferenced means supplied material whose relationship is not established by this check.
Acceptance fixtures: a clear matched annexure; absent listed file; unreadable reference; duplicate titles with different versions; an additional unreferenced draft; and an incomplete upload. Expected results preserve those separate dispositions and never edit the signed source to repair the pack.
The checklist is complete when every verified listed reference and supplied-source limitation has a disposition. Closing a gap requires the professional's accepted source or decision; merely uploading another similarly named file does not establish the match.
Compare candidates without inventing equivalence
OpenAI's Structured Outputs guide supports constrained fields and refusals. A schema can require annexure label, source location, candidate file, match basis and uncertainty. It does not prove that two documents are the same attachment or that all references were extracted. Source: OpenAI structured outputs
Use title, version, source reference and relevant content together under the reviewed matching rule. If these disagree, keep the candidate ambiguous. Do not assume a file named final is the correct version or that a matching label is enough when the contents differ.
Also avoid merging copies silently. Two uploads may be the same source, but their identity needs verification. If one is a partial scan and one complete, record their relationship and the professional's selected review source. The assistant should not combine fragments into a new purported signed original.
Check retrieval coverage against the inventory
OpenAI's file-search guide describes retrieval from uploaded files with citations. It can help locate annexure mentions or candidate text, but does not establish that every supplied page was reviewed or every listed file was indexed successfully. Compare retrieval results with the approved inventory and extraction status. Source: OpenAI file search
A missing search result can be an indexing or extraction problem rather than an absent attachment. Preserve the distinction. If a file exists in the inventory but cannot be retrieved or read, mark it unreadable or unavailable for this check instead of deleting it from the pack list.
Citations should resolve to the precise contract clause or candidate source used. A reviewer needs to inspect the relationship, not only see a general folder reference. Test that the authorised reviewer can open the sources without expanding access for other recipients.
Work through normal, missing and duplicate packs
In a hypothetical normal case, the selected signed source lists Annexure A with a title and version, and FILE-A matches that evidence. The assistant records a matched candidate and the professional confirms the file. The original contract and annexure remain unchanged.
In a missing-file case, Annexure C appears in the source but no verified candidate is supplied. The checklist identifies the clause and gap. It does not conclude that the agreement is invalid or that the pricing terms do not apply; those are different professional questions.
In a duplicate-title case, FILE-B1 and FILE-B2 both claim to be the service schedule but contain different provisions. The assistant holds the match and preserves both sources. The professional determines which, if either, belongs to the selected source set. Upload order does not resolve that question.
Keep documentary completeness separate from legal conclusions
A completed checklist answers what was supplied and what could be matched under its evidence rules. It does not authenticate signatures, determine enforceability or interpret incorporation. Label the result accordingly so another team does not treat a green documentary status as legal approval.
If the pack changes, rerun affected checks against the approved version and retain the earlier checklist reference. Professional review should cover the final supplied set, while unresolved source gaps remain visible rather than disappearing behind a revised summary.
FAQ about listed annexures in signed contracts
Does a missing annexure mean the contract is ineffective?
This workflow does not determine that. It records a gap in the supplied pack and refers the issue to the responsible professional for the applicable interpretation and action.
Can the assistant use an unsigned draft as the missing annexure?
Only the responsible professional can decide the relevant source relationship. Keep it as a candidate with its draft status, rather than marking it matched automatically.
What if the attachment exists but its scan is unreadable?
Classify it separately from a missing file, identify the source limitation and obtain a suitable authorised copy. Do not invent the contents or present the pack as fully checked.
If your business needs help defining this process, explore AI agents for law firms, the wider AI automation services, and our custom-agent workflow guide. The agents and automation comparison and custom AI agent glossary explain the terms. To discuss your records and approval rules, get in touch.