Guardrails and thresholds
Guardrails come before review. If they are wrong, the rest of the section will feel wrong too.
Colabra does not flag issues in a vacuum. It combines extraction with the thresholds and policies you set for the deal. That is why this section belongs at the front of Flag & screen: it controls what the later pages will surface.
Start with these first
If you only tune a handful of settings before review starts, make them these:
| Setting | Why it changes the output quickly |
|---|---|
| Buyer jurisdiction | Shapes how sanctions, compliance, and cross-border risk are interpreted |
| High-scrutiny country codes | Decides which jurisdictions get heightened screening attention |
| Evidence materiality floor | Stops trivial items from flooding the findings list |
| Litigation claims floor | Prevents minor disputes from reading like major litigation risk |
| Assignment / change-of-control policy | Drives one of the most common contract-risk outputs |
| Customer / supplier concentration thresholds | Controls when commercial concentration becomes an actual flag |
If these are wrong, the rest of the review often feels either too noisy or too thin.
You can review the full Diligence settings page for a complete field-by-field reference.
Same evidence, different signal
Real deal example: thresholds change the working queue
A small cross-border deal with stricter jurisdiction sensitivity and lower materiality may surface a very different first-pass findings list than a large domestic platform add-on. The evidence did not change. The guardrails did.
Where to set them
- Set the baseline at workspace scope when the same posture applies to most deals.
- Override at project scope when this transaction genuinely needs different thresholds or scrutiny.
That keeps the firm’s default review posture consistent while still letting a specific deal deviate when it has to.
What happens if you skip this
If the settings are left at the wrong defaults:
- contract findings may overfire or underfire
- entity screening may feel too broad or too narrow
- gap analysis may highlight the wrong missing evidence
- the team can end up debating the output when the real problem is the posture
Next step
- Read Flag: Risk register for clause-linked findings
- Read Screen: Entity risk for external screening and entity review
- Read Reconcile: Gap analysis for missing-evidence coverage