I got tired of signing contracts I didn't understand. So I built Claustar.
Every founder deal follows the same pattern.
You need someone to sign something. You open ChatGPT, type "create a contractor agreement," and get back a template that looks professional enough. You skim it. The other party skims it. Both of you hope the other one read it properly. Nobody did.
Or you pay $40 a month for a template platform. The NDA is fine. Then you need a factory agreement and realize the template doesn't cover mold ownership, tooling rights, or what happens if they manufacture your product for someone else. You're on your own again.
Or you spend six hours in a Word doc piecing together clauses from three different sources, second-guessing every line, with no way to know if what you wrote is actually enforceable in the state your contractor lives in.
I did all three of these. For 18 months. Across 80+ contracts.
I once hired an influencer. The contract said 20 reels, different outfits, different locations. In my head that meant 7 outfits and 5 locations. They delivered 2 of each. Technically fulfilled the contract because I never defined what "different" meant. That was on me. The clause wasn't wrong. It was just vague. And vague always gets interpreted by the other party, not you.
The tools that exist weren't built for us
There are two categories of contract tools.
The first is enterprise CLM software. Ironclad, ContractPodAi, DocuSign CLM. Powerful, deeply integrated, and built for legal teams at mid-size companies with a legal department and a six-figure software budget. Not for a solo founder closing a vendor deal.
The second is template platforms. RocketLawyer, LegalZoom, LawDepot. $40 to $50 a month for documents written for a general situation. Your situation is specific. The template doesn't know that.
And then there's just using ChatGPT. Which is free and fast and will confidently produce something that looks correct and may not be. It doesn't know your state. It doesn't know your industry. It doesn't know what clauses you're missing because it doesn't know enough about your situation to know what to ask.
Nothing in between existed for founders and freelancers who need real protection without a $500 lawyer bill every time they need an agreement.
What I built
Claustar is an AI-guided contract creation platform built for founders, freelancers, and small businesses.
You don't start with a blank document. You start with questions. Who are you hiring. What are they delivering. What state are you in. What happens if the project gets cancelled halfway through. What happens if the deliverable isn't what you expected.
Claustar builds the contract around your answers. Not a generic template with your name swapped in. An actual document that reflects your specific situation.
Every template on the platform is reviewed by licensed attorneys before it ever reaches a user. We have two named attorney advisors with their credentials visible on the platform. That was a non-negotiable from the start. Not for show. Because trust is the whole product.
We also built jurisdiction awareness in from day one. What's enforceable in one state isn't always enforceable in another. Non-competes are essentially void in California. IP assignment language has different standards depending on where your contractor is located. That context is baked into the intake flow.
And because I've seen what happens when founders don't understand what they signed, every document comes out in plain English you can actually read before you send it.
UPL compliance is part of the architecture
This is something most tools in this space either ignore or get wrong.
Claustar is a document preparation platform. Not a law firm. We don't give legal advice and the entire product is built around that line clearly. The intake flow educates and assembles. You evaluate and decide. That distinction matters legally and it matters for trust.
We also built a Verified add-on for situations where you want a licensed attorney to review a specific clause before you send it. Optional. Contextually surfaced. Not mandatory, because mandatory attorney review defeats the whole point of the product.
Pricing
Starter: $29/month. Core contract creation, guided intake, plain-English output, attorney-reviewed templates.
Pro: $79/month. Everything in Starter plus more features/usage.
Verified add-on: $49 per document for licensed attorney review of any contract before you send it.
I'm still pressure-testing these numbers and would genuinely love input from this community on what feels right for the audience.
Where I am
Launching next week. Waitlist is open now.
I've been living in this problem for two years across my own company. I know the pain is real. What I'm still figuring out is the right way to communicate it to someone who hasn't felt it yet.
What I'm thinking through
A few things I'd genuinely love input on from this community.
The right first segment. I built this for founders like me. But the pain is just as sharp for freelance designers, developers, and agencies who sign agreements every week. I'm trying to understand where to focus first and who becomes a paying customer fastest.
The trust problem. A lot of founders won't hand their contracts to an AI tool they don't already trust. The attorney advisor model and the compliance transparency are my answer to that. But I'm curious how this community thinks about it. What would actually make you trust a tool like this with a real agreement?
The counterparty angle. The most interesting growth mechanism I can see is someone receiving a Claustar-generated contract, having a better experience than any contract they've dealt with before, and coming back as a creator. That only works if the product is genuinely good for the person on the receiving end too. Still thinking through how to optimize for that.
If you've felt this pain or have thoughts on any of the above, I'd love to hear from you.
