Separate the artefacts
List the source datasets, derived labels, evaluation set, adapters, checkpoints, prompts, deployment code and operating documentation. For each, ask who can access, use, modify, export and continue operating it. A right to one artefact does not establish the same right to the others. Record the underlying model licence separately.
Ask operational exit questions
What file formats are supplied? What infrastructure is needed to load them? Who provides credentials and deployment instructions? Can another team reproduce the evaluation? What transition assistance is included, what does it cost and when is access withdrawn? A portability statement becomes meaningful when a transfer can actually be tested.
Treat absent text as an open question
The clause scanner only matches words in the supplied excerpt. A mention of “weights” may occur in a restriction rather than a grant. No mention may simply mean that another schedule contains the relevant term. The scanner therefore quotes the matching lines and produces questions; it never decides whether a legal right exists.
Bring the evidence to qualified review
Before signing, have the appropriate legal and security reviewers examine the complete agreement, licence and data arrangements. Resolve reuse, retention, termination and incident duties in the context of your workload. The tool prepares an exposure register to support that review. It is not legal clearance, a licence interpretation or a compliance certification.
Bring to the decision review
Bring the complete agreement, schedules, licence identifier and an artefact inventory to the appropriate reviewers. Ask for a practical export demonstration, not just a statement that files will be available. Confirm that operating instructions, required dependencies and evaluation material can be handed over under the agreed terms. Record unresolved questions without turning an automated keyword match into a conclusion about legal ownership.
Sources & editorial record
This is Frontier Development’s decision framework. The references below support the general technical concepts; the worked scenarios and procurement questions are our analysis.
References accessed 16 October 2026. No current price, product availability or legal clearance is asserted. Published study findings are attributed above; this guide reports no Frontier Development experiment. Read the comparison method.
Review history and research boundary
Edition 1.1 · 16 October 2026: added claim-level attribution, explicit evidence boundaries and links to the flagship synthesis. Published by Frontier Development. No named external technical reviewer is recorded. This guide provides a decision framework; it is not a Frontier Development experimental result.
Read the primary-study synthesis →Open the exit tool
Explore a complete synthetic example before using your own inputs.