Compare / LinkSquares
Sandstone vs LinkSquares: Contract Intelligence or Complete Legal Context?
LinkSquares started in contract analytics — extracting terms from executed agreements and making them searchable. In 2026 it relaunched as an agentic CLM covering drafting and redlining. Sandstone works across every request that reaches legal, with the business context behind it, resolved in the tools your team already uses.
Sandstone vs LinkSquares
| Capability | Sandstone |  LinkSquares |
|---|---|---|
| Primary focus | AI-native operating system for in-house legal work | Agentic contract lifecycle management and contract intelligence |
| What it is built around | Legal context: people, counterparties, matters, and prior decisions | Contract data: extraction, analytics, and portfolio insight |
| Scope of work covered | Any legal request, contract or otherwise | The contract lifecycle, pre- and post-signature |
| Where the work happens | Slack, email, and existing business systems | The LinkSquares platform, with integrations into Salesforce, Slack, and DocuSign |
| Intake and triage | Agents capture intent from any channel and route with context | Contract workflows and approval routing |
| Post-signature | Obligations tracked alongside the matter and counterparty they belong to | Clause extraction, renewal tracking, and portfolio analytics |
| Drafting and redlining | Playbook-driven, attorney-controlled | Automated drafting and redlining via its LinkAI engine, relaunched in 2026 |
| CLM coverage | Replaces a CLM for teams that want intake, execution, and system of record in one platform, and runs alongside one where an existing investment makes that the better call | Full contract lifecycle management |
| Permissions across systems | Permissions mapped across every connected integration | Platform access controls |
| Internal collaboration | Legal works a request together in the app or the plugins, with comments and drafts staying behind the scenes until you choose otherwise | Collaborative contract review |
| Acting back in source systems | Replies and actions go back to Slack, procurement, and contract systems under a shared team identity, with permissions mapped across those integrations centrally | Integrations with CRM and e-signature |
| Reporting | Cycle time, capacity, and risk across the whole legal function | Contract analytics and portfolio dashboards |
| Best fit for | Teams losing time to the work around contracts as much as the contracts | Teams that need analytics across a large executed contract portfolio |
Based on publicly available information as of September 2026. Names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. If anything here is inaccurate or out of date, contact us and we'll update it.
Frequently asked questions
The work: cycle times, capacity, risk exposure, deviation rates, where requests stall and why. That's a different question from clause-level portfolio analytics, and if extracting and reporting on terms across thousands of executed agreements is your primary need, a contract analytics platform is the evaluation to run.
It can, and whether it should depends on where you are. Replacing makes sense when the CLM is functioning mainly as a repository with approvals, adoption outside legal is thin, and you'd rather run one system. Running alongside makes sense when there's deep post-signature obligation management across a large legacy portfolio, when procurement or finance operate inside the CLM too, or when you're mid-term on a multi-year agreement. We'll tell you which one you are on a call, including when the answer is that you should keep what you have.
Requests can start in Salesforce, drafting can be triggered from it, and replies go back into it under a shared team identity rather than as a bot. What flows through is legal work and its context, not only contract data.
Counterparties, people, prior negotiations, relationships, and how similar requests were decided before — mapped into a knowledge base that compounds rather than sitting as isolated question-and-answer pairs.
