When your SOC 2 reviewer samples contracts, they focus on evidence. They test whether controls ran the way you said they ran across the entire review period, and they ask for proof that ties back to real user actions.

A Type 2 report includes the auditor’s tests of controls and results so gaps become obvious. A SOC 2 examination focuses on controls tied to security and related trust criteria, and a SOC 2 Type 2 review tests control operation over a period.

That is why contract compliance management software rises or falls on one simple capability. Can your team reconstruct who did what to a specific agreement, and can you reproduce that evidence on demand.

This playbook shows how to build an audit-ready trail in Concord using contract-level telemetry, portfolio exports, and governed access patterns from the Model Context Protocol connection.

What SOC 2 reviewers ask you for from a contract system

Most evidence requests collapse into four questions.

1. Who did what, to which contract, and when

2. What approval or control gated that change

3. Who had access, and how did you govern that access

4. Can you retain and reproduce the evidence across the audit period

If your team can answer those four questions for any sampled agreement, you have the backbone of a defensible SOC 2 story.

The four layers of an audit-ready trail in Concord

Layer 1: Contract audit trail for contract-level actions

Start with the Audit Trail on the agreement. Concord logs actions like new versions, status updates, approvals, signing events, and attachments with a date, time, and user. The same audit trail continues after signature, so you can show post-signature changes like renewals, status updates, and file management in one place.

Two practical points matter when you plan evidence packs.

First, external guests do not see approvals in the Audit Trail view, so keep auditors in a trusted internal reviewer role during sampling and walkthroughs. Second, the Audit Trail does not track standard fields or custom properties, so treat fields as reportable state, not as a historical log.

Layer 2: Signature-level proof you can hand to an auditor

For executed agreements, pair the signed PDF with the Signature Certificate. The certificate packages signer identity, IP address, timestamps, and a record of events around signature, which helps when an auditor asks for non-repudiation evidence tied to the exact file they sampled.

Layer 3: Portfolio-level population evidence you can reproduce

SOC 2 work often shifts from “show me this one contract” to “prove this control ran for all contracts in scope.” That is where structured exports and custom document properties matter.

Use the inbox export for a repeatable population pull of contract metadata and lifecycle fields. Use an exported report when you need a control-specific population, like “all supplier agreements with an SLA” or “all agreements with auto-renewal turned on.”

When an auditor asks for user-level evidence across the period, pull the User Activity CSV for the relevant date range. Keep the one-year export window in mind and plan a retention job so you do not lose older activity exports.

Layer 4: Governed access for AI and analysis workflows

Auditors increasingly ask how your team pulls contract data into downstream analysis, especially when you use AI tools. The cleanest answer uses governed, logged access with revocation.

With the Model Context Protocol connection, queries and actions run under existing permissions, with auditable interactions that stay logged and revocable, and the MCP Server model keeps a zero-retention posture for user data and AI interactions. When you configure the connector, document the allowed tools and the permissions model tied to the Concord MCP Server connection.

A configuration playbook built around what auditors actually sample

Step 1: Define auditable contract events you will treat as “control evidence”

A SOC 2 Type 2 review tests operating effectiveness, so your internal story needs a clean mapping from control language to observable events. Build an event taxonomy that matches what Concord logs in the Audit Trail view.

A practical starter set:

• Contract created, owner assigned, and folder or project assigned

• New version uploaded

• Approval workflow created, approval completed, approval rejected

• Status changed (draft, approval, signing, signed, active, expired, renewed)

• Signature requested, signature completed, signer revoked

• Attachment added, attachment deleted

• Document shared, invitation sent, user removed

Keep each event mapped to a specific control statement you can defend, like “Legal approves all non-standard terms before signature.”

Step 2: Make approvals auditable without extra narration

Auditors love two things: consistency and repeatability. Give them both with a naming and routing standard.

• Name approval workflows using a control tag, like “C-LEGAL-01 non-standard terms review”

• Route by contract type and risk flags, not by person

• Require an explicit approver role, not “anyone on the team”

• Use the same approval steps across templates, so control execution looks identical across a sample set

That pattern makes walkthroughs faster because you can show the same workflow mechanics across different agreements without re-explaining each one.

Step 3: Treat metadata as evidence you can reproduce, not as a historical log

Because the Audit Trail does not track standard and custom fields, you need another way to show what the system recorded at a point in time.

Build a minimum evidence schema using custom document properties and lifecycle fields, then export it on a cadence:

• Counterparty legal name

• Contract type

• Contract owner

• Business owner

• Department or cost center

• Effective date

• Expiration date

• Renewal type (auto, manual, none)

• Renewal notice period

• Termination for convenience allowed (yes or no)

• Termination notice period

• SLA present (yes or no)

• Rebate or credit obligations present (yes or no)

• Data processing or security addendum present (yes or no)

• Status and lifecycle stage

You can pull that schema in a consistent way through the inbox export flow, and you can export those custom properties into CSV or Excel columns for consistent downstream testing.

Step 4: Build a contract-level evidence pack that matches auditor workflow

When an auditor samples a contract, they want a small packet they can review offline. Standardize that pack so your team stops rebuilding it every time.

For each sampled agreement, collect:

• Signed PDF plus the Signature Certificate file

• A copy of the relevant Audit Trail entries that cover the audit period

• Any approval evidence for the key change, tied to the workflow name and approver

• A row-level record from your exported report or inbox export snapshot that shows the metadata used for population testing

That combination gives auditors contract-level proof and portfolio context in one packet.

Step 5: Run retention like a log management program, not like a folder of PDFs

Most teams treat contract evidence as “store the signed PDF.” SOC 2 reviews push you further. You also need action logs, export snapshots, and integrity controls on the artifacts you move around.

The NIST SP 800-92 guide frames log operations as a set of standard processes, including managing long-term storage. It also calls out file integrity checking using message digests for archived logs, with digest values protected against alteration.

Translate that guidance into a practical routine.

• Define a “required period” with audit, security, and legal input, then use it to drive every export and archive decision. NIST uses the same “required period of time” framing for retention planning in the long-term storage section for log data.

• Separate short-term access from long-term durability. Keep recent exports online for quick retrieval, and move older exports into an archive tier with tighter write permissions.

• Add integrity checks to exported evidence. NIST recommends calculating a message digest for archived logs so later checks can detect tampering.

• Store the integrity artifacts separately. NIST calls out protecting digests through encryption or read-only storage in its log file integrity checking section.

• Document the export cadence. The User Activity export only reaches back one year from the current date, so a monthly or quarterly archive job keeps activity evidence available across longer SOC 2 periods.

• Treat export links as time-bound. The inbox export email link stays valid for one week in the Exporting data from the inbox flow, so your archive runbook should download and store the files promptly.

Step 6: Keep AI access inside governed, auditable paths

If your team uses AI for investigations or reporting, auditors will ask how contract data flows into those tools. Avoid a messy story built around ad hoc exports.

Route AI work through the Model Context Protocol connection and document the allowed assistants, the permission model, and the revocation process. That gives you a simple narrative: the same access controls and auditability you use inside Concord also apply when someone asks a question in an AI assistant.

Contract-level evidence checklist for SOC 2 sampling

Use this checklist when an auditor pulls a contract sample from your population.

Appendix: What to export when audit season hits

Population exports you can pre-stage

• The User Activity CSV for each month or quarter in the review period, archived into a stable evidence location

• A monthly inbox export snapshot covering your required evidence fields and lifecycle fields

• Control-specific report exports, such as “all contracts requiring legal approval” or “all agreements with auto-renewal”

Contract-level exports for sampled agreements

• Signed PDF plus the Signature Certificate file

• A copy of the relevant Audit Trail entries for the period, covering versions, approvals, status, and attachments

• A short inventory of approved AI assistants tied to the Model Context Protocol connector setup

• A record of your tool permissions inside the Concord MCP Server connection

• A policy statement that routes contract data access through governed connectors, so your team avoids uncontrolled spreadsheet exports

When you build contract compliance management software around these artifacts, you stop arguing about “audit trails” in the abstract. You hand auditors a repeatable evidence packet, backed by population exports, with retention practices that follow the same logic NIST uses for trustworthy logs.