This article aims to analyze the problems of differentiation of procedural agreements in the practice of judicial investigation. A plea agreement is an agreement made between the prosecutor and the suspect, the accused, or the defendant at any stage of the criminal proceedings and in other cases provided by law. According to the author’s opinion, the essence of the procedural agreement is its dependence on the accused’s attitude towards his guilt, that is, a differential approach. Regardless of the plea agreement, the judge’s obligation to examine and evaluate the available evidence in the case is an important guarantee aimed at ensuring that innocent persons forced to enter into a plea agreement as a result of physical or mental coercion are not convicted. The article also explains and substantiates the need to clearly define the circumstances that must be determined in cases where a procedural agreement has been concluded. The article also explains and substantiates the need to clearly define the circumstances that must be determined in cases where a procedural agreement has been concluded. The article also analyzes the criteria for differentiating the forms of a procedural agreement. The author made a comparative analysis of the forms of a procedural agreement, such as a procedural agreement on the admission of guilt, a procedural agreement on reconciliation, an agreement on cooperation with the investigation. The problems of differentiation of procedural agreements in the practice of judicial investigation of foreign countries and various legal systems are investigated.