By:
LexisNexis South Africa
Too many legal professionals expect the first draft produced by AI to be complete and client-ready.
When it’s not initially at this high standard, there is often an assumption that the tool has failed.
In practice, a better approach is to treat the first response produced by the tool as ‘a working draft’ that can be vastly improved through a series of follow-up prompts.
In this brief article, you’ll get more of a sense of how to skilfully guide Lexis Protégé towards the result you need.
That skill is not only knowing what to ask first, but also knowing what to ask next.
Review the first response before refining it
Before re-prompting, read the initial response from Lexis Protégé as you would normally review work prepared by a junior colleague.
Ask yourself:
- Is anything important missing?
- Is the legal issue framed correctly?
- Does the draft reflect the correct audience and purpose?
- Is the tone appropriate?
- Are any assumptions unsupported?
- Does the structure make the document easy to review?
These questions will help you identify exactly what still needs to change.
Then make sure that you avoid giving Lexis Protégé a vague follow-up instruction such as: ‘Make this better.’
Rather identify the specific issue that needs to be amended, such as: ‘Add a short section explaining the commercial risk created by the termination provision.’
An accurate, clear instruction gives Protégé a defined task to execute and makes the next response easier to assess.
Refine one thing at a time
Trying to change the length, tone, structure and legal content in one instruction can make the response less predictable.
It is often more effective to refine the draft in stages.
For example:
1, ‘Shorten this draft to 300 words.’
Then:
2. ‘Rewrite the draft for a client with no legal background.’
Then:
3. ‘Make the recommendation more direct and practical.’
This stepped-approach gives you more control over the result and makes it easier to see exactly which one of the instructions improved the draft.
Improve the structure
A response can contain useful information, but still be difficult to use.
To improve the structure of the draft, instruct Protégé to organise the content in the format most appropriate for the task.
In this case useful follow-up prompts can include:
- ‘Restructure this answer under the headings issue, applicable law, analysis, risk and recommendation.’
- ‘Convert this response into a formal client email with a subject line, short introduction and clear next steps.’
- ‘Present the findings in a table with columns for clause, risk, consequence and recommended change.’
- ‘Turn this explanation into numbered paragraphs suitable for an internal legal memorandum.’
The clearer the format, the less time you’ll need to waste reorganising the draft manually.
Adjust the tone and audience
The same legal point may need to be expressed differently depending on who needs to read and understand it.
For example, a client email shouldn’t sound like an opinion for counsel, a note to the board shouldn’t read like informal correspondence, a letter to opposing attorneys may need to be firm, without becoming unnecessarily confrontational.
To adjust the tone of a draft, try prompts such as:
- ‘Rewrite this in plain language for a business owner with no legal training.’
- ‘Make the tone firmer but keep it professional and suitable for opposing attorneys.’
- ‘Rewrite this for senior management, focusing on commercial impact and recommended action.’
- ‘Make the wording more neutral and suitable for a settlement discussion.’
Tone is not a cosmetic issue. It affects how the advice is understood and how the document is received.
Ask Protégé to identify gaps
One of the most useful follow-up prompting techniques, is to ask the system what may be missing.
For example:
- ‘Identify any missing facts that should be confirmed before this draft is finalised.’
- ‘List the assumptions made in this response.’
- ‘Flag any legal or commercial issues that have not yet been addressed.’
- ‘Identify any wording that may create unintended obligations.’
This helps you move from drafting to review and encourages a more disciplined approach to legal work, where facts and assumptions are clearly separated.
Stress test the position
Useful rule of thumb: A draft becomes far stronger when challenged.
Protégé can help you consider the other side’s likely response. or identify weaknesses in your position, before the document leaves your desk.
To stress test the position, use prompts such as:
- ‘What are the three strongest counterarguments to this position?’
- ‘Which parts of this clause are most likely to be resisted in negotiation?’
- ‘Review this draft from the perspective of the other party and identify its weaknesses.’
- ‘Suggest two alternative versions of this clause, one that is client protective and one that is more balanced.’
Prepare the response for final legal review
Before considering the draft ready for use, ask Protégé to help you prepare a final review checklist.
For example:
‘Create a checklist of the facts, authorities, risks and drafting points that must be verified before this document is approved.’
Then, ultimately to complete your own professional review of the work, check:
- the jurisdiction
- the factual accuracy
- the client’s commercial position
- the legal principles and authorities
- any unintended obligations
- the treatment of confidential information
- the suitability of the tone and format
Protégé can help accelerate the work, but the legal professional remains responsible for the final document.
Final takeaway
Better results from Lexis Protégé comes from knowing how to refine the output that the tool produces.
Achieving this starts with an approach that treats the first response as a starting point.
After that; review it, refine it, test it and verify it.
That’s how Lexis Protégé becomes more than just a drafting shortcut and becomes a practical tool for producing client-ready legal work.