The first draft, with the authorities already checked.

Attach the matter, run the agent, and press Verify all before you send anything up, so the awkward Friday-morning question never has to happen.

Senior associates and fee-earners

Start free Book a 20-minute walkthrough

No credit card required

Agents · Contract Agent · New runMatter: Northgate · senior associate hire

Agent

Jurisdiction

Prepare for

Deliver as

Instruction

What should the agent look for?

Documents

Drop a contract, or pick one from the matter

Also on the matter

Offer_letter_v3.pdf2 pages
Staff_handbook_2025.docx61 pages
Board_minute_14_Aug.pdf3 pages

Platform model · zero data retention · audit register on

The shape every finished run takes: summary, action items, authorities, open questions, how it was made.

Before

You are the person the partner asks on a Thursday afternoon, and also the person who has to be able to answer, on Friday morning, where the case came from.

You have tried a general assistant before. It was fluent, it was fast, and at some point it cited a case you could not find, so you stopped trusting it for anything that mattered.

The partner wants a quick view by Wednesday, and quick usually means reading the whole agreement anyway to be sure nothing was missed.

After

The matter holds the documents already, so a question is grounded on the file rather than the abstract version of the question.

The Contract Agent finds the uncapped indemnity in schedule 4 before Wednesday, quotes it, rates it High, and proposes fallback wording you can adjust.

Press Verify all and every authority is checked against the source it claims to come from, so the Friday-morning question never has to be asked.

A lawyer at a window desk comparing a printed judgment against her laptop.

Grounded on the matter

Attach the matter with the matter chip and the answer reads the file rather than the general question, the same MSA or covenant the partner forwarded rather than a description of what that kind of document usually says.

See how matters work

Matters · Project Halcyon · SPA warranties and disclosureOpen

Project Halcyon: SPA warranties and disclosure

Buy-side warranty review, disclosure analysis and cited due-diligence grid.

Client: Halcyon Bidco Ltd
Reference: WC-2026-0412
Practice area: Corporate / M&A
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Responsible partner: E. Vance

No conflict check on file.

Chat, on this matter

Compare warranties with the disclosure letter.

Three high-priority exceptions require action: the unregistered charge, the change-of-control right and the tribunal claim.

Send a message… (@ to mention tools)BalancedPrepare for

25 Aug
Disclosure exceptions matrix
Chat
21 Aug
Disclosure exceptions matrix
Run · completed · 560 credits
18 Aug
Project Halcyon: Disclosure Letter
Document · indexed
16 Aug
Project Halcyon: Share Purchase Agreement
Document · indexed
4 Aug
Matter opened
Opened

The matter chip attached to a chat question, grounding the answer on the file.

A memo, not a chat

A run comes back with a summary, the files it read, action items to tick and confirm, an authorities tab, open questions and a How this was made record, all in one Word download you can send to the partner.

See the review grid

The Prepare for picker open on a matter chat: an audience (Standard, Executive Brief, Work-Stream Memo, Client Update, Court-Ready, Regulator Response) and a format (Word document, slide deck, spreadsheet, PDF, or in-app only). The timeline on the right shows a completed run that drew 560 credits. — A finished run: summary, action items, authorities and how it was made, in one document.

Verified, then shareable

Twelve authorities on a covenant question, ten verified, one needing a check, one not found; you drop one, correct a pinpoint, and sign the acknowledgement because you have actually reviewed it.

See how verification works

Authorities · 14 · Where we looked

#	Reference	Source	Verdict
1	Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd [2019] UKSC 32	—	not yet checked
2	Working Time Regulations 1998 SI 1998/1833, regs 4 to 5, 10 to 14	—	not yet checked
3	Coppage v Safety Net Security Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1176	—	not yet checked
4	UK GDPR, Articles 6 and 9 Retained Regulation (EU) 2016/679	—	not yet checked
5	Employment Rights Act 1996, s 1 c 18	—	not yet checked
6	Harlow v Artemis International [2008] EWHC 1126 (QB)	—	not yet checked

Twelve authorities on a covenant question, ten verified before you read the memo.

Named, not generic.

Each agent is built for one kind of work, carries its own protocols and returns the same six-tab run. These are the ones this desk reaches for.

What a run costs.

The credit cost sits on the turn, and billing attributes the run to its matter, so you can see what a first draft cost before you hand it up.

See pricing

What you will say before you try it.

The last assistant I used cited a case that did not exist.: This one fetches only from a fixed list of approved public primary sources, ranked so that courts and legislation come first, and every authority carries a verdict of verified, needs a check or not found before you read the memo.
I need something I can actually send to the partner.: A run returns a summary, action items, an authorities tab and a Word download, not a chat transcript you have to turn into one. Prepare for reshapes the same analysis for a client or a court filing.
I am not the one buying this.: On Free or Starter you get chat with all three tiers, the matter chip, Prepare for, and every agent, premium ones included, enough to make the internal case before anyone signs a plan.

Nearby desks.

Start free

Put one real agreement into a matter and ask what is wrong with it.

Then open the authorities tab. That is the whole evaluation, and it takes ten minutes.

Start free Book a 20-minute walkthrough