Buyer resource · Template updated 2026-09-05
Legal Review: compare the work, then test the fit.
Compare public positioning, workflow fit and the proof to request. This is not a measured ranking or a recommendation based on hands-on testing.
Download the blank pilot scorecard (CSV)Workflow comparison
Sources and research dates are linked for each product. Unverified commercial or technical details must be confirmed with the vendor.
| Product and evidence | Work it performs | Best-fit conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Harvey Initial profile · limited sourcing Vendor source | AI for legal and professional services used for research, due diligence, contract analysis, deal management, and complex workflows. | Large firms and legal departments that need secure AI across many legal workflows with professional oversight. |
| Crosby Automatically researched 2026-09-13 Vendor source | An AI-native law-firm service for commercial contract review and negotiation, combining agents with attorney review and document-based fixed pricing. | Fast-growing companies with recurring commercial contracts, clear playbooks and negotiation authority, an accountable internal legal or business owner, and a need for managed legal capacity rather than another software tool for the team to operate. |
| Lawhive Initial profile · limited sourcing Vendor source | AI-powered law firm model combining attorneys, managed intake, billing, admin, and AI junior associate tooling. | Consumers, small businesses, and smaller firms needing more scalable legal service delivery. |
| Spellbook Automatically researched 2026-09-02 Vendor source | AI contract-review and drafting software that works in Microsoft Word, surfaces issues and proposed redlines, and lets a legal professional inspect, edit, and choose whether to apply the suggested changes. | Legal teams with recurring contracts, established playbooks, a Word-based review process, and named lawyers who own final advice and approvals. |
| Luminance Automatically researched 2026-09-11 Vendor source | Contract-review and negotiation software that identifies non-standard clauses, proposes redlines against a buyer's positions, and can support contract questions and workflow orchestration across an agreement portfolio. | In-house legal and contract-operations teams with recurring agreements, documented standards and fallback positions, an accountable legal owner for final advice and exceptions, a Microsoft Word-based review workflow, and the capacity to test authority boundaries before expanding automation. |
| Legora Automatically researched 2026-09-15 Vendor source | Legal-workflow software for teams that want to draft, review, research, extract, and organise document work with configurable AI tools and lawyer-controlled workflows. | In-house legal teams and law firms with recurring, document-heavy work; defined playbooks and precedent; a named legal owner; and time to test output quality, access boundaries, source coverage, and exception routing before expanding use. |
Run a bounded pilot
- Choose one repeatable workflow, one accountable owner and a fixed evaluation period. Agree the success thresholds before testing; this template intentionally supplies no universal pass rate.
- Use a representative, approved sample with normal cases and known exceptions. Record the volume, complexity and reviewer experience so the baseline and pilot remain comparable.
- Compare the agent-assisted workflow with the current process. Count corrections, escalation and review time, including time spent checking apparently successful work.
- Keep final approval with the responsible operator. Stop for unauthorized actions, exposed data, missing audit evidence or a failure to recover safely. Investigate before expanding access.
- At the decision date, record proceed, revise or stop with the evidence and owner. Verify contract costs, implementation effort and exit options before buying.
Measures to record
- Minutes to first review
- Material issues missed
- Unsupported suggested clauses
- Redlines accepted by the responsible lawyer
- Access or confidentiality incidents
Proof to request from each vendor
Harvey
- Matter-level security and data retention controls
- Workflow coverage by practice area
- Adoption and hours-saved evidence by legal team type
Crosby
- The exact engagement and attorney-responsibility model for our entity, matters, jurisdictions, contract types, negotiation authority, conflicts, malpractice coverage, escalation, client communications, and final sign-off
- A representative end-to-end walkthrough: intake, document and business-context handling, use of preferences or precedent, proposed redline, lawyer review, exception routing, buyer approval, counterparty communication, correction, audit record, and emergency stop
- Current security and data-processing evidence for the proposed service: DPA, confidentiality and privilege treatment, model and subprocessor list, geography, data residency, retention, deletion, backups, support access, encryption, access controls, incident notification, export, and termination assistance
- A commercial proposal that identifies per-document fixed rates, included document classes and complexity, volume commitments, turnaround targets, out-of-scope and urgent-work treatment, onboarding, integrations, invoicing, renewal, cancellation, and migration or record-return terms
- A controlled pilot comparison against current counsel measuring time to first response and signature, material issue detection, missed issues, legal-owner rework and override rate, business exceptions, approval completeness, stakeholder satisfaction, cost per completed document, and incidents
Lawhive
- Licensed entity and attorney responsibility by jurisdiction
- Practice area coverage
- Client satisfaction and review quality
Spellbook
- A live test of one representative agreement showing the selected party, jurisdiction, deal context, review depth, playbook, citations or reasoning, every proposed redline and comment, tracked-change behavior, user edits, final lawyer approval, and handling of ambiguous or missing facts
- A written data-flow and permissions map for Word, iManage, Google Drive, Google Docs, and every other enabled integration: fields and documents accessed, authorization model, ethical-wall behavior, uploads, retention, deletion, exports, logs, customer support access, third-party LLMs, subprocessors, model versions, residency, and incident handling
- Current commercial and assurance materials: edition and feature matrix, price metric, trial-to-paid conversion, minimum term, implementation and training scope, usage limits and overages, renewal and cancellation terms, SOC 2 report and scope if available, DPA, subprocessor list, penetration-test summary, uptime or support commitments, and termination assistance
- A blind or double-reviewed pilot sample with agreement type, counterparty posture, jurisdiction, reviewer, issue severity, false positives, missed material issues, redlines accepted or rejected, time to first pass, time to final approval, escalation rate, and outcomes from adversarial or unusual clauses
Luminance
- A tenant-specific demonstration using representative and adversarial agreements: data ingestion, clause comparison, suggested redline, rationale or source context, checklist, exception, human override, approval trail, outbound communication, correction, audit export, and rollback
- An authority and integration matrix for the purchased edition: Word and Microsoft 365 behavior, contract repository and API connections, data read or written, user and service permissions, SSO, MFA, RBAC, division access, logs, export, revocation, offboarding, error paths, and emergency disablement
- Current security and data-processing evidence: ISO 27001 certificate scope, SOC 2 Type 2 report and bridge letter if available, penetration-test scope, DPA, subprocessor and model-provider list, AWS region and residency commitments, encryption, retention, backup, deletion, support access, incident notice, and legal-hold handling
- Commercial terms for the required modules and usage: pricing metric, minimum term, proof-of-value scope, implementation and training, support and uptime commitments, renewal, cancellation, data export, migration assistance, and autonomous-negotiation limits
- A controlled pilot comparison against lawyer-reviewed baselines measuring time to first pass, time to signature, material-issue recall, false positives, missed clauses, acceptance and rework of proposed changes, exception volume, approval completeness, access incidents, and legal-owner confidence
Legora
- A representative walkthrough from matter intake through document or source upload, playbook and workflow configuration, generation or review, source links, exception routing, lawyer approval, export, audit record, correction, rollback, and access revocation
- A current product and integration matrix covering Word, desktop, browser, mobile, APIs, document repositories, legal-content sources, read and write permissions, roles, service accounts, logs, exports, and how each connection is disabled
- The proposed DPA, security package, model and subprocessor list, data locations, encryption, access controls, retention, deletion, backup, legal-hold, support-access, incident, confidentiality, privilege, and audit-report terms applicable to our edition and region
- A commercial proposal specifying package, licensing or consumption unit, implementation, legal-content and integration costs, workflow limits, support, training, renewal, cancellation, document and data export, and transition assistance
- A time-boxed pilot using representative standard and difficult matters, independently measuring legal-owner agreement, material-issue coverage, source accuracy, false positives, missed issues, rework, exception age, approval completeness, turnaround, and correction time