As artificial intelligence transforms the legal industry, law firms face a critical challenge: how to evaluate and select AI tools that enhance their practice while maintaining ethical standards and client confidentiality. The right AI solution can dramatically improve efficiency and outcomes, but the wrong choice could expose your firm to significant risks.
This guide outlines a structured approach to vetting AI tools for legal practice, helping you make informed decisions that balance innovation with professional responsibility.
Why Proper Vetting Matters
When adopting AI tools for your law practice, it’s not just about finding the most powerful or user-friendly option. Legal professionals must consider unique concerns around:
- Client confidentiality
- Data security
- Accuracy of legal information
- Ethical compliance
- Jurisdictional appropriateness
A solution that works perfectly for general business use might be completely unsuitable for legal professionals. Let’s explore how to evaluate these tools properly.
The Five-Step AI Vetting Process
Step 1: Classify the Tool – Free vs. Enterprise
The first distinction to make is between consumer-grade tools (like the free version of ChatGPT) and enterprise-level solutions (like Harvey or specialized legal AI platforms).
Consumer-grade tools typically:
- Cost nothing or very little
- Have generic capabilities
- Offer limited security guarantees
- Provide minimal customization options
- May use your inputs for training
Enterprise tools typically:
- Require subscription fees
- Offer specialized legal functionality
- Provide stronger security measures
- Allow customization for specific practice areas
- Have clearer data privacy policies
While free tools might seem appealing for testing purposes, they rarely provide the security and compliance features necessary for handling client information.
Step 2: Identify the Category and Associated Risks
Different types of AI tools carry different levels of risk. Understanding which category a tool falls into helps assess its potential pitfalls:
Extractive AI
- Function: Retrieves information from databases
- Examples: Legal research platforms, case law databases
- Risk Level: Lower (if from reputable sources)
- Concerns: Accuracy, comprehensiveness, currency of information
Corrective AI
- Function: Compares and corrects text against known standards
- Examples: Advanced spellcheck, citation checkers, contract reviewers
- Risk Level: Moderate
- Concerns: False positives/negatives, over-reliance
Collaborative AI
- Function: Highlights information to support human decision-making
- Examples: E-discovery tools, document automation platforms
- Risk Level: Moderate
- Concerns: Missed information, bias in selection algorithms
Generative AI (GenAI)
- Function: Creates new content based on prompts
- Examples: ChatGPT, Claude, Bard, content generation tools
- Risk Level: Highest
- Concerns: “Hallucinations” (false information), confidentiality breaches, unauthorized use of client data
The bottom line: Generative AI tools present the highest risk profile and require the most careful vetting, especially when handling client matters.
Step 3: Evaluate Across Three Key Dimensions
When assessing any AI tool, consider these three critical factors:
1. Required Engagement
How much critical thinking and oversight does the tool demand from the user?
- High engagement (safer): Tools that require lawyer review, verification, and decision-making
- Low engagement (riskier): “Black box” solutions that generate complete work products with minimal user input
Many generative AI tools require minimal engagement, making them convenient but potentially dangerous if used without proper oversight.
2. Knowledge Requirements
What level of expertise does the user need to effectively employ the tool?
- High knowledge requirement (safer): Tools designed for legal professionals that require expertise to operate
- Low knowledge requirement (riskier): User-friendly interfaces that allow anyone to generate legal content
Tools with low knowledge barriers may be easy to use but can produce sophisticated-looking results regardless of accuracy.
3. Reliability
How trustworthy are the tool’s outputs?
- High reliability (safer): Enterprise-grade solutions with verified information sources
- Low reliability (riskier): Free tools with unclear training data and no guarantees
The bottom line: The safest AI tools typically require more engagement from you, more knowledge to use properly, and come from trusted sources with proven reliability. Free, easy-to-use AI might be convenient, but often carries higher ethical risks for lawyers.
Step 4: Apply the Vendor Vetting Checklist
Once you’ve categorized the tool and assessed its risk profile, use this comprehensive checklist to evaluate specific vendors:
Don’t hesitate to request clarification from vendors on any of these points. Reputable providers should be transparent about their policies and willing to address your concerns.
Step 5: Test Solutions Thoroughly
Finally, put prospective tools through rigorous testing before committing:
- Request free demos from vendors to evaluate functionality
- Test with real-world tasks — Ask the tool to summarize a case, draft a memo, or cite legal rules relevant to your practice
- Verify citation accuracy — Can you trace citations to their source? Do they actually exist?
- Compare results across platforms — Run identical prompts through different tools (e.g., ChatGPT vs. Lexis+ AI) to identify strengths and weaknesses
- Watch for hallucinations — Ask questions with known answers to test accuracy and identify fabricated information
- Maintain an evaluation log — Track tools’ performance across different tasks and document any errors or concerns
This testing phase is crucial for identifying potential issues before they affect client work.
Final Considerations
Remember that AI tools, no matter how sophisticated, are supplements to—not replacements for—legal expertise. The most effective implementation strategy combines powerful AI capabilities with proper attorney oversight.
Consider starting with lower-risk categories like extractive or corrective AI before venturing into more complex collaborative or generative tools. This allows your firm to build AI competence while minimizing potential ethical issues.
Finally, document your vetting process. Should questions arise about your use of AI tools, having a record of your due diligence demonstrates your commitment to maintaining professional standards while embracing innovation.
By following this structured approach to vetting AI tools, your law firm can harness the benefits of this transformative technology while upholding the high ethical standards that clients and the legal profession demand.
This blog post is intended as general guidance for legal professionals considering AI adoption. Each firm should consult with appropriate IT, security, and ethics experts to develop policies tailored to their specific practice areas and jurisdictional requirements.