Partners and general counsel now ask an assistant which legal tool to use. Then they check it the way lawyers check anything.
They want to know what happens to client data. Is it used for training? Where is it stored? Does the tool fit the professional rules?
Throughline reads what the assistants tell legal buyers each week, and which pages they lean on. A growth strategist sets the plan, and we draft the work that puts you in the comparison.
This page is for seed to growth stage legal tech companies. You might sell document review, contract management, drafting, legal research, matter management or eDiscovery.
You have two buyers with different questions. A law firm’s partners ask about confidentiality and their duty to clients. A general counsel asks what will clear contracts faster with a small team.
Both take advice from peers, and both now ask an assistant. The broad answers name two or three heavily funded platforms, because those have the most written about them.
What do a partner and a general counsel find before the first call?
A lawyer checks a vendor the way they would check the other side. Here is the path two legal buyers walk before a demo, and what they find when the public record lags the product.
- 1A partner asks for AI tools for document review at a mid-size firmTwo large platforms, from news coverage and a comparison pageOut of date
- 2Asks which tools keep client data confidentialThe company not named. The answer quotes a rival’s security pageOut of date
- 3Asks about bar confidentiality rules, like the Swedish Bar Association (Advokatsamfundet) or the ABA, and EU storageA general answer, and no vendor that addresses itOut of date
- 4A general counsel asks for contract tools for a legal team of fiveThe company named, from a review siteCurrent
- 5Opens the company’s site to check retentionNo page on retention, so the answer guessesOut of date
- 6Looks for the security documentationA trust page, with the documents on requestCurrent
What does Throughline read for a legal tech company?
Once you connect them, your own tools come first. The CRM shows every demo and where each buyer came from. Product analytics shows which trial accounts finished a first review or a first contract.
Search Console compares workflow searches with branded ones. Webinars and LinkedIn show which lawyers engaged, and from which kind of firm.
Then come the questions. Each week the watch asks ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Perplexity what legal buyers ask before a demo.
Which tools speed up review and due diligence? Which offer zero data retention and never train on client matters?
Which work inside Word and our document management system? Which suit a small in-house team reviewing DPAs and MSAs?
It asks in English, and in Swedish where lawyers do, such as “Vilka AI-plattformar för jurister uppfyller kraven på tystnadsplikt och datalagring inom EU?” Each answer is saved with who it named.
Then the profession. Legal buyers read bar guidance, the legal press and what large firms’ innovation teams publish. The scouts watch these for new guidance, rival launches and lists that change.
What do we find when lawyers ask an assistant?
The findings follow two paths, a law firm’s and an in-house team’s. Each one says where it was read and what could make it wrong.
Demo requests from in-house teams moved with views of the contract-playbook guide, not with the news page.
In-house lawyers came for the playbook guide, not the news. A guide for each common agreement gives them more reasons to try the product.
Lawyers ask more and more which tools keep client data confidential. The answers quote rivals’ security pages. The company’s answer sits in a gated PDF the assistants cannot read.
The answer exists, but it sits behind a form. Moving the plain facts to a public page gives the assistants something of yours to quote.
Firm deals stalled at the risk and IT review in the weeks its questions took longest to answer.
Slow answers and stalled firm deals rose and fell together. Answers that are ready before the risk and IT review starts remove one reason to wait.
What do we draft for a legal audience?
We draft the pages a lawyer reads before a trial. We write in a lawyer’s register.
A confidentiality page answers zero data retention, model training, storage and access without hedging. Workflow guides cover due diligence, redlining and contract playbooks.
A page explains how the tool fits the professional rules where you sell. A comparison page says plainly when a rival is the better fit.
Guides and clips use standard templates like a sample DPA, MSA or NDA, public filings, or anonymised clauses with written permission.
A growth strategist on our team plans each piece, directs our agents through your own material and edits every line. Each draft arrives in your site’s own format, ready to publish.
A lawyer on your team or advisory board approves anything that touches the rules. Nothing goes live without that yes.
Every page is tested against the questions legal buyers ask before it goes live. A week later it is read again.
- PageConfidentiality page on zero data retention, training, storage and access$6.40
- PageWorkflow guide for due diligence review$6.40
- PageContract playbook guide for in-house teams$6.40
- BriefBriefing notes for two comparison pages$2.60
- Video45s from a sample contract review, start to finish$10.80
- SocialThree posts for the founders, from the guide$0.90
The amounts are the machine cost of each draft, made under your growth strategist’s direction. Your approval comes after. If a draft takes more runs to get right, those runs are on us.
Which numbers move, and by how much?
Lawyers buy on trust and check everything. A strong product with thin public answers gets named at home. It goes missing when a firm abroad or a general counsel asks.
Those answers move when each question a lawyer asks has a page that answers it plainly. They move faster when the risk and IT review’s questions are answered before they are asked.
How fast depends on how many workflows the product covers, and how much you can say in public about data.
We check the answers every week. They move month over month, not week to week, so your receipt reads them by the month.
| The number | How it moves | What the size of the move depends on |
|---|---|---|
| Answers that name the company for its workflows | From missing to named, workflow by workflow | How many workflows can be shown with sample contracts or public filings |
| Answers on confidentiality that quote the company’s own page | From never to the questions it can answer plainly | What the company can say in public about data handling |
| Days a firm deal waits at the risk and IT review | From weeks to days, with answers on one page | How many firms ask outside the standard set |
| Demo requests that name an assistant or a search | Recorded at the request, and rising with the guides | Whether the request form asks |
| In-house trials that finish a first contract | Rises as the guides answer the first week | How long setup takes today |
The big platforms are named because more is written about them. A plain answer to the confidentiality question is open to any company willing to give it.
What happens in the first thirty days?
- Week 1The weekly watch of what legal buyers are told begins from your public pages. No access is needed. The CRM, product analytics, search and webinars connect when you choose.
- Week 2Your Visibility Plan arrives. It shows each legal question, who is named, which pages the answers use, and which gaps to close first. Once your tools are connected, it also shows where deals stop.
- Week 3The confidentiality page and the first workflow guide are drafted. A lawyer checks them and you approve.
- Week 4The first receipt arrives. It shows what shipped, what it cost and what moved.
Questions people ask
Lawyers are careful about what is claimed. Who checks the pages?
A lawyer on your team or your advisory board approves anything that touches the professional rules. Nothing goes out without that yes.
We sell to firms and to in-house teams. Is that one set of pages or two?
Two. They ask different questions, so the watch tracks them apart and the drafts follow.
The big platforms dominate the answers. Is there room?
For the broad question, they will stay named. For a specific workflow, jurisdiction or rule, the answers lean on whoever has the clearest page. That is still open.
Who on our team approves the work?
Usually a founder, with a lawyer checking anything that touches the rules. Every approval happens in one queue.
Where do we start?
With the AI visibility check. A growth strategist reviews how AI assistants see your company and replies within two business days. A call then sets the scope.