Make the intake specific
Supply the parties, document kind, jurisdiction, obligations, dates and reference material. Review imported content and retain its source identity before using it in a new matter.
Legal first drafts built for counsel review
Start with the parties, terms, governing law, and reference files. Gixo builds a structured legal first draft that counsel can review clause by clause. The point is not to skip counsel. The point is to give counsel a structured first shot that arrives with context, references, and visible review hooks.
Reviewed 2026
An AI legal first draft for counsel is a structured, reviewable draft — built from captured intake (parties, terms, dates, governing law) and reference-file input — that hands counsel a working starting point with visible review hooks, not a finished, sign-ready document. It supports 29 named legal document types on the main create flow, plus custom drafting, with exports for counsel to review. The AI supplies structure and clause flow; counsel supplies the legal judgment, jurisdictional fit, and sign-off responsibility. Gixo Lex is sold per seat at $29–$229 per seat per month after a 14-day trial, with no free plan. Compare that subscription with the same matter's intake, review, negotiation, and approval effort; do not treat a seat price as a promise of unlimited drafts or a substitute for counsel.
Lex · real output
Read the matter facts and the resulting draft together.
This is a real Lex export for invented parties. Inspect the input and clauses as a worked example, with professional review kept separate from automated drafting and checks.
Consulting Agreement: repairs satisfaction measurement (worked example)
A consulting agreement of 26 numbered clauses between two invented parties: scope, services, deliverables, exclusions, fees and expenses, intellectual property, confidentiality, liability, termination, notices, governing law and signature blocks. Its first page says the parties, people and addresses are invented and that it is a worked example, not a legal document.
Inspect the source brief or data
Draft a Consulting Agreement: repairs satisfaction measurement between Larkfield Analytics Ltd (Consultant) and Harbourside Housing Association (Client). Governing law: England and Wales. Effective date: 2027-02-01. Term: Ten weeks from the effective date. Confidentiality: Three years after the engagement ends. The Consultant will review the Client's current repairs satisfaction survey and the data behind it, recommend a method for measuring repairs satisfaction by contractor, and leave the Client with a reporting approach that the repairs team and the board can use. Excluded: building or buying software, and running surveys. Dependencies: the Client provides the survey data within five working days of the effective date and two days a week of its operations manager's time. State on the first page that the parties, people and addresses in this agreement are invented and that it is a worked example, not a legal document. Keep the agreement short and plain. The notice email address of Larkfield Analytics Ltd is notices@larkfield-analytics.example and of Harbourside Housing Association is notices@harbourside-housing.example (both invented).
Read the sample review notes
Read mechanically against the intake, not by a lawyer: all 12 facts the intake gave (names, registration numbers, addresses, representatives, the effective date and the governing law) are in the draft, nothing is left as a placeholder, and it states two terms the intake did not give, 30 days and 10 business days, which Lex chose.
Inspect clauses and changes
Use the legal workspace's permitted structural tools, Draft Checks and review paths. Compare proposed changes with the saved draft and original material; unsupported Word edits must be handled explicitly.
Approve the exact version
Have qualified counsel review enforceability, local requirements and the actual commercial intent. Check the current approval state and the downloaded document after a change.
Structured clause proposals and permitted changes
Select the target clause and give Ask Lex a bounded instruction. Missing facts remain visible for review. Inspect the before-and-after proposal, required clause checks and any explicit outside-matrix or mandatory-clause override before versioned application. Use the legal workspace's structural allowlist rather than assuming every general content-editor block is available.
Playbooks, source evidence and obligations
Inspect immutable playbook versions, anchored findings, provenance and precedent variants before staging a change. Matters retain original sources, quotation findings and source-version comparisons. Review extracted obligations for timing, ownership and source revision; negotiation turns and agreement-pack review cells have their own decisions and current-version requirements.
Original Word, redlines and the delivery receipt
Original-format Word export, tracked changes against an original and saved-version redlines are separate paths. Unsupported edits must be surfaced rather than silently claimed as preserved. Inspect the layout, validator notes and downloaded file, then retain its delivery receipt. Counsel's review applies to the actual matter and version.
AI contract review, key terms and review of every document
Every contract in Lex, drafted or imported, gets an AI contract review: each clause the document type expects marked present, weak or absent; up to 25 risks with a level, the party each falls on, why it matters and replacement wording; and provisions that cannot both be followed. Every quotation is checked against the contract text, findings are decided before approval, and there is no single risk score. The same review reads the key terms and obligations with the words they quote and proposes them into the Agreement Pack. Review every document puts up to 25 documents of an Agreement Pack, or up to 200 in a matter, into one table with your own questions as columns and an Excel export. Approvers can be named in order, and signing supports up to 10 signers with an optional signing order and automatic reminders; it is a simple electronic signature, not a qualified one. A qualified reviewer still decides what the contract says.
Lex does not provide legal advice or certify compliance. The public specimen is not a universally reusable legal template. Word fidelity depends on the supported original-document and saved-version path; unrestricted Power Edit and image insertion are not legal editing features.
Additional product example
What makes an AI first draft usable for counsel?
The job is not to ask AI for a legal answer. The job is to prepare a draft or artifact that a qualified reviewer can actually work with.
Structured inputs before generation
Capture the parties, commercial terms, dates, and governing law before the draft is written so the reviewer does not start by fixing missing basics.
Reference-file input
Use prior agreements, playbooks, or client forms to steer the first draft toward the language and structure counsel expects to see.
Authority and governing-law context
Reference files and governing context can shape the draft. Cited sources can show which draft sentences are supported by supplied reference files. This in-app support does not establish legal authority or statutory compliance and is not inserted into the contract or its exports; reviewers still check the facts and law independently.
Clause-level editing
Refine the document inside the workspace instead of regenerating the entire draft every time counsel wants a targeted change.
Review workflow attached to the draft
After the first draft, Lex runs an AI contract review of the whole contract, with every quotation checked against the text, beside rule checks: clause coverage against a versioned playbook, clause-conflict detection, and defined-term and cross-reference checks. Findings, tracked-change DOCX redlines, comments, review state, assignees, due dates, and version history all stay attached to the same document. A contract imported from Word can go back as that same DOCX, with the Lex edits shown as Word tracked changes; where Lex cannot track an edit faithfully, such as inside a field, an existing revision, a header or a footer, it refuses the export instead of altering the document. Reviewers still verify every clause and conclusion.
Clear professional boundary
Gixo helps prepare regulated work. It does not provide legal advice, certify compliance, or replace professional review.
How teams use Gixo's legal drafting AI for counsel-review drafts
1
Capture the inputs the draft depends on
Define the document type, parties, terms, dates, and governing law. Start with guided confidentiality/IP, services, corporate/equity, employment, real-estate, finance, and general legal documents, including custom drafting.
2
Add prior templates or matter-specific context
Use your team’s contract language, reference documents, or negotiated precedent to inform the first draft.
3
Generate and review the first draft
Gixo prepares the structure and clause flow so counsel can focus on legal judgment, negotiation posture, and missing facts.
4
Refine and export
Keep edits, comments, and export handoff in one place before the document moves to signature, negotiation, or external counsel workflows.
What does an AI legal first draft for counsel include?
Compare current written commercial terms on the same matter and reviewer scope. Lex is priced per seat with bounded drafting capacity; template licenses, general AI plans and counsel services use different terms. No document-price or professional-fee estimate on this page is a current vendor quote.
| Capability | Gixo first draft | Template libraries | General AI | Manual drafting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main job | Reviewable first draft | Prewritten forms | Prompt response | Attorney-written |
| Reference-file input | Yes | Ask if it accepts your files | Paste or upload; verify current support | Yes |
| Structured intake | Yes | Ask the vendor | Prompt, project or custom workflow; verify | Interview based |
| Jurisdiction-aware drafting | Yes | Template dependent | Test on the same inputs | Yes |
| Review workflow | Yes | Ask where review happens | Verify current document and review tools | Your own review process |
| Multi-party support | Up to 10 parties | Check its party limit | Manual specification | Any number |
| Time to first draft | Measure the same task | Measure the same task | Measure the same task | Hours to days |
| Cost per draft (market ranges, mid-2026) | Subscription | Confirm current document price and license | Subscription | Request a current matter-specific quote |
The other columns describe what each kind of tool is generally for, not a test of a named product, and products differ. Run the same brief and reference files through anything on your shortlist, then compare the draft, the review trail and the export.
The four pillars of reviewing an AI draft
A good review is not a linear read-through. It interrogates the draft from four angles — an error in any one can undermine the whole agreement.
Factual accuracy & context
AI has no knowledge of your actual deal — it uses placeholders or invents details. Confirm the draft reflects the real parties, dates, amounts, and business terms.
Legal sufficiency & jurisdiction
Does it include the clauses needed to be effective, and does it fit the governing-law jurisdiction? A globally-trained model can produce a generic contract that is invalid in a specific place. This is where counsel matters most.
Structural integrity & consistency
A contract is a logical system. Are terms defined once and used consistently? Do cross-references point to the right sections? Do clauses contradict each other? AI drafts are notoriously prone to these errors.
Risk allocation & intent
A contract allocates risk between parties. The AI does not know your risk tolerance or negotiating position — does the draft protect you where you need it, or quietly give away too much?
The high-risk failure points to hunt for
These are where current AI drafts most often break. A reviewer should actively look for each one rather than assume the polished prose is correct.
Missing or inappropriate clauses
AI builds from the most common patterns, so it can omit a clause your specific deal needs — a data-processing addendum, tailored IP assignment — or include one that does not belong.
Defined-term drift
It may define "Confidential Information," then later say "Proprietary Information" for the same thing — ambiguity that can render a key provision unenforceable.
Cross-reference errors
"As defined in Section 3.1" when the definition is in 2.1 — or a section that does not exist. Models without a persistent map of the document fail to update these as numbering changes.
Jurisdictional mismatch
A "vanilla" draft blends legal systems; a non-compete that is standard in one state can be unenforceable in another. Check that the draft fits the governing law you have chosen.
Hallucinated law
AI can confidently cite statutes or cases that do not exist, or invent plausible-sounding clauses with no basis in law. Treat every citation with skepticism and verify it independently.
Silent gaps
The hardest to catch is what is not there. The AI gives what was asked for, not what should have been asked for. Step back and ask what protection you would wish the contract had if things go wrong.
Where Gixo helps
Before review, Gixo Lex runs a draft analysis pass: a clause inventory, missing-clause coverage, defined-term consistency, cross-reference validation, and execution-readiness checks. Those checks are rule-based rather than generated: they call no model, write no new legal text, and draw no plan capacity, so the same draft checked twice gives the same answer and reviewers start from a cleaner draft instead of hunting for gaps. That handles the mechanical layer — clause coverage, defined-term consistency, cross-reference validation — so your reviewer starts past the structural errors and spends judgment on the substance. The legal judgment stays with counsel.
A structured review protocol
Check the fundamentals before the fine print. A logical order keeps reviewers from polishing prose in a draft whose foundation is broken.
1
Scope & factual verification
Confirm all names, dates, amounts, and business terms against the deal sheet. Make sure the draft's scope matches the real transaction.
2
Structural integrity check
Before reading for substance, run a mechanical pass: verify definitions, hunt for defined-term drift, and validate every cross-reference.
3
Clause-by-clause substantive review
Read section by section. For each clause ask: is it legally sound, is it clear, and does it achieve the outcome you want?
4
Jurisdictional conformance audit
Check the document against the requirements of the governing-law jurisdiction. This step may need specialized counsel.
5
Holistic risk & commercial review
Read the corrected document end to end. Does it work as a coherent whole, and does the risk allocation match your position?
6
Final polish & formatting
A last pass for typos, grammar, and formatting inconsistencies the AI may have introduced.
When should you start from an AI draft, and when shouldn't you?
Not every document carries the same risk. Match the approach to the stakes.
Low risk / standardized
Simple NDAs, basic policies, internal resolutions. An AI draft is an efficient starting point — provided it still goes through the full review protocol.
Medium risk / customized
Service agreements, employment contracts, commercial leases. Use with care: treat the draft as a collection of candidate clauses and expect significant redrafting.
High risk / complex / novel
M&A, patent licenses, shareholder agreements, litigation filings. These need strategic architecture from the first word — not a generative first draft.
The honest framing
Think of AI as the first 10% of drafting — a fast, structured starting point — and human expertise as the essential last 90% of review, strategy, and finalization. The reviewer who approves the document takes full professional responsibility for it. Gixo helps prepare regulated work. It does not provide legal advice, certify compliance, or replace professional review.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is this for?
Built for in-house legal, legal ops, finance, audit, and compliance teams that need reviewable work product rather than generic AI answers.
What document types can teams prepare?
The main draft surface supports 29 named legal document types on the main create flow, plus custom drafting.
Can counsel edit the draft after generation?
Yes. The draft stays in a workspace that supports edits, comments, versions, and export handoff.
Can I use prior firm or client templates as references?
Yes. Teams can upload reference files and precedent to keep the first draft closer to existing practice.
Can I use an AI-generated contract without a lawyer?
For anything of legal or financial significance, it is inadvisable. AI cannot give legal advice, understand your specific situation, or take responsibility for errors. Treat the output as a structured first draft for qualified review, not a finished document.
Is an AI-generated legal document legally binding?
Whether a document is binding depends on contract formation and legal sufficiency, not on how it was drafted. A sound contract drafted with AI can be binding — but the risk is that the draft is not sound. The quality of the final, reviewed document is what matters.
What is the single biggest risk of an AI draft?
A false sense of security. The output looks plausible and professional, which can lull a reviewer into trusting a document that has a hidden flaw or omission — discovered only when a dispute arises.
How do I know if the AI used up-to-date law?
Assume it may not have. Models have a knowledge cutoff and are not connected to live legal databases. Independently verify any legal standard, statute, or requirement before relying on it.
Is this a substitute for legal advice?
Gixo helps prepare regulated work. It does not provide legal advice, certify compliance, or replace professional review.
What is an AI legal first draft for counsel?
It's a structured, reviewable draft prepared with captured intake (parties, terms, dates, governing law) and reference-file input, then handed to counsel with edit, comment, and export hooks already attached — not a finished document, and not a substitute for legal advice.
How is this different from starting with a general AI prompt?
Gixo begins with document-specific fields for parties, terms, dates, and governing law. It accepts optional reference files and keeps drafting, edits, comments, and export handoff in one workspace for counsel review. Reviewers still verify every fact and clause.
How much does a legal first draft cost?
It depends on the route and the matter. Gixo Lex is a per-seat subscription at $29–$229 per seat per month after a 14-day trial, with no free plan. Compare the applicable plan, seat minimum, workflow limits, and the counsel time still needed for intake, verification, negotiation, and approval. A seat price is not a promise of unlimited drafts and does not replace qualified legal review.
How many parties can one draft cover?
Up to 10 parties on a single draft. Template libraries are usually built for two, and general AI assistants require you to specify every party manually.
What AI tools produce a faster first draft for proposals and agreements?
Tools that skip structured intake produce a faster-looking draft that is slower to fix. Gixo's first-draft workflow covers 29 named legal document types on the main create flow, plus custom drafting, captures parties, terms, dates, and governing law before generation, and exports to PDF, DOCX, HTML, and TXT — so the time saved shows up in review, not in redoing the intake counsel would have asked for anyway.
Gixo Legal & Compliance
AI Legal Documents
Contract Drafting Tool
Jurisdiction-Aware Drafting
For Fractional General Counsel
Pricing
Updated
More from Gixo