Unwrapped

Teardown · draftwise

DRAFTWISE

DRAFTWISE

CategoryLegal AIFunding · undisclosedSite ↗
  • Index Ventures

Firm deal documents + LLM APIs + Word add-in drafting tool.

01

Public data / API layer

Firm DMS (iManage, NetDocuments)
Firm DMS (iManage, NetDocuments)Yours
Firm precedent libraries
Firm precedent librariesYours
SEC EDGAR
SEC EDGARPublic
Signed transaction documents
Signed transaction documentsYours

Internal replication score

Easy
0.71

Feasibility of a useful internal substitute built with Claude (or similar), the same data access, and light agent logic — not rebuilding the whole product.

IRS = 0.30·D + 0.25·L + 0.20·O + 0.15·R + 0.10·Sthis record · 71%
  • D

    Data accessibility

    weight 0.300.70
    • 1.0mostly customer-owned / public / standard third-party sources
    • 0.5mixed accessibility
    • 0.0hard-to-access or proprietary source layer
  • L

    LLM substitutability

    weight 0.250.85
    • 1.0mostly retrieve / prompt / cite / summarize / classify / compare
    • 0.5mixed standard + custom behavior
    • 0.0strongly custom model behavior (fine-tunes on proprietary data, etc.)
  • O

    Output simplicity

    weight 0.200.75
    • 1.0straightforward internal work product (memo, list, reply, SQL query)
    • 0.5moderately specialized
    • 0.0highly specialized (e.g. FDA-graded clinical text)
  • R

    Review / risk tolerance

    weight 0.150.50
    • 1.0internal use with human review is acceptable
    • 0.5moderate risk
    • 0.0very low tolerance for error (e.g. external legal filings)
  • S

    Surface complexity

    weight 0.10inverse — higher means less surface dependence0.65
    • 1.0a simple internal shell is enough
    • 0.5polished workflow matters somewhat
    • 0.0product surface / rollout / trust posture is central to value
LabelsEasy ≥ 0.67Medium ≥ 0.34Hard < 0.34

Missing factor rows use heuristics from wrapper scores. Editorial heuristic, not investment advice.

Build it yourself→

Recreate the workflow inside your org.

Internal build

Build it yourself

Same firm DMS + LLM API + retrieval-augmented drafting agent — requires DMS connector build and playbook curation.

Internal use only. Replacing them in-market is a different bar than replaying the useful workflow inside your org.

01 · Connectors & flow

Firm DMS (iManage, NetDocuments)
Firm DMS (iManage, NetDocuments)
Firm precedent libraries
Firm precedent libraries
SEC EDGAR
SEC EDGAR
Signed transaction documents
Signed transaction documents

Internal build map

Data in

Connectors
Connectors

Agent layer

Planner
Tools + retrieval
Reasoning model

Logic

LLM API
retrieve precedent
draft clauses
compare versions
redline
cite sources
not custom weights

Outputs

Internal search
Answer
Citations

02 · Claude / agent prompt

Paste as the system or developer message in Claude (or your agent runtime). Scroll to read; Copy grabs the full text.

Claude / agent prompt

// Internal contract drafting assistant You are a contract drafting assistant inside [YOUR_FIRM]'s legal department. You help transactional attorneys draft, review, and negotiate agreements using ONLY documents the attorney is authorized to access from the firm's document management system and public SEC EDGAR filings. ## What you must do 1. Retrieve first: Before drafting any clause, search the firm DMS for the most relevant precedent based on deal type, client, counterparty, and date. Prioritize recently-signed deals and deals with the same counterparty. 2. Cite rigorously: Every proposed clause must cite the specific precedent document (matter number, date, parties) it is drawn from. If you generate language not directly grounded in firm precedent, label it clearly as "drafted language — no precedent match." 3. Surface conflicts: When reviewing redlines from counterparty, compare proposed language against firm precedent on the same provision. Present alternatives in a table showing: provision topic, counterparty proposal, firm's last 3-5 negotiated positions on that topic (with citations), and recommended response. 4. Scope: You draft transactional agreements (M&A, financing, commercial contracts). You do NOT draft litigation documents, regulatory filings, or opinion letters. ## What you are not You are not a replacement for attorney judgment or legal review. Every draft you produce requires attorney review before client delivery. This is an internal efficiency tool, not a client-facing work product generator. ## Refusal Refuse if: (1) the attorney requests a clause type with no firm precedent in the accessible DMS scope, (2) the request involves privileged opposing-party documents you should not have access to, or (3) the deal type is outside transactional scope (litigation, regulatory). When you lack precedent, say so explicitly and ask the attorney to provide a starting template. ## Safety All outputs are for internal attorney review only. You mirror DMS access permissions — if the attorney cannot access a precedent document, you cannot retrieve from it. Flag any request that might require external counsel review or client privilege considerations.

03 · Result

Draft an indemnification clause for a SaaS vendor agreement with an enterprise customer, using our firm's standard customer-favorable language.
firm-precedent

Retrieved 8 signed SaaS agreements from Q4 2024. Drafting indemnity provision based on [Matter 2024-1523] with General Mills, cite included.