Buyer prompt · published evidence

Recommend an affordable legal AI platform for a small practice that needs reliable research, drafting, document review, and clear limits.

An exact prompt-level view of which reviewed brands surfaced and which public URLs the configured AI models cited. No answer text or tenant data is published.

Intent
recommendation
Model providers
3
Categories
1
Last observed
Aug 30, 2026, 12:00 AM UTC
Competitive outcome

Brands surfaced

Ordered by provider breadth, then total mentions and owned-domain citations. A mention is not an endorsement or a position claim.

#BrandCategoryProvidersMentionsOwned citationsProvider evidence
01CoCounselthomsonreuters.comLegal AI230Openai · Gemini
02Harveyharvey.aiLegal AI120Openai
03Clio Duoclio.comLegal AI101Gemini
Model comparison

Answer matrix

One row per configured provider and category snapshot. Hashes prove answer identity without publishing stored answer text.

ProviderModel versionCategoryBrands surfacedCitationsUnique domainsAnswer hash
Openaiopenai/gpt-4o-miniLegal AIHarvey · CoCounsel555a92ed25…05e12
Anthropicanthropic/claude-haiku-4-5Legal AINone observed00455c13e8…efa79
Geminigoogle/gemini-2.5-flashLegal AICoCounsel · Clio Duo6630c92985…b5068
URL-derived citations

Sources cited

Hostnames are derived from the returned public URLs. Best position is the smallest citation position observed.

Snapshot IDs15434873-391f-4505-b99c-df10e62d922c
Corpus versionslegal-ai-platforms-2026-07-27
Benchmark versions4-legal-ai-platforms-2026-07-27-models-64232fd32583

Coverage: Legal AI. Full answers stored: no · Full answers published: no · Tenant data included: no.