B

BoostDraft

BoostDraft separates rule based editing from generative contract review. The established Word editor handles formatting, defined terms and internal references, while BoostDraft AI adds risk analysis, proposed revisions, summaries, translation and chat. The AI service can compare an agreement with a customer's template or policy and focus attention on deviations. Those tasks depend on models interpreting content, rather than simply correcting numbering.

Removing the AI would still leave the editing product and BoostDraft Compare, which compares Word, PDF, Excel and PowerPoint files. The company began offering the AI review service in 2026 alongside those existing tools, making content analysis a distinct capability within the wider drafting product family.

BoostDraft AI uses lawyer supervised prompts and customer supplied templates or policies to identify contract risks and propose changes. The review can reflect the party's position and the organization's own standards, and highlights lead the reviewer to relevant text. That establishes context for a recommendation, without a measured legal accuracy result or a described retrieval process linking answers to primary authority.

The company's review guidance recognizes that generated clauses can introduce fabricated obligations, unsupported concepts and inconsistent references. It calls for verification against the agreement and approved playbooks. No test set, hallucination rate or method for determining the legal correctness of a proposed revision accompanies the current AI service.

The review workflow stays inside Word, where users inspect highlighted passages, move to the relevant text and apply proposed revisions or comments to the agreement. Customer policies and templates provide constraints for risk analysis, while the English feature description says the level of AI involvement remains under user control. BoostDraft's guidance assigns approval of business exceptions to people and treats generated language as draft material requiring legal review.

These are concrete review surfaces and a stated division of responsibility. The product does not specify circumstances that automatically stop an unsupported answer or a route for escalating a faulty recommendation after it has been applied.

Farella Braun + Martel and Silicon Legal Strategy describe using BoostDraft for proofreading, definitions, references and formatting. Silicon Legal reports approximately 10 percent less total contract review time, while Farella describes deployment through its internal software center and adoption among transactional lawyers. These accounts establish use of the editing product, but do not identify deployment of the AI review service introduced in 2026.

The October announcement's 1,000 cumulative paying companies also covers all three services together. No named customer account or measured production result isolates the current generative review, translation or chat functions. The earlier editor's outcomes therefore remain distinct from the AI service's performance.

BoostDraft AI masks confidential information before transmitting content to AI. The stated examples include company names, addresses and transaction terms, and anonymization is included as a standard feature. The product description also says information from the file is not retained or used to train models. These are concrete handling commitments for the AI service, separate from the older editor's ability to work entirely on the device.

The processing provider and contractual scope of the training prohibition are unspecified. No matter level access controls, privilege preservation process or work product treatment accompanies the description, and it does not establish the retention treatment of every chat or generated response.

BoostDraft is designed for legal professionals working on contracts, with lawyer supervised prompts and review inside Word. Its drafting guidance says people remain responsible for business judgment and approval of exceptions, and generated language requires legal review before it becomes part of a final agreement. That gives users an operational role in the workflow. The product and commercial terms do not establish a distinct boundary between software assistance and legal advice, identify jurisdictional restrictions on the service, or allocate professional responsibility through a specific ethics framework.

Japanese, English and Korean analysis describe supported languages rather than authorization to provide legal services in those jurisdictions.

The product design separates deterministic formatting from AI analysis and human judgment. BoostDraft's October announcement explains that changes to formatting should not alter meaning, while content review can involve broader judgments. Confidential information is masked before AI processing, and lawyer supervised prompts provide a legal context for recommendations. The company's workflow guidance also reserves exceptions to organizational standards for human approval.

These principles identify intended safeguards, but do not define a model governance program. There is no named owner for model behavior, pre release evaluation protocol or result describing uneven performance across agreement types, languages or client populations. The team's legal expertise alone does not establish those controls.

The AI service states that information from contract files is neither retained by the AI nor used for training, with automatic masking before transmission. The privacy policy separately permits service delivery and creation of anonymous or statistical information, and provides routes to request correction, deletion or suspension of personal data use. Those general rights do not define the complete AI data lifecycle. Prompt and output storage, operational logs, access administration and incident notification remain unspecified.

The Japanese privacy policy names advertising providers, but those entities are not identified as processors of contract content. A complete AI subprocessor list and deletion schedule for residual service data are not available.

The English commercial notice promises a corrected version when the software has a serious defect. It also excludes convenience refunds and continues charges until the end of a subscription term after cancellation. These provisions address software delivery and payment, rather than the consequences of an incorrect AI risk assessment or proposed clause. No allocation of loss for generated legal output, AI indemnity, liability cap tied to that output or professional warranty accompanies the current service description.

The Japanese commercial notice identifies the seller, payment process and delivery timing without adding those remedies. A software correction commitment therefore does not establish recovery for harm caused by reliance on a recommendation.

Microsoft Word is the principal working environment for BoostDraft. The editor scans the active agreement, groups potential errors and moves the user to a selected passage. Suggested corrections can be applied to the file, while the AI service inserts proposed revisions and comments into the agreement without a separate review window. Existing Word add ins can remain in use. BoostDraft Compare accepts several common office formats and can export tracked changes or PDF results.

These features keep drafting and review in the lawyer's existing editor. No detailed iManage, NetDocuments or practice management synchronization process is identified, including permission inheritance or movement of matter metadata between systems.

The original editor and BoostDraft Compare can operate locally without sending contract content to a cloud service. BoostDraft AI follows a separate path, masking confidential information before passing content to AI. Its processing region, provider location and tenant architecture are unspecified, so the local editor's deployment cannot establish residency for the AI service. Platform support also differs by regional offer.

The English feature page requires Windows 10 or later, Office 2016 or later and .NET Framework 4.7.2 or later, with no Mac support. The Japanese pricing FAQ allows Windows and Mac while noting that available functions differ. Neither statement defines feature parity for AI across operating systems.

BoostDraft's security approach emphasizes reducing movement of contract content. The editing and comparison tools can run on the device, and the AI review service masks sensitive details before processing. Its product description also rejects retention and training use of information from files. Those are product design and data handling claims, rather than independent security attestations. No SOC 2 report, ISO security certificate, named auditor, assessment period or defined audit scope accompanies the current product, pricing and privacy material.

The privacy policy identifies a contact for personal data questions, but does not provide a trust portal or a route to an independent report.

BoostDraft AI performs contract analysis, translation, summarization and chat after confidential details have been masked. Lawyer supervised prompts and customer policies shape the task, but neither identifies the underlying model. The current product description does not name a foundation model family, model version, inference provider or hosting region. A promise that file information will not train models also does not identify who operates those models.

The earlier editor's local processing is a separate design and cannot establish the generative service's supply chain. No customer notification commitment explains how a change in model or provider would be communicated to firms relying on the service.

BoostDraft's English offer uses a subscription per user without a minimum seat requirement. The Japanese pricing structure instead describes monthly charges per device, with an additional charge for English language functionality and no initial fee. Numeric subscription amounts are supplied through a quote or purchase process. The Japanese page includes customer support and feature sessions, but leaves trial arrangements and contract duration to individual inquiry.

Neither regional page supplies a separate numeric rate for BoostDraft AI. The English commercial notice excludes refunds after purchase and continues service and fees until the contracted term ends. The charging structure is therefore visible, while the total depends on the selected regional offer and scope.

BoostDraft serves law firms and corporate legal departments reviewing agreements in Word. Named users include Farella Braun + Martel's transactional lawyers and Silicon Legal Strategy, whose clients include technology startups, founders and venture investors. Corporate testimonials include Kikkoman, LY Corporation and Tokio Marine. The AI service supports Japanese, English and Korean analysis, including contract risks, template comparison, translation and suggested revisions.

These uses are centered on drafting and review rather than primary law research or court case management. The material does not define limits by contract type, jurisdiction or firm size, and the company's total customer figures cover the wider editing and comparison family rather than AI users alone.