T
Thomson Reuters Document Intelligence

Thomson Reuters Document Intelligence is contract analysis software that reads, sorts and extracts provisions from large sets of agreements. It is sold to law firms, to in house counsel and legal operations teams, and to corporate contract and asset management teams, with a dedicated offer for renewable energy. It began as ThoughtTrace, which Thomson Reuters acquired in 2022, and the application still runs at app.thoughttrace.com.

Its extraction models were pretrained by Practical Law attorney editors, who spent more than 15,000 hours building and training them in six months. They identify thousands of provisions across a suite of domain specific models, including more than 450 for wind and solar agreements. Users look across thousands of documents by meaning and context, bulk upload and auto label files, set reminders for obligations and renewals, build dashboards, and connect other systems through a low code workflow builder.

A Microsoft Word add in compares a draft against a standard template and applies clause playbooks with fallback language. Extracted provisions also feed HighQ's AI Hub and iSheets for customers holding both products. Its section of Thomson Reuters' Legal Product Specific Terms lets Thomson Reuters train its products on customer data, and prices are not published.

Compared with

Thomson Reuters Document Intelligence, head to head

Side by side on the same 15 capability axes and 12 legal signals: where the two part company, and what neither one publishes.

Build your own comparison

Capability grades

All 15 axes, graded from public sources on the date shown. Hover a grade to see what the letter means on that axis.

BB on AI CentralityThe models are the engine of a core capability, layered on a product that would still function without them as a document or workflow system.

AI Centrality

How much of the product is actually AI. Whether the machine learning is the mechanism the buyer is paying for or a feature layered onto conventional software, and whether the vendor is specific about which is which.

Document Intelligence is a contract repository and analysis platform built around pretrained extraction models. The models identify thousands of provisions across a suite of domain specific models, from dates, obligations and payment details in commercial contracts to curtailment rights, production guarantees and take and pay clauses in wind and solar agreements. They return results as structured fields that HighQ's help pages call Thoughts, the extracted provisions and sub provisions.

The same models drive retrieval by meaning, intent and context across thousands of documents, automatic labeling of document types on bulk upload, and the AI generated table of extracted contents in the Word add in. Around the models sit features that work without them. These include relational libraries in place of folders, shared bookmarks of saved results, notifications and calendar reminders, dashboards, playbooks with preferred and fallback language, and a low code and no code workflow builder. Thomson Reuters markets no generative drafting, chat or summarization feature for Document Intelligence.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on Citation Accuracy and Hallucination DisclosureAccuracy is asserted without measurement, or grounding is claimed while output cites sources the reader cannot open and verify.

Citation Accuracy and Hallucination Disclosure

Whether the vendor publishes measured accuracy on citations and assertions, grounds output to primary sources, and says plainly what its system does when it does not know. Legal has a documented public record of fabricated citations reaching filed briefs, so an untested claim of accuracy is not evidence.

Document Intelligence extracts provisions from the customer's own contracts, so its output points to text in documents the customer holds rather than to legal authority. Thomson Reuters publishes no precision, recall or error figure for its extraction models and describes no test set. The product page promises truly accurate results based on the context and intent of the text. The April 2023 launch release quotes Thomson Reuters' chief product officer for legal technology saying automated review improves accuracy, with no measurement behind either claim.

The 50 percent figure Thomson Reuters cites measures faster retrieval and review against manual methods, not accuracy, and the features page says contextual retrieval ensures nothing important is overlooked. Editor users can edit and confirm extracted provisions under section 5.2.2 of the Legal Product Specific Terms, and fields shown in HighQ are limited to those defined in the Document Intelligence application. The Thomson Reuters General Terms of September 2026 call AI output probabilistic and say it may at times be incomplete, inaccurate, out of date or biased.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Autonomy and Oversight ModelA written commitment that the models work alongside a supervising lawyer, with real review surfaces, short of the full control structure: commonly the threshold at which the system stops or what happens after it is wrong.

Autonomy and Oversight Model

What the system decides on its own, what a lawyer must approve, and whether the vendor documents where the review point sits. A tool that drafts under review and a tool that files without one are different products and different risks.

Extraction runs on documents a user uploads or a HighQ site sends, and results flow into the library, dashboards, notifications and, for HighQ customers, AI Hub and iSheets. The Legal Product Specific Terms split users into Editor users, who upload and delete documents, create and modify tags and attributes, and edit and confirm provisions, and Viewer users, who have read only access. Section 3.3 of the General Terms of September 2026 says output must be reviewed by a licensed professional or someone with the right credentials before reliance, use or distribution.

It makes the customer solely responsible for verifying the accuracy and legality of output. Thomson Reuters' AI Usage Policy of January 2026 bars using AI output for automated decision making, or as a substantial factor in decisions with legal or similarly significant effects, without that review. Playbooks in the Word add in carry escalation contacts for clauses outside approved positions. Thomson Reuters publishes no setting that holds extracted provisions for confirmation before they feed alerts or dashboards, and no point at which the system hands a document back to a person.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Operational and Outcome EvidenceReal deployment evidence with substance, short of full attribution or measurement: a named customer without figures, or figures without the named customer.

Operational and Outcome Evidence

Named, dated evidence that the product works in production at real firms or legal departments. Case studies with figures and identified customers count. Unattributed testimonials and launch announcements do not.

Tim Custer, a senior vice president at Apache, is quoted on the product page saying work that would have taken a team days, weeks or months now takes minutes and hours, with no figure and no date. A 2022 customer infographic carries anonymous quotes reporting a project cut from two years to two months and a consent to assign clause found in two minutes after a month of manual review. Others report work of 20 to 25 days done in a few days and a $4 million find.

The corporate legal page quotes an unnamed M&A general counsel on saving hundreds of hours of manual review. Thomson Reuters says customers have cut information retrieval and review time by more than 50 percent against manual methods, a figure first published in the April 2023 launch release. It also says the models received more than 15,000 hours of training and maintenance in the second half of 2022. No figure is tied to a named customer or comes with a method, and the newest dated customer material is from 2023.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on Privilege and Confidentiality PostureConfidentiality is asserted in general terms, or the commitment lives only in a sales conversation and cannot be read in advance.

Privilege and Confidentiality Posture

How client confidences are handled: attorney client privilege and work product treatment, segregation of one client matter from another, whether client data trains any model, and what the vendor commits to in writing rather than in marketing.

Section 5.4 of Thomson Reuters' Legal Product Specific Terms, version 1.0 of July 2026, lets Thomson Reuters use, store, copy, share, transfer and process customer data to provide Document Intelligence. Given the machine learning nature of the service, it may also use customer data to train, update, modify and adapt its products. The resulting Machine Learning Adaptions belong solely to Thomson Reuters, and the customer grants a royalty free, irrevocable and perpetual license to its data to secure those rights.

Deidentified data Thomson Reuters collects or generates is its sole property, and the customer may have no access to it. The General Terms bar training of generative models and large language models on customer data, and the Legal AI Product Specific Terms bar training of generative or foundational models. Both rank below the Legal Product Specific Terms, and both address generative models, while Document Intelligence runs extraction models.

The General Terms treat customer data as confidential information during the term and for five years after it ends. Privilege, work product and separation between clients or matters go unaddressed.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on UPL and Professional Responsibility PostureA real position is published on advice versus tooling, short of full treatment: commonly a disclaimer without the supervision and competence dimension, or silence on jurisdiction limits.

UPL and Professional Responsibility Posture

Whether the vendor is clear that it supplies a tool rather than legal advice, who its audience is, and how it addresses unauthorized practice of law, competence and supervision duties, and jurisdiction limits. ABA Formal Opinion 512 is the reference point. Where the advice line is not the duty a product raises, the axis is read through the nearest professional duty it does raise: judicial conduct rules and the reviewing duty for products sold only to courts, and the duty to bill for time actually spent for products that draft time entries.

Section 14.3 of the Thomson Reuters General Terms, version 6.0 of September 2026, says Thomson Reuters provides its services for informational purposes and not as legal, financial, tax, accounting, compliance or other professional advice. Section 3.3 requires output to be reviewed by a licensed professional, or someone with the right credentials, before reliance, use or distribution. The AI Usage Policy of January 2026 bars using AI output to assist in giving legal advice unless such a professional reviews it first, and bars presenting output as solely human generated.

Document Intelligence's marketing invites law firms and in house teams to advise with confidence. It also sells to buyers outside the legal function, including corporate asset management teams, contract managers and renewable energy developers, owner operators and investors, with no separate disclosure for them. Nothing in Document Intelligence material addresses competence or supervision duties, and jurisdiction limits are unstated.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on AI Governance and Bias DisclosureA published governance framework with real substance, short of testing results or a named owner.

AI Governance and Bias Disclosure

Published governance over model behavior: who owns it inside the vendor, what is tested before release, and what is disclosed about disparate output across matter types, parties, or populations.

Thomson Reuters publishes data and AI ethics principles, including commitments to strive to keep human involvement in its AI products and to treat people fairly. Its Data and AI Governance and Security Program whitepaper of March 2025 places governance with a Responsible AI and Data Trust team. It requires AI models used for a business purpose to be registered in a central Responsible AI and Product Compliance Hub. It also runs data impact assessments and model risk assessments, with ethics controls covering human oversight, fairness and automated decisions.

Section 3.2 of the General Terms commits Thomson Reuters to policies on bias, accuracy, explainability, transparency and human oversight in developing its AI. Practical Law attorney editors build, train and maintain the Document Intelligence models. Thomson Reuters' ISO/IEC 42001 certificate, valid from August 2026 to March 2028, covers Westlaw, CoCounsel Essentials, CoCounsel Tax, Audit and Accounting, CLEAR Investigate and Practical Law, and does not cover Document Intelligence. No testing result, bias finding or named owner is published for these models.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on AI Safety and Data StewardshipSubstantive published policy covering most of the ground, short of the full set: commonly no named subprocessor list or no stated incident practice.

AI Safety and Data Stewardship

Retention, deletion, access control, and what happens to prompts and documents after they are processed. Whether the vendor states its subprocessors and its incident practice, or leaves the buyer to assume.

Thomson Reuters' Data Security Addendum, version 2.0 of November 2023, commits to notify the customer of a security breach without undue delay and within 72 hours of discovery, followed by a root cause analysis. Customer data is encrypted at AES 256 in transit and at rest, and user credentials are never stored in clear text. The Data Processing Addendum, version 3 effective February 2025, deletes customer personal data on request, except where law or Thomson Reuters' retention policies require it to be kept.

Data kept on those grounds is isolated from further active processing. It points to subprocessor lists on Thomson Reuters' web pages, where product lists exist for Casetext, CoCounsel Core and Practical Law and none for Document Intelligence. The enterprise wide list of January 2022 names 20 providers, among them Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, Pendo and Salesforce. Editor users can delete documents, and customer data may pass to Thomson Reuters' service providers and to partners the customer enables. No retention period for documents or extracted provisions is published.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on AI Liability and RecourseA real published position on liability, short of the full picture: commonly a stated indemnity without scope or caps.

AI Liability and Recourse

What the vendor stands behind contractually when its output is wrong. Indemnities, caps, carve outs, insurance, and whether any of it is published or only reachable through a negotiated agreement.

The Thomson Reuters General Terms, version 6.0 of September 2026, cap each party's yearly liability at the amount payable for the affected service in the 12 months before the first event giving rise to the claim. In the first year the cap is 12 times the average monthly charge. Breaches of confidentiality, data protection or information security obligations carry a cap of twice that amount. Lost profits, revenue, goodwill and indirect, consequential and punitive damages are excluded.

Section 3.2 says Thomson Reuters is not liable for the accuracy, legality or reliability of any output, or for decisions taken on it. Thomson Reuters defends the customer against third party intellectual property claims about the services, excluding combinations with customer data and unauthorized changes. It warrants that the services conform in all material respects to the documentation, with repair, modification or replacement as the remedy and termination if that fails. No indemnity or warranty covers extracted provisions, and no insurance is stated.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Practice Systems Integration DepthReal integrations exist and are documented, short of depth: named connections without a description of what they actually move.

Practice Systems Integration Depth

How deeply the product reaches into the systems legal work already lives in: document management such as iManage and NetDocuments, Word and Outlook, contract lifecycle management, matter management, e-billing, and court filing systems.

Document Intelligence connects to HighQ through the HighQ AI Hub, set out step by step in HighQ's help pages. A HighQ system administrator enters a client ID, secret token and application URL generated under API clients in Document Intelligence, over the API at api.thoughttrace.com. Files sent from HighQ come back as Thoughts, the extracted provisions and sub provisions, and Facts, the metadata users assert, in AI Hub and iSheets.

The customer must hold both products, each Document Intelligence workspace connects to one HighQ instance, HighQ's IP addresses must be allowed by Document Intelligence support, and HighQ fields are limited to those defined in Document Intelligence. A Microsoft Word add in compares drafts against a standard template, applies playbooks and alerts on redlines and comments. A low code and no code workflow builder, embedded from Workato under Thomson Reuters' third party terms, offers prebuilt connectors to common systems that are not named. No connection to iManage, NetDocuments, SharePoint or Salesforce is described.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on Deployment Model and Data ResidencyCloud delivery is implied and neither the tenancy model nor the region is stated.

Deployment Model and Data Residency

Where the software runs and where the data sits. Multi tenant cloud, single tenant, private deployment, on premises, and whether region of residence is a published option or an enterprise conversation.

Document Intelligence is delivered as software as a service from app.thoughttrace.com, the ThoughtTrace domain it kept after the 2022 acquisition. HighQ's help pages give app.thoughttrace.com/myworkspace as an example application address, one per Document Intelligence workspace, and api.thoughttrace.com as the API address. Thomson Reuters publishes no hosting provider, region, tenancy model or residency option for Document Intelligence.

Its Data Processing Addendum covers international transfers of personal data across Thomson Reuters services under applicable data protection law, with separate terms for European personal data. Files a HighQ customer sends for processing leave HighQ for the Document Intelligence application, whatever region the HighQ instance runs in. No on premises or private cloud option is described, and where extraction runs, as distinct from where documents are stored, is unstated.

Source: Vendor Published
DD on Security Certifications and Trust CenterNo independent security attestation located.

Security Certifications and Trust Center

Independent attestation a buyer can pull without a sales call: SOC 2, ISO 27001, penetration test summaries, a trust center with current reports and named scope rather than a badge image.

Thomson Reuters' trust center publishes security profiles for CoCounsel, HighQ, Practical Law and other legal products, and none for Document Intelligence. Its ISO/IEC 27001 certificate, CERT 001130 issued by MSECB and valid to October 2028, lists products in scope by site, including HighQ, CoCounsel and Contract Express, and does not list Document Intelligence or ThoughtTrace. The ISO/IEC 42001 certificate, CERT 002034, valid to March 2028, also leaves it out, and no SOC 2 report is stated for the product.

Section 3.2 of the Data Security Addendum lets a customer review an executive summary of any independent assessment or certification Thomson Reuters makes available for a service, and section 3.1 allows one security questionnaire a year. Section 2.9 says Thomson Reuters or a third party it appoints may periodically run penetration tests, with a summary of the results available on written request. Systems are monitored for threats and vulnerabilities on an ongoing basis.

Source: Operator Verified
BB on Model Supply Chain DisclosureThe supply chain is partly disclosed: providers named without change notification, or architecture described without the providers.

Model Supply Chain Disclosure

Which models sit underneath, whose they are, where they run, and whether the vendor commits to telling customers when that changes. A legal buyer inherits every dependency it cannot see.

Document Intelligence runs on Thomson Reuters' own extraction models, described as a suite of domain specific models pretrained by Practical Law attorney editors and maintained by Thomson Reuters with no upkeep from the customer. Thomson Reuters says the editors spent more than 15,000 hours building and training them in six months, and that it continues to grow and scale its model training. No third party model provider, large language model or model version is named for Document Intelligence.

Thomson Reuters' generative AI third party terms page lists Amazon Web Services, Anthropic, Google, Microsoft and OpenAI across its portfolio without tying any of them to this product. Where the models run is unstated. Section 5.4 of the Legal Product Specific Terms lets Thomson Reuters update, modify and adapt the models with customer data, and nothing commits it to tell customers when a model changes.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on Commercial TransparencyPricing is gated behind a demo request while tier names and feature splits are published, so the shape is visible and the number is not.

Commercial Transparency

Whether a buyer can learn what this costs without entering a sales process: published rates, the unit being charged, what sits behind an enterprise tier, and what implementation adds.

Thomson Reuters publishes no price for Document Intelligence. Buying runs through a free demo request, a contact form and a sales phone line, and a representative replies within one business day. The Legal Product Specific Terms say the scope and parameters of users are set in the ordering document and define two user types, Editor users and Viewer users, which sets the shape of the subscription without a figure. No tiers, modules or add on prices are named.

The HighQ integration requires a Document Intelligence subscription alongside HighQ, and the Workato connectors run under Workato's embedded terms. SoftwareOne's software marketplace lists Document Intelligence with Thomson Reuters as vendor and no price. No implementation or training fee is stated, although Thomson Reuters runs product training and support for Document Intelligence customers.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Firm and Practice CoverageSegment and practice coverage is described with substance, short of the boundaries: what is supported is clear, what is not is left open.

Firm and Practice Coverage

Who the product is actually built for. AmLaw, midlaw, small firm and solo, in house departments, government and courts, and which practice areas are supported rather than merely claimed.

Document Intelligence names three buyer groups, law firms, in house counsel and legal operations, and corporates from energy to finance, including asset management teams and contract managers. Thomson Reuters runs a dedicated page for corporate legal departments and one for renewable energy. The renewable energy page lists power purchase agreements, interconnection agreements, operations and maintenance contracts, and site leases and option agreements.

It counts more than 450 out of the box provisions for wind and solar agreements, from curtailment rights to forecasting requirements. M&A due diligence is the lead law firm use, the subject of the April 2023 launch release, alongside commercial contract review and drafting in Word. The demo forms take law firms by size, corporate legal departments, financial institutions, other businesses and government. Languages, jurisdictions and contract types outside commercial and energy agreements are not stated.

Source: Vendor Published
Sources on file

8 public documents

The public pages on file for Thomson Reuters Document Intelligence, with the recorded signals each one supports and the date it was last read. Open any of them and check the reading against the record.

Legal Signals

What each signal means

A signal records what public sources say on the date shown. It is not a grade and it is not a recommendation. Where a signal reads Not addressed, it means the index did not locate the material in public sources on that date, which is a statement about disclosure rather than about the product.

Confidentiality and Privilege

Client Data in Training

Can material a lawyer puts into this product be used to train a model?

Permitted, in the contract

The published agreement expressly reserves a right to train on customer content, with no opt out located. Any de identification, anonymization or aggregation qualifier is recorded in the summary.

Section 5.4 of Thomson Reuters' Legal Product Specific Terms, version 1.0 last modified in July 2026, applies to Document Intelligence subscribers. Given the machine learning nature of the service, Thomson Reuters may use customer data to train, update, modify and adapt its products, and the resulting Machine Learning Adaptions are solely Thomson Reuters property. The customer grants a royalty free, non exclusive, irrevocable and perpetual license to its data to secure those rights, and deidentified data belongs to Thomson Reuters.

No opt out is offered. The General Terms and the Legal AI Product Specific Terms bar training of generative or foundational models and large language models on customer data, and both sit below the Legal Product Specific Terms in its order of precedence.

Source: Vendor Publishedmay use Customer Data to train, update, modify, and adapt its productsAs of Oct 10, 2026Evidence

Prompt and Output Retention

How long does the product keep what a lawyer typed, and can that be set to zero?

Disclosed without a period

Retention is acknowledged in public materials with no stated period.

Section 3.6 of the Thomson Reuters Data Processing Addendum, version 3 effective February 2025, deletes customer personal data on request, except where law or Thomson Reuters' data retention policies require it to be kept. Retained data is isolated and protected from further active processing. Editor users can delete documents in Document Intelligence, and no retention period is published for documents, extracted provisions, facts users assert or backups.

Under the Legal Product Specific Terms the license to customer data that secures Thomson Reuters' Machine Learning Adaptions is perpetual and irrevocable, and deidentified data stays with Thomson Reuters. The Data Security Addendum adds encryption at AES 256 in transit and at rest.

Source: Vendor Publishedrequired to retain such data by law or its data retention policiesAs of Oct 10, 2026Evidence

Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation

Does retrieval respect the firm’s ethical walls, or can the model read across them?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses walls or matter level segregation.

The Legal Product Specific Terms define two user roles for Document Intelligence. Editor users upload and delete documents, manage tags and attributes and edit and confirm provisions, and Viewer users have read only access, with the customer administering accounts. Relational libraries group documents without folders, and bookmarks of saved results can be shared with other users. Each Document Intelligence workspace connects to a single HighQ instance, where HighQ's own site and folder permissions govern who sees returned provisions.

No ethical wall, information barrier or restriction by matter or client is described for Document Intelligence, and nothing says whether access follows the permissions of a document management system.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Oct 10, 2026

Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice

If someone subpoenas the vendor for a firm’s data, does the firm hear about it first?

Notice committed

Terms commit to notice where lawfully permitted. No transparency report located.

Section 13.2 of the Thomson Reuters General Terms, version 6.0 of September 2026, lets either party disclose confidential information when required by law, regulation, subpoena or court order. Where legally permitted, the disclosing party must first give the other prior notice and reasonable assistance to contest or limit the disclosure. Section 1.3 names customer data as confidential information. Section 3.4 of the Data Processing Addendum refers requests and complaints from regulators about customer personal data to the customer, to the extent permissible.

No transparency report is published, and the Data Security Addendum commits to notify a security breach within 72 hours.

Source: Vendor Publishedgives the Disclosing Party prior notice and reasonable assistance to contestAs of Oct 10, 2026Evidence
Accuracy and Authority

Primary Law Corpus Provenance

Where does the law in this product come from, and does the vendor have the right to use it?

Sources named, basis unstated

Sources are identified without stating the license or rights basis.

Document Intelligence's answers come from the customer's own contracts, extracted by models that Practical Law attorney editors built, trained and maintain. Thomson Reuters says the editors devoted more than 15,000 hours to training and maintaining the models in the second half of 2022. It markets the result as AI powered by Practical Law, its own content service with more than 650 attorney editors. The documents the models learned from, and the rights basis for them, are not described.

Playbooks in the Word add in hold the customer's approved clause positions. Section 5.4 of the Legal Product Specific Terms adds customer data to the material Thomson Reuters may use to adapt its products.

Source: Vendor PublishedPractical Law editors, who dedicated 15,000+ hours to build and train the AIAs of Oct 10, 2026Evidence

Good Law Verification

Does the product tell you when the authority it just cited has been overruled?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses whether authority is checked for subsequent history.

Document Intelligence extracts provisions and data from contracts and does not cite case law or legislation, so the subsequent history of legal authority sits outside the product. Thomson Reuters' citator, KeyCite, belongs to Westlaw and CoCounsel, and no Document Intelligence material connects it to extracted provisions. Playbooks in the Word add in compare clauses with the customer's approved language rather than with authority.

Nothing describes how a provision tied to a repealed rule, a changed regulation or an outdated market position is flagged.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Oct 10, 2026

Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior

What does the product do when the answer is not in the corpus?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses what the product does when it cannot ground an answer.

Thomson Reuters publishes nothing on what Document Intelligence shows when a provision is missing from a contract or the models cannot place it, and no confidence indicator is described. Editor users can edit and confirm provisions under the Legal Product Specific Terms, which gives a manual correction path, and HighQ fields carry only what Document Intelligence returns. The General Terms say AI output may at times be incomplete, inaccurate, out of date or biased, and that it must be reviewed by a licensed professional or someone with the right credentials before reliance. Marketing promises that contextual retrieval ensures nothing important is overlooked.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Oct 10, 2026

Fabricated Citation Record

Does a public court record exist addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations in output from this product?

None located

No court order, opinion or disciplinary record addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations produced by this product has been located as of the date shown. This is a statement about the public record on that one subject, not a finding about the product, and this signal is not a litigation history.

The AI Hallucination Cases database maintained by Damien Charlotin, which records court decisions worldwide that address hallucinated AI content and the tool involved where known, has no entry naming Document Intelligence or ThoughtTrace. Document Intelligence extracts provisions from contracts and does not draft court filings or cite authority.

Source: Bar Guidance or Court RecordAs of Oct 10, 2026Evidence
Professional Responsibility

Bar Guidance Alignment

Has the vendor engaged in public with the ethics opinions its buyers are bound by?

Generic reference

Public materials refer to professional responsibility in general terms without naming guidance.

Thomson Reuters' AI Usage Policy of January 2026 bars using AI output to assist in legal advice, or as a substantial factor in decisions with legal effects, without prior review. The reviewer must be a licensed professional or someone with the right credentials. It also bars presenting output as solely human generated. The General Terms say the services are not legal advice and leave verification of output with the customer.

No bar opinion, ethics rule or professional conduct guidance is named in Document Intelligence material, including for law firms using it on client due diligence. Thomson Reuters' AI principles commit in general terms to human involvement and fair treatment.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 10, 2026Evidence

Billing and Fee Posture

Does the vendor address what happens to the bill when the work takes an hour instead of six?

Savings claims only

Public materials claim time savings without addressing billing or disclosure, and the product sits inside a fee relationship between a lawyer and a client where those savings would change the bill.

Document Intelligence's pitch to law firms promises to reduce unbillable hours, and the April 2023 launch release says pretrained models matter to firms because training AI models is nonbillable work. Customers are said to cut retrieval and review time by more than 50 percent, and the corporate legal page quotes an M&A general counsel on saving hundreds of hours. Due diligence for a deal, the lead law firm use, is work billed to clients, and no Document Intelligence material addresses how AI assisted review is recorded, billed or disclosed to the client. In house and corporate buyers sit outside a fee relationship, while law firm use sits inside one.

Source: Vendor PublishedReduce your unbillable hours by leaning on technology.As of Oct 10, 2026Evidence

Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness

Can a firm get this vendor through a client’s AI clause without a bespoke negotiation?

On request only

The material exists behind a sales conversation or an executed agreement.

Thomson Reuters' Data Processing Addendum and Data Security Addendum can be read without an agreement, and the processing addendum points to subprocessor lists on Thomson Reuters' web pages. Those pages carry lists for Casetext, CoCounsel Core and Practical Law and none for Document Intelligence, and the enterprise wide list dates from January 2022. No model provider is named for Document Intelligence, and the trust center has no Document Intelligence profile.

Under section 3.1 of the Data Security Addendum a customer may ask once a year for a completed security questionnaire, and under section 3.2 may review executive summaries of independent assessments where they exist. The Legal Product Specific Terms let Thomson Reuters pass customer data to its service providers and to partners the customer enables.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 10, 2026Evidence

Court Disclosure Support

If a judge’s standing order requires an AI disclosure, can the product produce one?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses court disclosure or verification certification.

Document Intelligence produces extracted provisions, dashboards and alerts from contracts rather than court filings. Editor users confirm provisions, and bookmarks save result sets that update as contracts are added, but no audit log, record of the model used or export showing how a provision was produced is described. HighQ customers receive Thoughts and Facts in iSheets, where HighQ's own audit logs apply. Thomson Reuters publishes no disclosure template or guidance on certifying AI assisted review, including for due diligence findings that reach deal documents or disputes.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Oct 10, 2026
Contact

Correct a record, or ask how something was graded

Every grade and every signal on this index is drawn from public sources and dated. If a record is wrong, out of date, or missing an artifact the index did not locate, send the source and it will be reviewed and the record redated. Vendors are welcome to submit documentation. Nothing on this index is for sale, including a listing, a placement, or a grade.

AI Legal Index

The AI Legal Index is an independent index that tracks changes to AI vendors in legal. It holds 303 vendors across 9 categories, each graded on the same 15 capability axes and recorded against 12 legal signals, from public sources. No vendor pays for inclusion, placement, or rating.

Index Status
Last index update
October 10, 2026
The AI Legal Index is an editorial reference. It is not a regulatory body, not a law firm, and nothing published here is legal advice or a recommendation to retain or avoid a vendor. Records are verified against published sources, bar guidance and public court records. Where a record reads not addressed, the material was not located in public sources on the date shown. See the Methodology page for evaluation standards and limitations.
© 2026 AI Legal Index
3801 N Capital of Texas Hwy, Ste E240 · Austin, TX 78746