A guided AI-assisted legal diagnostic for founders building AI generators, compliance tools, and automated document platforms.
The workroom runs your materials through attorney-designed prompts and GPT-powered analysis to produce a preliminary legal-risk map: where your marketing claims may overreach, where your Terms and disclaimers conflict with your sales copy, where users may rely on generated output in risky ways, and where safeguards appear to be missing.
Tap a question for an instant, free answer (no email needed), or describe your situation and the analyst routes you to the right next step. This is preliminary information, not legal advice.
Common questions, always free
This is the same layered way I read an AI product when a founder asks me to look at it before launch. The workroom mirrors these layers so the preliminary map is structured, not a wall of text.
What the product promises before purchase: headlines, taglines, feature bullets, outcome language. This is where most overpromising lives.
Terms of Service, disclaimers, refund policy, and limitation-of-liability language, and whether they actually back up the marketing.
What the user is asked, shown, warned about, and allowed to do inside the product before and during generation.
What the generated output itself implies: does it read like advice, a guarantee, or a finished legal or compliance document?
How users actually rely on the output in the real world, and where that reliance creates exposure if the output is wrong.
When a result should route to a human or to attorney review instead of being delivered as a finished answer.
What developers must actually change: copy edits, disclaimer placement, gating, logging, and human-review triggers.
The preliminary screen looks across nine recurring risk surfaces for AI products. Everything here is preliminary issue-spotting designed to tell you what to look at, not a sign-off that anything is fine.
If your AI ranks users, judges submissions, scores images, selects winners, or drives who gets a prize or a cash payout, you are not only in advertising-and-disclaimer territory. You may also be in promotion and skill-versus-chance territory, where the legal question is whether the contest is a lawful skill competition or an unlawful lottery in a given state. The classification depends on the exact mechanics, so this branch flags the issues to examine rather than reaching a conclusion.
Answer these to see whether the promotion layer applies to you
Whether the model looks like a brand promotion with a real free entry route, or like a dual-currency, casino-style "sweepstakes" app that the newer state bans (CA AB 831, NY S5935A) can reach, including the payment, geolocation, content, platform, and affiliate partners that support it. If this flag is on, ordinary advertising-and-disclaimer review is not enough. This is a flag for review, not a legal conclusion.
Whether the design reads more like a skill contest, a sweepstakes, or a setup that risks looking like a lottery, with the chance arguments and skill arguments that point each way. This is a flag for review, not a legal conclusion.
Publish the scoring rubric in advance, fix the model version, log the prompt, seed, model, and score, add a human appeal or tie-break, and run repeated rounds so skill can show. These can strengthen a skill argument; none of them guarantees a particular legal result.
What official rules, no-synthetic-testimonials language, AI-generated-entries terms, and state exclusions a payment processor or sponsor will typically expect before a paid-entry, real-prize contest goes live.
All three paths run through the same workroom below. Paste what you have; the more real text you include, the more specific the preliminary map.
Paste your public marketing claims and product description. The workroom returns a preliminary risk map and the top risk themes. Best for a quick read before you go deeper.
Run AI legal-risk triageAlso paste your Terms, disclaimers, refund policy, and a sample of generated output. The workroom adds Terms-versus-marketing conflict detection and output-reliance analysis.
Build preliminary safeguard packageUse the preliminary map to request a paid written review by Sergei Tokmakov, Esq. The map becomes the structured starting point for legal conclusions on your actual materials.
Prepare attorney-review packageThree example rows, before you paste anything. This is the shape of the issue-spotting: what was flagged, why it may matter, and a safer direction to consider. None of this is a legal conclusion; it is a prompt for review.
| Issue spotted | Why it matters | Safer approach |
|---|---|---|
| "OSHA compliant safety program" | May imply a guaranteed regulatory outcome the product cannot promise. | "Helps generate safety documentation based on user inputs." |
| "No lawyer needed" | Creates professional-advice reliance risk and a possible unauthorized-practice angle. | "Designed for self-serve drafting, with attorney review recommended for high-risk use." |
| TOS says "no guarantee," homepage says "guaranteed compliance" | Marketing and legal terms conflict, which weakens the disclaimer and invites dispute. | Align disclaimers and sales copy so the promise and the Terms say the same thing. |
Illustrative only. Your actual findings depend on the materials you paste, and any of them may be wrong for your specific facts until reviewed by an attorney.
Paste your real materials into the workspace. The left rail tracks what you have provided; the right rail shows which risk lenses your inputs activate. This version is paste-only; file upload is not available yet.
This workroom is built around the issue-spotting framework Sergei Tokmakov, Esq. uses when reviewing AI document generators, compliance tools, and regulated workflow products. The automated report is a preliminary triage tool. Legal conclusions require paid attorney review.
Once you run the preliminary risk map above, a counsel-style dashboard loads here: an executive risk map, the top risk themes, a preview of the claim-risk matrix, the recommended paid scope, and a panel describing what Sergei would review next. The full matrices, rewrites, and attorney-review package unlock by email or with a paid review.