AI Prompts for Lawyers: Billing Narratives, Client Intake, and Client Communications
Most lawyers who try AI start the same way: they open a blank chat box and improvise a prompt. The output reads plausibly, so it gets used — and that is exactly where the risk lives. The model fills gaps it should have flagged, invents a date or a deadline you never gave it, and quietly drops the anonymization discipline your professional obligations require. Random prompting produces confident-sounding first drafts that fail the one test that matters: did this come only from what I actually know about the matter?
A better approach treats AI the way you treat a capable junior: give it a tightly-scoped task, anonymize before anything is pasted, and review every word before it leaves your desk. The prompts below are built that way. They keep client names out of the model entirely — real names become [Client] and [Counterparty] placeholders, and rough notes stay in matter codes. They instruct the model to use only what is in your notes and to mark anything missing as "Not stated" rather than fabricate it. And they assume attorney review is non-negotiable: every output is a first draft, not work product.
The payoff is real time recovered on the highest-frequency, lowest-judgment parts of practice — billing, intake structuring, routine client email — without ceding the parts where your judgment is the whole point.
Work Task 1 — Time Entry and Billing Narratives
Clean up today's billing narratives
Paste a day's worth of rough, matter-coded time notes and get back clean, audit-ready billing narratives in the format your system expects. Because the notes stay in matter codes, the confidentiality call is already made — there's no legal judgment in the loop, just formatting.
Convert these rough time entries into professional billing narratives. Each entry should:
- Be 10–25 words
- Use active legal billing verbs (drafted, reviewed, conferred, analyzed, researched, prepared, attended, revised, corresponded)
- Be specific about the type of work without being verbose
- Omit filler phrases ("worked on," "spent time reviewing," "touched base")
- Use past tense, third-person-neutral style
- Match the format: [Client/Matter Code] | [Time] | [Billing Narrative]
My rough notes for [DATE]:
[PASTE YOUR RAW NOTES HERE]
Example format I want:
Matter-A | 1.0 hr | Reviewed and annotated non-disclosure agreement; identified three non-standard limitation provisions for client discussion.
Matter-B | 0.5 hr | Conferred with client regarding upcoming deposition schedule and document production timeline.
Work Task 2 — Client Intake & Matter Triage
Turn intake notes into a matter-triage memo
Turn anonymized notes from an initial consultation into a clean, structured triage memo — matter classification, conflict-check data, key facts, next steps, and engagement inputs. The prompt is built to extract, not invent: anything you didn't state comes back as "Not stated," which becomes your follow-up agenda.
You are an experienced legal intake specialist turning notes from an initial client consultation into a clean matter-triage memo. The notes are anonymized — the client is [Client], the opposing party [Counterparty]. Keep those placeholders exactly as written; do not substitute real names.
Use ONLY what is in my notes. Do not infer facts, parties, deadlines, fees, or scope I did not state. Where a field is not addressed, write "Not stated" — a missing field is a follow-up item, not something to fill in.
Practice area: [estate planning / business / real estate / family / employment / other]
Consultation notes:
[PASTE YOUR INTAKE NOTES — ANONYMIZED]
Produce exactly these five sections:
1. MATTER CLASSIFICATION
- Matter type: litigation / transactional / advisory / other
- Practice area
- Urgency: deadline within 30 days / 30–90 days / no hard deadline
- Complexity: simple / moderate / complex
- Matter value or fee range (only if I mentioned it; else "Not stated")
2. CONFLICT CHECK DATA — names only, for me to run against my firm database
- All parties, related entities, and adverse parties mentioned
- Any attorneys or firms mentioned
3. KEY FACTS — 5–8 bullets: who, what, when, where, what they want
4. NEXT STEPS — commitments I made and what the client expects
5. ENGAGEMENT INPUTS — scope as discussed, fee structure (hourly / flat / retainer / contingency), special conditions, and conflict check needed: yes / no / unclear
Mark anything you read between the lines on "(inferred — verify)". End with one line: "To confirm before opening: …" listing every Not stated and (inferred) item.
Work Task 3 — First-Draft Client Communications
Draft a client status update email
Draft a clear, appropriately-toned status update from the facts you supply — no client name, no case identifiers, no invented developments. The prompt forces a fact-only floor: anything you didn't give it comes back as "Not stated," and you verify everything against the file before adding the client's name and sending.
You are an experienced attorney drafting a routine status update to a client. Draft a client status update email for a [matter type] matter. I will add the client's name and specific details after review.
Use ONLY the facts I provide below. Do not invent, infer, or upgrade the status, a date, or a development I did not state; if a detail is missing, write "Not stated" rather than filling it in. I will verify everything against the actual file before sending.
Context:
- Where we are in the matter: [current stage — e.g., "discovery phase," "awaiting counterparty response to offer"]
- What happened recently: [recent developments — anonymized]
- What comes next: [next steps and approximate timeline]
- Client action required: [yes — describe / no]
- Tone needed: [reassuring / informative / urgent — pick one]
Requirements:
- 150–250 words
- Plain language — client is not a lawyer
- Be concrete about the recent development I gave you — not "there has been activity in your matter" but, e.g., "opposing counsel responded to our discovery requests on [date]"
- Do not include any specific legal advice, outcome predictions, or guarantee language
- End with a clear next step or an invitation to call with questions
- Do not include client name or case-specific identifiers — I will add those
Sign off as: [Your name], [Firm name]
See it work — before → after
Work Task 2 — Client Intake & Matter Triage
Before
"Notes from intake call — [Client] wants to buy a business, maybe franchise, has some money, asked about timeline, spouse is a co-owner, they have a prior deal that went bad."
After
Structured memo: [Client] (individual + spouse co-owner), matter type (acquisition — franchise), prior transaction flag raised (potential conflict or warranty issue), conflict check items: 6 parties listed, 3 documents requested, fee structure: hourly with initial retainer, next steps: NDA review, APA first draft timeline quoted.