PromptSharp › Prompt Library › Law › Document-review protocol: a defensible plan before the review starts
Document-review protocol: a defensible plan before the review starts
A production is coming and volume is high. Draft a review protocol and privilege-log approach a supervising attorney can approve.
The prompt — copy and run it
You are a litigation attorney drafting a document-review protocol for a supervising lawyer's approval — a drafting aid, not legal advice. Produce: A) SCOPE + SEARCH — the responsiveness criteria and a proposed search-term/date/custodian approach from the parameters I gave you, with the terms most likely to be over- or under-inclusive flagged. B) CODING SCHEME — the review tags (responsive, privileged, confidential, hot) with a one-line test for each so coders are consistent. C) PRIVILEGE APPROACH — how to identify and log privileged material, and the fields a defensible privilege log needs. D) QC PLAN — the sampling and second-pass checks that keep the review defensible. Inputs: [MATTER + CLAIMS] · [DISCOVERY REQUESTS] · [CUSTODIANS + DATE RANGE] · [KNOWN PRIVILEGE ISSUES] Rules: Do not invent facts, custodians, or legal standards I didn't provide — mark assumptions. Anonymize matter details; keep privileged and confidential material out of consumer AI tools (ABA Formal Op. 512). This is a drafting aid, not legal advice; the supervising attorney approves the protocol and owns every privilege call. Verify anything uncertain against the source before relying on it.
How to use this prompt
- Copy the full prompt above with the Copy button.
- Fill in your inputs. Replace each bracketed placeholder with your specifics:
[MATTER + CLAIMS][DISCOVERY REQUESTS][CUSTODIANS + DATE RANGE][KNOWN PRIVILEGE ISSUES] - Paste into ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini and run. Read the reality guardrail below before you act on the output.
Why this prompt works
Review protocols get built ad hoc and become the thing opposing counsel attacks; a structured scope, coding scheme with per-tag tests, privilege approach, and QC plan produces a defensible, documented process — while the anonymize rule and assumptions-marked discipline keep it a drafting aid the supervising attorney owns, not a substitute for legal judgment.
Get a prompt like this every day
The PromptSharp Law Brief ships one desk-ready prompt every weekday — free on the web today. Free forever. Today's Law issue is live on the web right now — subscribe and we email you the sample issue immediately, then the Law daily every weekday as its email edition ships. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subscribe free → Read a sample issueFrequently asked
When should I use this prompt?
A production is coming and volume is high. Draft a review protocol and privilege-log approach a supervising attorney can approve.
Why does this prompt work?
Review protocols get built ad hoc and become the thing opposing counsel attacks; a structured scope, coding scheme with per-tag tests, privilege approach, and QC plan produces a defensible, documented process — while the anonymize rule and assumptions-marked discipline keep it a drafting aid the supervising attorney owns, not a substitute for legal judgment.
What mistake does this prompt help you avoid?
Ad-hoc, indefensible document review — a structured scope/coding/privilege/QC protocol with anonymization and marked assumptions.
Related Law prompts
Document-set chronology + hot-doc log: witness-ready timeline from anonymized excerpts
You have excerpts and summaries from a document production and need a working chronology, a hot-doc log, and the gap list — before…
Clause-by-clause contract review against YOUR playbook — deviation table + redlines
Opposing counsel sent a draft agreement. Run a first-pass review against your standard positions — deviations, missing protections…
Redline playbook check: compare a draft against your standard positions
A counterparty sent their paper. Flag where it deviates from your playbook and what to push back on — as a first pass for an attor…
Plain-English client update: what happened, what it means, what happens next
Something happened in the matter — a ruling, a continuance, a settlement offer. Draft the client update at the right reading level…
Client status letter: honest, plain-English, no over-promising
The client wants an update and you want it clear, honest, and defensible. Draft a status letter a partner would sign.…
Research memo skeleton: IRAC draft with a cite-verification table
You need a first-draft research memo on a discrete question tonight. Build the skeleton and the authority map — with a built-in ci…
New-matter intake triage: conflicts questions, scope, fee structure, engagement letter checklist
A prospective client just described their problem. Triage it before the intake call: what to ask, what the conflicts check must co…
All Law free prompts
The PromptSharp Law Brief page — five full free prompts plus today's issue.
PromptSharp Daily — free
The cross-vertical sampler: one sharp, copy-paste prompt each day, rotating across the roster. Two things in one brief: you get better at AI and prompting, and you see the sharpest prompts from across the network.
Double-opt-in. Unsubscribe anytime. No spam, ever.
Even a sharp prompt starts from zero unless your AI knows you. Brainfile is persistent context — your work, voice, and priorities loaded into every session. Brainfile is the memory; PromptSharp is the playbook. Together they compound — the same prompt gets sharper because it runs on YOUR context.
Set up your brainfile →Want both? The All-Access + Brainfile annual bundle covers the pair.
Home · Daily Issues · Prompt Library · Glossary · Pricing · For Teams & Universities · Archive · Newsletter · Privacy · Terms · Refunds
Marketing · Sales · Dev & Engineering · Finance · Product Management · Vibe Coding · C-suite · Consulting & Strategy · Law · CPG · Personal Finance · Career & Job Search · Trading · Health & Fitness · Students · Focus & Productivity · Learning · Travel Planning