Does the tool replace lawyers' review?

No. Lawyers still review everything; the firm says anything delivered to a client must be stood behind 100%, so the tool lets them check interim summaries and source documents.

How was the tool tested?

Lawyers compared test outputs with human-authored diligence reports from completed deals, then refined the rubric and report format based on the gaps.

What other AI does the firm use?

Alongside its proprietary diligence tool, Ropes & Gray cites GPT‑6 Astra as among the tools helping it solve client problems faster.

Large Language ModelsAI Business & IndustryOpenAI Blog4h agoOct 30, 2026, 04:00 JST

Ropes & Gray builds AI diligence tool with OpenAI

Send on LINE

3 Key Points

What happened
Ropes & Gray developed a transactional diligence tool with OpenAI that inventories a data room, groups documents by themes, and drafts a report in the firm's own format.
Why it matters
Partners describe its output as comparable to a capable junior-to-mid-level associate, leaving lawyers to review and make the judgments clients actually pay for.

WHO IT HITSLaw firm associates and partners handling deal diligence stand to shift from contract review toward reviewing and refining AI first drafts; Ropes & Gray says lawyers still check everything before delivery.

Not sure about something? Ask the AI

Questions and answers are published on this page.

Summaries like this, every morning.

Get these free every morning

Context & Analysis

Ropes & Gray frames the tool as a response to a specific bottleneck: transactional diligence is data-heavy, pulls in an entire team of lawyers, and can take days of intensive work when a bid is on a short timeline. The design mirrors the firm's own process—initial reviews, summaries, then higher-level review—rather than inventing a new one.

The testing method is notable. Rather than judging drafts in isolation, the firm compared them against human-authored reports from completed deals and adjusted the rubric and format where the drafts fell short. Lichtenstein's point that clients pay for judgments, not contract review, explains why the tool is built to let lawyers inspect groupings and interim summaries rather than skip them.

Two lessons the partners draw are to experiment broadly and to keep clients first. Glazer's stated next step points inward: using AI to create collective knowledge from client meetings and past projects across 340 partners and 1500 lawyers, which he describes as creating value directly rather than just saving time or money.

FAQ

Does the tool replace lawyers' review?: No. Lawyers still review everything; the firm says anything delivered to a client must be stood behind 100%, so the tool lets them check interim summaries and source documents.
How was the tool tested?: Lawyers compared test outputs with human-authored diligence reports from completed deals, then refined the rubric and report format based on the gaps.
What other AI does the firm use?: Alongside its proprietary diligence tool, Ropes & Gray cites GPT‑6 Astra as among the tools helping it solve client problems faster.

OpenAI BlogRead Original Article

Send on LINE

AI news that matters for your work, delivered every morning.

Pick your industry and the AI tools you use, and get news related to your work every day.

Get it free

Free · 30 seconds with Google · unsubscribe anytimeWhat is AIToday? →

Ask AI

Ask AI anything about this article. The AI reads this article, earlier AIToday articles, and Wikipedia, and cites its sources. Q&As are published on this page for other readers too.