In one sentence
A finished letter is not the end of the matter here but its middle: once it has been generated, a five-step process leads from the draft through dispatch and the deadline to the analysis of the reply — and it ticks off only what there is a genuine signal for.
The letter is not the result
Tools that generate legal letters mostly stop at the PDF. That ends in the wrong place: whether a claim succeeds is rarely decided by the draft. It is decided by whether the letter actually goes out, whether the deadline it names stays in view, and what happens with the reply that comes back — or fails to come. Precisely these three steps used to fall out of the tool and into your head.
The page after generating therefore now carries a card headed “And now? From draft to reply”. It replaces a row of equally ranked buttons with an order. How a letter is produced is unchanged and described in the help article on it.
Five steps, in the order in which they arise
- Check the addressee and the enclosures — the last look before anything leaves the house.
- Download and send — the document in the form you need.
- Mark as sent — the moment from which the platform can start counting.
- Keep the deadline in view — this step appears only if the letter names a deadline at all. If there is none, nothing appears there either.
- Reply received? — the return channel: you upload the other side’s reaction and have it classified.
Why only two of these steps get a tick
That is the actual design decision, and it went against the comfortable option. It would have been easy to tick off every step as soon as you had clicked it — filled progress bars look like control. Only the platform does not know at all whether you really posted the letter after downloading it. A tick at that point would be an assertion about your world that we cannot substantiate.
What is ticked off is therefore exclusively what there is a genuine signal for: the dispatch marker you have set, and a reply actually uploaded and analysed. All the other steps deliberately remain without a tick — even where you completed them long ago. A status display that lies politely is worse than none.
After fourteen days the platform asks
If a letter is marked as sent and nothing comes back for two weeks, the platform speaks up of its own accord and asks whether a reply has arrived in the meantime. That is deliberately the point at which matters otherwise disappear quietly. If something strikes you in the AI chat along the way that you do not want to forget, you can secure the note as a permanent task on your to-do list instead of leaving it behind in the conversation.
One analysis, two entrances
For the other side’s reply we deliberately did not build a second, parallel function. The existing reply analysis has been extended and now accepts either a letter or a matter — exactly one of the two. The advantage carries a long way: this logic continues to be maintained in one place only. Two parallel routes would over time have become two routes of differing quality.
What the process does not do
You set the dispatch marker yourself. It is a note for you and the basis for the reminder — not proof of posting and not proof of delivery. Where receipt really matters, you need the route of dispatch that proves it; which one that is depends on the individual case. Nor does the classification of a reply that has arrived replace review by a lawyer. At the latest when the other side is represented by lawyers, threatens litigation, or amounts are at stake that you do not want to lose, that is the point at which a law firm should see the matter — not only once the next deadline is already running.
→ How it works · Classifying a reply · Use cases · System limits
