Solution · Legal
Govern consequential legal AI actions with proof
When contract-review agents recommend filing, sharing, or acting on privileged material, Recon evaluates authority at the boundary—before the action becomes liability you cannot explain.
Anchored scenario
A contract-review agent recommends sending a clause summary that may contain privileged material to an external workflow.
- Policy — Policy requires counsel approval before the summary leaves your boundary.
- Trust Receipt — Trust Receipt records the hold, policyId, and authority context.
- Ledger — Ledger preserves the same correlationId for audit and investigation.
- Mission Control — When Policy escalates, operators open the receipt in Mission Control to investigate and coordinate review.
01 · Urgency
What can go wrong?
Legal-adjacent AI can recommend consequential actions—filing summaries, routing privileged excerpts, or triggering downstream workflows—without a durable record of who authorized what. When counsel or regulators ask why an action occurred, fragmented logs are not defensible proof.
- Agent output crosses privilege boundaries without an explicit authority check
- No inspectable record ties the recommendation to policy and approver context
- Incident response requires manual reconstruction across tools and chat logs
02 · Govern
What does Recon govern?
Recon governs the AI-action boundary: each governed interaction is one Trust Atom—observed, evaluated against your Policy, and resolved before execution proceeds. You configure rules; Recon enforces them consistently and returns a decision your systems can act on.
- Observe the attempted legal action with org scope and integration context
- Evaluate trust and exposure against Policy—not opaque model confidence
- Return permit, hold, or escalate outcomes your workflow can enforce
03 · Control
What happens when Policy intervenes?
Policy is business control—not an architecture diagram. Your team defines who may send privileged summaries, when counsel must approve, and what happens on violation. Recon applies those rules on every governed interaction.
- Permit when authority and scope match your legal Policy
- Hold or require approval when privilege-sensitive output needs counsel review
- Escalate to human operators when risk exceeds automated thresholds
04 · Proof
What proof do I retain?
Every governed interaction produces a Trust Receipt—inspectable evidence of the action, Policy decision, and authority context. The Ledger appends durable evidence tied to the same correlationId so audit and investigation do not depend on internal graphs.
- Trust Receipt — open the artifact and see why Recon decided permit, hold, or escalate
- Ledger — confirm the entry persists for retention and export workflows
- One correlationId threads from send → decision → receipt → ledger entry
Recon requires approval before this action proceeds.
- correlationId
- tacorr_8f3a2b1c4d5e6f708192a3b4c5d6e7f8
- receiptId
- a1b2c3d4e5f6789012345678901234567890abcdef1234567890abcdef123456
- decision
- require_approval
- policyId
- policy_legal_privilege_gate
- actionType
- legal_contract_clause_recommendation
Ledger
The Ledger is your durable evidence spine—every Trust Receipt links back to the same correlationId for retention and audit.
- correlationId
- tacorr_8f3a2b1c4d5e6f708192a3b4c5d6e7f8
- ledger.entryId
- b2c3d4e5f6789012345678901234567890abcdef1234567890abcdef1234567890
05 · Outcome
What business risk does that reduce?
Teams reduce defensibility gaps, audit friction, and liability from ungoverned legal AI actions. You can show what was attempted, which Policy applied, and what proof exists—without asking buyers to learn internal runtime vocabulary.
- Defensibility — explain consequential legal AI actions with attributable proof
- Audit readiness — Ledger retention supports review and export without log stitching
- Liability containment — holds and escalations fire before irreversible external sends
Illustrative buyer language only—not legal advice, not privilege determination, and not regulatory certification.