Guideline Guard

Every client's outside counsel guidelines, enforced on every prebill before it leaves the firm. Claude reads the guidelines, audits each line, quotes the rule it applied, and the biller decides.

Model Depth Rulebook

Time entries

Expenses

What this would look like at the firm

1. Prebill out of AderantBilling already produces a prebill for every matter each month. The same report, exported as text, is the input. No integration is needed for a pilot.

2. Guidelines out of the document systemEach client's guidelines are extracted into a rulebook once, then reused every month. The rulebook can be loaded into Intapp Terms later if the firm adopts that module.

3. The biller reviews, Claude checksClaude flags, quotes and proposes rewrites. The biller applies what they agree with and sends a bill the client will pay. Nothing changes in Aderant without a person.

4. Later: automaticA scheduled run on every prebill, with narrative write-back through Aderant, and a monthly report of dollars protected by client and by timekeeper.

Why IT can say yes

Runs on what the firm already licenses. Claude seats, the Aderant prebill report and the document system. No new vendor, no procurement, no client data in a new place.
No new data exposure. Time narratives and expense lines already leave the firm every month to clients and e-billing platforms. The guidelines are the client's own document. [Confirm the data terms of the firm's Claude plan; enterprise terms exclude training on inputs.]
Every claim is checked. Each flag quotes the guideline word for word, and the page matches the quote against the source text. A misquote shows in red before anyone acts on it.
A person decides. The tool proposes; the biller applies. Aderant stays the system of record.
Auditable. Each run records the model, the depth and the time, and the prompts are fixed text in this page, not a chat.
A path inside the firewall. The audit step is a classification task. The firm's local-model bake-off showed a 9B model handling this class of work, so the step can move to firm hardware if the data terms are not settled.

What it is worth

Illustrative only. Replace the figures with the firm's own: fees billed through e-billing platforms, last year's reduction rate on those invoices, and the share of reductions that were guideline violations the firm could have caught. Each is an estimate until Finance pulls the numbers from Aderant.

Fees through e-billing per year ($) Reduced or appealed (%) Preventable share (%)

Protected per year, estimate

Where this sits next to the other tools

Matter Desk runs attorney workflows on matter documents. Marketing Studio drafts and checks firm content. Guideline Guard is the first tool for the business side of the firm: Finance owns the metric, Billing runs it monthly, and the conflicts desk gets each client's consent and affiliate terms as a by-product of the same extraction.