Writer

What to ask before you buy

1. What is the price, and is it per seat?
2. Does the no-training statement cover every model the platform uses?
3. Where is data processed?
4. What is the firm's rule for what may be entered?

Limits in the record

• It is not legal-specific, so it does not cite authority or understand matters.
• The vendor does not publish a firm-size scope in the checked source.
• It is oriented to enterprise content work, so small-firm fit is not established by the checked source.

How it sits in General-purpose assistants

Inside general-purpose assistants, this competes on the strength of its no-training statement and its enterprise controls. It is closest to Grammarly Business in audience, though it aims at content production rather than writing correction.

Reading the vendor’s wording

The vendor states plainly that it does not train its models on customer data, inputs, or outputs, and that data is encrypted at rest and in transit in an isolated production project. It also holds SOC 2 Type II and several ISO certifications. This is one of the most direct no-training statements among the general assistants.

How to evaluate it in a trial

1. Ask for the price and whether it is per seat.
2. Confirm the no-training statement covers every model the platform uses.
3. Ask where data is processed.
4. Write the firm's rule for what may be entered.

What adopting it costs

It is a writing and content platform rather than a system of record, so adopting it does not replace matter management. The switching cost is the firm's usage policy rather than a data migration.

Closest alternative

Grammarly Business — The closest writing tool. This one produces content; Grammarly corrects it. Both are not legal-specific.