A paralegal reviewing an AI-drafted matter intake summary
Claude Cowork guide · Legal

Legal intake automation, step by step.

Four unstructured intake files to a reviewed matter summary, with the conflict surfaced, in under five minutes. The exact sequence from our recorded walkthrough, including the guardrails to set before you point it at a real matter.

The short answer

Automate the assembly, not the judgment.

Every new matter starts as fragments: an intake email, a voice memo dictated between meetings, conflict notes, fee and scope details. Someone has to turn that into a clean, accurate summary before anything moves. That first pass eats non-billable hours, and it has to be right, because a missed deadline or an overlooked conflict costs the firm the matter or worse.

Claude Cowork reads the folder, plans the steps, and returns a structured summary with the blockers at the top. What it does not do is decide anything. The seven steps below are the sequence from our recorded walkthrough, in the order you would actually run them.

Seven steps

Running the first pass

Steps one to five are the run itself. Six and seven are the setup you do once, before any real matter touches it.

01

Put the matter’s raw files in one folder

Intake arrives as fragments: the prospective client’s email, the attorney’s voice memo dictated after the call, the conflicts check results, and the fee and scope notes. Drop copies of all of them into a single folder. Start with one matter, not your whole document management system.

02

Connect that folder to a Cowork session

Open Claude Desktop, choose Cowork from the mode selector, and connect the matter folder. Cowork can only read and write inside folders you explicitly connect. It does not see unrelated client folders, and it does not reach your DMS unless you give it that access.

03

Write the intake prompt as a work product spec

Say what the summary must contain and what should stop the process. For example: produce a matter intake summary including client information, factual background, potential claims, deadlines, and open items, and flag anything that blocks engagement partner review before we proceed.

04

Read the plan before it runs

Cowork lays out its plan before touching anything: which files it will read, then how it will organise the output. On client work this matters. Read the plan, and stop the run if the approach is wrong before any output exists.

05

Check the blockers before the summary

Read the flagged items first. In the recorded walkthrough the conflicts check surfaced a former client of the firm holding a minority investment in the prospective client’s former employer, placed at the top of the summary as a blocker rather than buried in a list.

06

Set firm-wide global instructions once

In Settings, Cowork, Global instructions, write the guardrails that apply to every session: never include client-identifying information in file names or task titles, always surface potential conflicts at the top of every summary, never make legal judgments, only organise and flag. Set once, applied to every session after.

07

Choose the permission mode for privileged work

For confidential matters, set Cowork to ask before every action. It pauses and shows what it intends to do before proceeding. It is slower, and it is the right trade-off on privileged material. In every mode, Cowork asks for confirmation before permanently deleting a file.

From the walkthrough

What the first pass surfaced

Four items out of four unstructured files, on a fictional employment matter. Each one is the kind of thing that survives a careful read and dies in a rushed one.

A conflict two degrees out

A former client of the firm held a minority investment in the prospective client’s former employer. The kind of link that is easy to miss skimming four files under deadline pressure.

A filing deadline mentioned in passing

The EEOC deadline was never stated as a deadline. It was a date said out loud in a voice memo. The deadline math was carried into the summary.

A secure-transmission instruction

The note about not letting the client send documents through regular email was carried forward into the open items rather than lost in the memo.

The litigation hold reminder

Picked up from the unstructured notes and surfaced as an action item, alongside the rest of the open items list.

The full run is in the law firm guide, with the recording and a complete transcript.

Where this sits

This is not intake software

If you are shopping for client intake software, you are shopping for a pipeline: web forms that capture the enquiry, lead tracking, e-signature, conflict database, and a CRM record that persists. Clio Grow and Lawmatics do that. Claude Cowork does none of it.

What Cowork does is the step in the middle that no pipeline handles: reading whatever actually came in, in whatever shape it arrived, and producing the summary a lawyer reviews. A firm with intake software still has someone doing that by hand. A firm without one still has the same fragments to assemble. Both get the same hours back.

So the honest answer is that these are complementary, and if you only have budget for one, buy the pipeline first. The assembly step is where Cowork earns its place, and it is cheaper to test.

Questions

Legal intake automation, answered

What is legal intake automation?
Legal intake automation is using software to handle the repetitive first pass of opening a new matter: turning the intake email, call notes, conflicts results, and fee terms into a structured summary a lawyer can review. It does not mean the software decides whether to take the matter. The output is a draft work product with the issues surfaced; the engagement decision stays with the attorney.
Is this a replacement for client intake software?
No, and it is worth being precise about the difference. Intake platforms like Clio Grow or Lawmatics own the pipeline: web forms, lead tracking, e-signature, and the CRM record. Claude Cowork does not do any of that. It handles the reading-and-writing step in the middle, turning whatever came in through that pipeline into a usable summary. Firms run both.
How long does the first pass take?
In the recorded walkthrough, four unstructured files became a reviewed matter intake summary in under five minutes, including the conflict flag and the deadline math. The review still takes as long as review takes. What compresses is the assembly.
Can a paralegal run this, or does it need IT?
A paralegal runs it. The prompt is plain language and the output is a Word document. What does need doing once, by whoever owns firm technology, is the setup: the global instructions that enforce your guardrails, the permission mode, and the decision about which folders Cowork may ever see.
Does this satisfy our confidentiality obligations?
It does not replace them. Cowork runs its actions inside an isolated virtual machine separate from your operating system, can only access folders you explicitly connect, and offers a per-action approval mode for privileged work. Those are a meaningful technical foundation for meeting your obligations under Rule 1.6, not a substitute for the policy, supervision, and disclosure decisions the rule requires.
What should we not use it for?
Legal judgment. The guardrail we recommend firms write into global instructions is explicit: organise and flag, never conclude. It should not decide whether a conflict is disqualifying, whether a claim is viable, or whether to take the matter. It should make sure a person sees those questions.
Want this done for you?

We install Claude Cowork for teams in DC & Raleigh

Design, setup, connected tools, hands-on training, and a one-page AI policy. Live in two weeks, from $2,500 flat. Nonprofit pricing available.

Or just tell us what you're trying to do — we'll point you the right way, free.

No commitment required. We'll reach out within one business day.

Keep reading

More Claude Cowork guides

What is Claude Cowork? The plain-English guide

What it is, what it actually does, who it is for, and how teams use it.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork pricing

What Claude Cowork costs, plan by plan, plus what a real team rollout runs.

Read the guide →

How to use Claude Cowork

Step-by-step setup and a first-week playbook for business teams.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork vs Claude Code

Two Anthropic agent products, two different jobs. Which one fits yours.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork vs OpenClaw

Managed knowledge-work agent or self-hosted personal assistant: the practical choice.

Read the guide →

Is Claude Cowork free?

The direct answer, what each paid plan includes, and what can cost extra.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork use cases

Eighteen real workflows, by team type: nonprofits, legal, and growing businesses.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork vs Microsoft Copilot

An honest comparison for SMB stacks, from a Microsoft shop that deploys both.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork security & data privacy

What it can touch, what it cannot, and the controls that make it safe for real data.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork for nonprofits

Grants, donor emails, and board packs: the nonprofit playbook.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork for law firms

Intake, review, and records work with the controls partners expect.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork for small business

Official workflows, Team plan costs, and a rollout that prevents AI shelfware.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork Dispatch

Assigning desktop tasks from your phone: what it needs, which plans have it, and the trade-off.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork change log

A dated record of Cowork releases, plan changes, platform support, and fact checks.

Read the guide →

Claude Cowork plugins & Skills

Skills, connectors, and plugins: what each one is, when to build, and how to govern them.

Read the guide →

Claude consulting for SMBs

Implementation, training, and managed Claude operations in DC & Raleigh. Live in two weeks, from $2,500 flat.

See the service →