The CRAFT Prompting Framework for Legal Work

Why Most Legal Prompts Fail

Vague prompts produce poor results. "Summarize this contract" produces a generic overview no attorney would use. Prompt structure separates generic responses from useful work product. CRAFT provides a repeatable five-step method.

What Is the CRAFT Prompting Framework?

CRAFT stands for Context, Role, Ask, Format, Tone. Each element fixes a specific prompting failure:

• Context grounds the task in jurisdiction, practice area, and facts.
• Role tells Claude what kind of attorney to emulate, sharpening its reasoning.
• Ask specifies the exact deliverable, preventing scope creep.
• Format structures the output for immediate use — memo, table, checklist, or redline.
• Tone sets the register so output matches its audience.

Step 1: Context — Ground the Task

Claude cannot infer your jurisdiction, governing law, or client situation. State them. A strong context includes the jurisdiction (e.g., "Delaware corporate law"), the matter type (e.g., "Series B preferred stock financing"), and constraints (e.g., "existing SAFE notes converting in this round").

Example: "We represent a Delaware-incorporated SaaS startup in a $15M Series B round. The lead investor requires a full-ratchet anti-dilution provision. California governs the side letter."

Step 2: Role — Activate Domain Expertise

Telling Claude to "act as a senior corporate attorney specializing in venture capital transactions" draws on deeper, more specialized training. Be precise: "litigation attorney" is weaker than "senior commercial litigation partner with 15 years of breach-of-contract experience in federal court."

Step 3: Ask — Specify the Deliverable

State exactly what you need. Not "review this contract" but "identify every provision in this SPA that allocates indemnification risk to the buyer, flag deviations from ABA model terms, and recommend redline language for each." Specific asks produce actionable output.

Step 4: Format — Structure the Output

Legal work demands structure. Tell Claude: formal memo with IRAC analysis, bullet-point risk summary, comparison table, redline draft, or client-ready email. Specify section headers and ordering (e.g., highest risk first).

Step 5: Tone — Match the Audience

A federal court brief and a client advisory email need different language. Tell Claude the audience: "persuasive tone for a motion to dismiss," "plain English for a non-lawyer board member," or "analytical tone for an internal research memo."

CRAFT in Action: A Complete Example

A full CRAFT prompt for AI-assisted contract review:

"Context: We represent the buyer in a $50M asset purchase of a manufacturing business in Ohio. The seller has provided a 60-page APA with Ohio choice-of-law. Role: Act as a senior M&A attorney with manufacturing sector experience. Ask: Produce a risk matrix of every seller rep and warranty, rate each high/medium/low, and flag any narrower than ABA model provisions. Format: Table with columns for Section, Rep/Warranty Summary, Risk Rating, Issue, and Recommended Redline. Tone: Analytical and precise, for a partner review memo."

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Skipping Context: Without jurisdiction and facts, Claude defaults to generic reasoning.
• Vague Ask: "Help me with this contract" is a wish, not a prompt.
• No Format: Claude picks its own structure if you don't — and it rarely fits.
• No Tone: A motion brief and a client email need different registers.

For more prompting techniques, see How to Write Legal Prompts That Actually Work. New to Claude? Our complete guide for attorneys covers the fundamentals.

Subscribe to The 5-Minute Claude Briefing — free weekly strategies for using AI in legal practice.