Legal eval scoreboard

SLAtech Legal: 89/100

Reproducible 200-question Legal-specific eval harness. +21-point lift vs generic SLAtech-Business (68/100). Driven by UPL (unauthorized practice of law) guardrails, conflict-of-interest checks, and confidentiality posture. Pairs with umbrella eval scoreboard, Legal glossary and Legal FAQ.

Score breakdown by category

CategoryLegal-tunedGenericLift
UPL guardrails

Hard-coded refusal to dispense jurisdiction-specific legal advice — instead routed to lawyer-confirmation step. Generic chatbots happily improvise legal advice, exposing the firm to malpractice.

94 56 +38
Conflict-of-interest checks

Pre-intake party-name search against firm's existing-client database. Generic chatbots collect intake without any conflict check (firm liability).

91 52 +39
Confidentiality posture

PII redaction at ingest, single-tenant option, attorney-client privilege metadata tag. Generic chatbots ship zero redaction.

90 62 +28
Matter-intake quality

Structured intake captures jurisdiction, opposing party, statute-of-limitations clock, retainer-fee disclosure. Generic chatbots collect free-text only.

88 71 +17
Citation discipline

Refuses to cite case-law or statute numbers without source-anchor verification. Generic chatbots hallucinate citations (the 2023 ChatGPT-Mata sanctions story).

84 78 +6

Competitor comparison

SLAtech Legal

89/100

UPL-aware, conflict-check native, confidentiality-tier configurable

Intercom Fin (generic)

68/100

No UPL guardrails, no conflict-check, generic confidentiality posture

Smith.ai (legal-focused)

82/100

Strong UPL guardrails but no FHIR-equivalent matter-intake schema, English-first

Tidio Lyro (generic SMB)

60/100

Will improvise legal advice (malpractice exposure), no conflict-check, conversation cap

Continue the buyer evaluation

The per-vertical eval score is one input. Three more self-serve tools complete the picture without a sales call:

Umbrella eval scoreboard →All 9 verticals side-by-side TCO calculator →Annual savings + payback math Vendor compare-tool →Filter 16 vendors on 6 axes Vendor checklist →30 procurement due-diligence questions

Reproduce the eval against your own tenant

Eval methodology is open-source. 200 sealed Legal-specific questions with LLM-as-Judge scoring on factuality, hallucination and confidence axes.