The result to aim for
Laura Mancini, a lawyer in private practice, compares the AI to a junior collaborator, while explaining to her clients the limits of the analyses they do themselves with chatbots.
What was done
OnLib'Infos (Interfimo) reports on August 27, 2026, the words of Laura Mancini, a lawyer at Mancini Avocado: for an individual firm, AI is "the equivalent of a full-time assistant or junior collaborator", which allows her to devote time to her development or personal life. It also observes clients who use AI before consulting it: one of them broke a lease by believing in his law, with financial consequences that could have been heavy. She explains to her clients that it is not effective to spend twice as much time analyzing the responses of several AIs they transmit to her, and believes that the profession will have to rethink its value other than in the past.
Before you start
Tool cited by the source: generative AI. Gather the information the prompt asks for. Strip confidential data that is not needed and check your tool’s access terms. Features and plans can change.
The method, in three steps.
Gather the context
Gather the information described in the prompt.
Adapt the prompt
Copy the prompt below, replace the bracketed items, then paste it into the AI assistant you use. The cited tool (generative AI) is not necessarily available to the public..
Reread before using
Reread the result, correct it if needed and keep the final decision. Caveats are detailed below.
Your starting point.
Replace the bracketed items, then adapt the proposal to your situation. This prompt is written by the iadujour desk It is not a quotation from the source.
A customer sends the analysis he got from a chatbot about his situation: The facts I know: 1. Lists the statements of this analysis, indicating for each one whether it is correct, to be qualified or erroneous, and why. 2. Finds the important facts 3. Writes for the client a short and pedagogical answer explaining the limits of this analysis.
What deserves your attention
Proof level: Testimony published by an identified source. Source checked on 10 November 2026. Use described by the source, not tested by the desk. Original summary written by iadujour.fr: figures and claims are the source’s; the prompt is a desk proposal, not a quotation.
Comments.
A field note, a question, a precision on this use case? Comments are reviewed before publication.
Published comments
Loading comments…
Leave a comment
Moderation charter. Every comment is reviewed before publication. We refuse hate speech, insulting or discriminatory language, advertising, spam and promotional links, off-topic posts and other people’s personal data.