What I Actually Use Lloyd For (And What Our Members Are Discovering)

Like almost every single in-house lawyer, I am simultaneously excited by how I can use AI to be better at my job and exhausted with all of the Legal AI options (and noise) out there.

So when we at The L Suite decided to develop a legal AI tool of our own, skepticism crept in. Never of AI broadly. What I was skeptical about was whether we could build something meaningfully better for in-house lawyers. Something that would make me reach for it instead of the tools I already had open.

The super-early versions of Lloyd confirmed this fear. I felt I could get better, more precise answers from ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini than I could from Lloyd.

Thankfully, due to the brilliance of not only our tech teams, but also our members who contributed hundreds of hours to testing and improving Lloyd, I quickly learned that the answer was “Yes - we can absolutely build something meaningfully better for in-house lawyers.”

And based on the feedback pouring in from members who've been part of our beta, I'm not alone.

Let me walk you through how I've been using it, and what I'm hearing from your peers.

The Question I Was Actually Asking

A few months ago, I needed a quick gut-check on click-through agreement enforceability, just a refresher on the framework for thinking it through. So I typed exactly that into Lloyd. No fancy prompt engineering, no elaborate setup. Just the question.

What came back wasn't the wall of text or an academic treatise that you would have gotten from chatbots a year or two ago. And it wasn’t just the well-organized, practical set of guidelines that you can often get from them today.

Rather, it was that helpful analysis, backed by cited threads from actual GC peers who'd wrestled with the same issue. I could click directly into any of those threads and read the full conversation in context. That's the thing that keeps getting me: it's not just a summary. It's a door into the room where this was actually debated, with the advice of people who have made the decisions I now need to make.

One feature worth calling out here is video citations. When Lloyd cites a video as a source, clicking it takes you directly to the exact moment in that recording where the relevant discussion happened, not the beginning of a 60-minute session. You see the transcript alongside it. That's the kind of detail that makes the difference between a tool you use once and one you keep coming back to.

Pressure-Testing "Market"

Here's a use case that probably resonates with anyone who spends time on commercial deals: getting told something is "market" when your instincts say otherwise.

I tried asking Lloyd whether unlimited liability is really as standard as some enterprise procurement teams would have you believe. The answer was unsurprisingly clear: it should be the exception, not the rule. Lloyd also backed up that position with member quotes and real examples. Lloyd even volunteered super-cap ranges I hadn't asked for, because it knew they were relevant to what I was dealing with.

Then I pushed further: when you're stuck in that negotiation, what do you actually say? I got talking points drawn from things your peers have actually tried and found effective. That's the L Suite's institutional knowledge, years of hard-won experience, surfaced in seconds.

When There's No Thread on Point

I want to be upfront about something, because you might assume I cherry-picked examples where Lloyd happened to have great content. Sometimes it doesn't.

I once asked for a cease-and-desist letter template for a trademark issue. Lloyd didn't try to force irrelevant Braintrust threads into the answer. It just drafted a solid, well-formatted template, styled the way lawyers actually like to see things. It knew the difference between a situation calling for a document and one calling for a bullet-point answer.

So even when there's nothing on point in the library, Lloyd will still get you the help you need. And when there is relevant community content? It's an invaluable resource.

What Use Cases Members Are Discovering

During beta, the feedback confirmed a lot of what I'd experienced and surfaced use cases I hadn't fully anticipated.

Finding the right peer

One of Lloyd's more novel features is what we call Peer ID. You can ask Lloyd to identify which other members have been through the same issue you're navigating, and it will surface the top matches based on their contributions to events, posts, and discussions, along with a draft outreach message so you can start the conversation. One member described asking for help thinking through an IPO process and getting a list of peers who had actually taken companies public, with the context to back it up. This is the community's human network made searchable.

Outside counsel recommendations

Multiple members described asking Lloyd for law firm recommendations in specific practice areas. One member needed immigration counsel for new hires across multiple geographies. Lloyd gave an initial list of 6 to 8 firms, then proactively offered to refine the recommendations based on additional context and peer feedback from L Suite members. That iterative, conversational dynamic, where Lloyd meets you halfway and asks the right follow-up questions, came up again and again in the feedback.

Contract issue spotting

Several members have been experimenting with uploading contracts and asking Lloyd to flag potential issues or negotiation points, calibrated to what peers have actually seen and pushed back on. The idea is that when the community has had detailed discussions about, say, executive severance terms or liability caps in SaaS agreements, that knowledge can inform a review of your specific document. We're still refining this feature, but early results have surfaced issues members told us they wouldn't have caught otherwise.

The "What would you do?" test

One member described asking Lloyd about an issue they'd already worked through, using our suggested prompt. Lloyd's advice was consistent with the approach they'd landed on, but then offered an alternative they hadn't considered and walked through the pros and cons when prompted. That's not a search engine. That's a thought partner.

AI governance

Several members are using Lloyd to think through how to govern AI use within their own organizations, not just write policies, but figure out how to actually enforce them. One described Lloyd offering "helpful solutions in a tone that was practical." In-house lawyers don't need more theory. We need practical.

Vendor due diligence

One member asked Lloyd to review a vendor's security controls based on what was available on the vendor's website. They got detailed analysis and a useful action-item table for next steps. Another used Lloyd to track down a hard-to-find type of resource and came away impressed by how quickly relevant threads were surfaced and synthesized.

What Makes This Different

A few members ran direct comparisons between Lloyd and Gemini or ChatGPT for the same questions. The consistent finding: Lloyd does a much better job with sourcing, and the outputs are structured the way in-house lawyers actually think.

One member put it simply: "It is [structured in] a way that an in-house lawyer would find most useful."

That's the goal. Not AI for lawyers generally. AI trained on the collective intelligence of this specific community, for the specific challenges you face every day. The peer quotes aren't decoration. They're the point.

I know some of you are still figuring out where Lloyd fits alongside the other tools in your stack. That's fair, and it's a conversation I expect we'll keep having as the product matures. But if you haven't tried it yet, start simple. Ask it the question that's been sitting in the back of your mind. Don't overthink the prompt.

The room is full of smart people who've already been there. Lloyd helps you find them.