Start with the issue and the record
Research is most useful when it begins with a defined legal question, the material facts, the procedural setting and the relief being considered. Those inputs help a research specialist distinguish a promising authority from a result that merely shares similar words.
The output should explain the proposition being researched and how each selected authority relates to it. Keep supporting material, potentially adverse material and unresolved research questions visible. A persuasive collection is not the same as a balanced account of the legal position.
Choose the right source scope
Depending on the matter, a research plan may span the Supreme Court, relevant High Courts, specialist tribunals, legislation and regulatory material. Tax work may call for tribunal decisions and period-specific provisions; a regulatory question may require material from bodies such as RBI, SEBI or CCI.
Source scope should be agreed for the issue. The implementation must establish which databases and official sources are available, how current they are and where coverage is incomplete. A list of institutions is not evidence that a system contains every decision, circular or amendment from each one.
Keep the passage and its meaning together
An authority record should retain the original source, a stable identifier, the relevant passage and a precise location. Exact quotations must be checked against the source. A summary, translated passage or inferred proposition should be labelled as such rather than presented as a verbatim extract.
Finding the passage is only one check. Counsel must assess its context, relevance, precedential weight and current treatment. Provisions also need the version and effective period relevant to the matter. A citation that opens successfully does not by itself establish that the legal proposition is sound.
Carry reviewed research into the draft
A reviewed authority set should connect issues, propositions, passages and counsel’s decisions. A drafting specialist can then draw from that set while retaining source links and any limits on how an authority may be used. New research should remain visibly distinct until it has passed the agreed review.
AgenticStride helps firms design this route from question to research to approved work product. Evaluation should examine missed adverse material, quotation fidelity, source coverage and lawyer effort—not simply how many results appear or how quickly a confident answer is generated.
Can your team inspect the source, understand the handoff and see who approved the next step?
Build the approach around your practice ↗