open-legal-products makes Word review durable
The original Mike project is turning assistant edits in Word into a review process that can survive reloads and handle real document conflicts.
Instead of treating a suggested change as a disposable chat message, Mike now keeps a structured record of each proposed document edit. That should make a long review session more dependable: cards can be restored, citations and explanations stay in sequence, and internal assistant mechanics do not leak into the lawyer-facing conversation.
- Review proposals without altering the document, then apply or locate them.
- Apply edits as Word tracked changes, with clear Accept and Reject decisions once revisions exist.
- Resolve clashes with existing tracked changes through an explicit Accept & apply choice.
- Use Word-specific shortcuts for proofreading, key-term extraction, and drafting from a template.
The team also aligned the Word add-in with the web experience while retaining controls suited to working inside an active document.
So what Legal teams reviewing AI-assisted Word edits should care because the workflow is becoming more auditable and less fragile in the documents where approval actually happens.
Spotted something wrong? Or know the PR text has fresher detail than the writeup above?