Find your profile. Open the evidence report first.
Search for yourself or your firm, inspect what the system can currently support from public evidence, and see the exact gaps before deciding whether anything needs correction or enhancement.
The search system can only answer from evidence it can attribute.
A beautiful website can still leave important client questions unanswered if the information is missing, buried, ambiguous, or only stated at the firm level when the question is about an individual lawyer.
See what AI can verify
Your Intelligence report separates identity, location, practices, team relationships and source evidence. Missing coverage is shown as a gap — not as a claim that you lack the service or experience.
See why answers stop
The system exposes the exact evidence gaps that prevent a stronger public answer: shallow source depth, missing lawyer-to-practice attribution, unclear intake information, office ambiguity and more.
Close the evidence gap
Claim / Enhance gives you a structured way to submit corrections and additional public information for manual review while keeping submitted data distinguishable from indexed website evidence.
This is more than a directory listing.
Turn scattered public information into a maintained knowledge layer.
A law-firm website is becoming a machine-readable knowledge source.
Traditional search focused on ranking pages. AI-assisted search increasingly has to understand a complete client situation, retrieve supporting passages, distinguish firms from individual lawyers, resolve geography and practice scope, and assemble an answer that can be traced back to evidence.
Pages, keywords and clicks
- Target a practice-area or city keyword.
- Rank a page and persuade the visitor to click.
- Expect the visitor to browse menus, biographies and articles.
- Measure rankings, traffic and conversions.
Entities, evidence and answerability
- Interpret natural-language legal problems and follow-up questions.
- Retrieve the most relevant evidence rather than only matching keywords.
- Keep firm capability, lawyer-specific evidence and geography distinct.
- Return answers that can be supported by identifiable sources.
Strong AI visibility starts with clear, attributable evidence.
The goal is not to “game AI.” The goal is to make the firm's real services, people, offices, experience and client information clear enough that a retrieval system can understand what is supported and what is not.
Entity clarity
Make the firm, lawyers, offices, jurisdictions and relationships between them explicit and internally consistent.
Lawyer-level evidence
A firm-wide practice page should not silently become proof that every lawyer at the firm handles that work.
Practice-area depth
Explain sub-services, client fit, process, common questions, lawyer team and supporting public evidence.
Question coverage
Answer the practical questions prospective clients ask about cost, process, timing, documents, urgency and next steps.
Geographic precision
Keep firm offices, service areas and individual lawyer locations distinct so search systems do not infer unsupported geography.
Freshness and consistency
Outdated lawyers, offices and contradictory pages weaken confidence in the public evidence layer.
The question is no longer only “Do we rank?” It is “Can the website answer?”
These are the kinds of questions a modern legal-search system should be able to answer from attributable public evidence without inventing unsupported conclusions.
Turn scattered approved information into something searchable by meaning.
A private vector knowledge base can complement the public website by organizing approved information into focused retrieval units with firm, lawyer, practice, location and source context.
Organize
Structure approved knowledge and preserve provenance.
Retrieve
Match questions by meaning instead of exact wording alone.
Ground
Return answers from relevant evidence with source context.
Measure
Track which client questions are strongly, weakly or not yet answerable.
Use the current report first. Build only what the gaps justify.
Free corrections remain separate from optional enhanced services. The first step is to inspect the current public evidence and determine whether the problem is a factual correction, a public website content gap, or a deeper knowledge-architecture opportunity.
From “What does the system know?” to a better AI-ready profile.
Find your profile
Locate the existing lawyer or firm record already represented in the system.
Open AI Intelligence
See the indexed evidence, current answerability, benchmark context and specific gaps.
Claim / Enhance
Submit corrections and public structured information for manual review. A claim is not automatic verification.
Build the knowledge layer
Future enhanced services can maintain richer verified information and improve what client questions the profile can answer.
Do not buy a promise. Inspect the report first.
Find your current profile, see what is actually supported, and decide whether the gaps are worth correcting or enhancing.