---
title: "Record that a client was consulted before a generative tool did significant work"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/obligations/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools/record-that-a-client-was-told-an-ai-tool-will-do-substantial-work/united-states"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A43-JU20261022-10-US"
practice_area: "Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["US"]
last_reviewed: "2026-10-22"
---

# Record that a client was consulted before a generative tool did significant work

> From the retainer and the description of the tool, list whether the client has been told that the tool will be used, what information it will be given, and whether its output will bear on a significant decision in the…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/obligations/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools/record-that-a-client-was-told-an-ai-tool-will-do-substantial-work/united-states  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-22

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools](https://ailawframework.com/obligations/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | From the retainer and the description of the tool, list whether the client has been told that the tool will be used, what information it will be given, and whether its output will bear on a significant decision in the matter. Do not send the disclosure. |
| What the lawyer must review | Model Rule 1.4(a)(2) requires the lawyer to consult reasonably about the means, and Rule 1.4(b) requires an explanation sufficient for an informed decision. Formal Opinion 512 says consultation is required when information relating to the representation will be entered, when the tool affects the basis or reasonableness of the fee, and when the output will influence a significant decision. The lawyer decides whether this use is one of those cases and settles the words. |
| Written for | United States |
| Applies to | [Record that a client was told an AI tool will do substantial work](https://ailawframework.com/obligations/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools/record-that-a-client-was-told-an-ai-tool-will-do-substantial-work.md) |

## Checking plan

- What the AI does: From the retainer and the description of the tool, list whether the client has been told that the tool will be used, what information it will be given, and whether its output will bear on a significant decision in the matter. Do not send the disclosure.
- Basis: Checked against the linked sources on 22 October 2026. Confirm the current instrument before reliance.

## Notes

- The text opened is the ABA Model Rule. The rule adopted in the lawyer's jurisdiction controls where it differs.
- The opinion says disclosure is not required in every matter. It is required if the client asks, and if the engagement or outside-counsel guidelines require it.

## Sources

- [ABA Model Rule 1.4, Communications](https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_4_communications/) (checked 2026-10-22)
- [ABA Formal Opinion 512, Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (29 July 2024)](https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/ethics-opinions/aba-formal-opinion-512.pdf) (checked 2026-10-22)

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*