Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Introducing the Legora Agent: the execution engine at the core of the Legora aOS™. Most legal AI responds to prompts. The Agent executes objectives. You give it a goal and it builds a plan, presents it for approval, then carries the work out end-to-end — selecting the right tools...

40,137 views • 3 months ago •via X (Twitter)

10 Comments

Damir Wallener's profile picture
Damir Wallener3 months ago

Isn’t “give it a goal” literally prompting…?

luis's profile picture
luis3 months ago

@Presidentlin

Jef DerwAIl's profile picture
Jef DerwAIl3 months ago

I hope the next version will be named the Legora aOSS™

Victoria Blake's profile picture
Victoria Blake3 months ago

What stands out here is the shift from AI as an assistant to AI as an operator. Giving users a clear plan, keeping them in the approval loop, and then executing end-to-end is a compelling approach for real-world legal workflows. Interested to see how far this can scale. 👏⚖️🚀

Carlos Herrera's profile picture
Carlos Herrera3 months ago

@harjtaggar Win this case no mistakes, easy

Ira Rothken's profile picture
Ira Rothken3 months ago

Supervision requires AI agent conduct and human lawyer clickstream logging which is dual use evidence - it shows good supervision or over delegation by a lawyer. This is especially important to discern what the AI legal agent does while you are not looking.

Mr Dari ₿'s profile picture
Mr Dari ₿3 months ago

Solid vision behind this project 💎

ututuu's profile picture
ututuu3 months ago

@aacauaa

Mr Dari ₿'s profile picture
Mr Dari ₿3 months ago

Nice project, would love to collaborate 🔥

Sophia Nexus ⭐'s profile picture
Sophia Nexus ⭐3 months ago

The project keeps moving forward step by step. Looking forward to contributing and engaging with the community.

Related Videos

Systematic literature reviews take 12-18 months to complete. Looks like AI is going to fully automate systematic reviews sooner than later. SciSpace ( SciSpace) just launched an autonomous AI agent that conducts a systematic literature review with a single prompt. Go to scispace[.]com and run the following prompt: "Conduct a systematic literature review on [your topic]" SciSpace agent will generate research questions based on the PICO framework. You can review these questions and edit them according to your specific requirements. The agent will also draft screening criteria that you can edit according to your needs. Then the agent asks you to select the databases you want to use and the date range for paper. After this step, everything is fully automated. The agent will search for papers in the relevant databases, it will combine and rerank the papers. Then it will start the title and abstract screening and include the papers that meet the include criteria. In the next step, it will download the full text of included papers and screen them followed by data extraction. Based on the extracted data, it generates a complete systematic literature review and also a PRISMA diagram. It will also give you a table of papers included along with the rational for including them. The only thing that is keeping AI agents to fully automate systematic literature reviews fields is the papers behind paywalls. Check out the agent at scispace[.]com and see if you find its review useful.

Mushtaq Bilal, PhD

42,003 views • 5 months ago

WHAT IS AN AI "SOFTWARE FACTORY" AND IS IT HYPE (31 MINUTE BREAKDOWN) I think it's a silly name for a genuinely USEFUL idea! A software factory is 5-6 markdown files that sit next to your code and tell your agents how you like to work, so you can build high quality apps 24/7. It's going viral because AI coding has a trust problem. The model can build the feature, but with no structure around it you end up babysitting the agent, wondering what changed and hoping it didn't break something important. So you build with agents the same way a factory builds physical products! 1. Each feature gets its own station, which in software means its own branch, so multiple agents can work at the same time without stepping on each other. 2. The build station gives the agent rules for how to write the code, because "it works" is very different from "a developer could open this repo next month and understand what happened." 3. The proof station makes the agent show evidence. Screenshots, videos, speed numbers, before-and-after states. It has to prove the thing works instead of saying it works. 4. The review station runs the work through a code review agent, and if it doesn't clear the bar, it goes back through the line. 5. Then you show up at the end to merge. For a 100+ years people have run production this way, and it worked because the structure is good. The full episode on what’s a software factory is NOW live on The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 with the wonderful Micky Watch: So is it hype?!? I don't think it is, because of what it does to your output! WITHOUT a factory, you build ONE feature at a time and you're the bottleneck at every step, prompting, checking the diff, testing it yourself, hoping nothing else broke (spoiler alert it often does). WITH a factory, EACH feature runs in its own isolated copy of the app, so you can have 10+ of them going at once, and each agent has to prove its own work and pass a code review before it ever reaches you. Instead of supervising the work, you're APPROVING finished work that already has evidence attached. REALLY interesting to see how work with agents is evolving to be….well, similar to working with people!

GREG ISENBERG

30,787 views • 12 days ago