AI Transparency

AI Transparency Policy — Brief (Working Title)

Positioning. Brief is an AI-powered correspondence assistant. It summarizes and translates documents and helps users draft messages based on the facts and communication intentions they provide. Brief does not independently determine legal rights, obligations or legal strategy and is not a substitute for advice from a qualified professional.

>

Positionierung. Brief ist ein KI-gestützter Korrespondenz-Assistent. Er fasst Dokumente zusammen, übersetzt sie und hilft Nutzerinnen und Nutzern, Nachrichten auf Grundlage der von ihnen angegebenen Tatsachen und der von ihnen gewählten Mitteilungsabsicht zu verfassen. Brief bestimmt nicht eigenständig Rechte, Pflichten oder eine rechtliche Vorgehensweise und ersetzt keine Beratung durch eine qualifizierte Fachperson.

>

Version: 1.0 · Date: 2026-08-05

1. Purpose and scope

This policy defines how Brief:

  1. labels AI-generated content so users always know what was produced by AI;
  2. communicates the limitations of AI analysis honestly;
  3. technically and editorially prohibits fabricated legal citations;
  4. decides when and how to recommend human professional review.

It applies to every AI-generated surface in the app: the plain-language explanation, extracted deadlines, risk notes, reply drafts, and any future AI feature. It does not apply to static editorial content written by humans (onboarding copy, help pages), which must not be labeled as AI-generated.

2. Labeling of AI content

Principles

Never

3. Model limitations — what we tell users and how we build for it

Disclosed limitations (in the in-app "How Brief uses AI" page and reflected in Terms §2):

  1. AI can be wrong or incomplete, including in confident-sounding ways (hallucination).
  2. AI can misread dates, amounts, and names, especially from imperfect scans; OCR quality bounds analysis quality (hence the low-confidence OCR warning).
  3. AI has no knowledge of the user's full situation — it sees only the submitted text.
  4. AI is not current legal doctrine: laws, fee schedules, and administrative practice change; the model's knowledge has a cutoff and the app performs no legal research.
  5. Language nuance: analyses in ru/ro/en are explanations of a German-language legal context; terminology is approximated and German terms are kept where precision matters.

Product safeguards backing the disclosure

4. Prohibition on fabricated law citations

Policy: The app must never present a fabricated or unverified legal citation (statute, section, case, court decision, official fee schedule) as fact.

Rules

  1. Default: no citations. The system prompt instructs the model not to cite specific statutes, case law, or section numbers in analyses, except when the citation appears verbatim in the user's letter — then it may be referenced as "the letter cites § X …".
  2. Letter-sourced only: Any legal reference shown must be traceable to the OCR text of the letter. References originating from the model's own knowledge are stripped or generalized ("relevant tenancy law" instead of an invented "§ 573c BGB"-style citation) by prompt policy and, where feasible, output post-processing.
  3. No invented case law, ever. Court decisions, file numbers, and precedents must never be generated. Output post-processing treats decision-citation patterns not present in the source letter as violations and removes them.
  4. Reply drafts: Same rules. A reply draft may reference the sender's own file number and the letter's cited provisions, but must not add legal argumentation resting on model-invented citations.
  5. QA gate: The regression test suite includes adversarial prompts (letters inviting citation) and fails the release if fabricated citations appear.
  6. Incident handling: A confirmed fabricated citation reaching production users is a severity-1 content incident: hotfix the prompt/filter, document it, and review this policy.

5. Human-review recommendation policy

Principle: The more consequential the letter, the stronger and earlier the push toward a qualified human — a lawyer (Rechtsanwalt), tax advisor (Steuerberater), recognized advice center (e.g. Verbraucherzentrale, Migrationsberatung), or the issuing authority itself.

Tiers

TierTriggerApp behavior
BaselineEvery analysisGlobal AI label (string 1); "verify against the original" framing throughout.
Sensitive categoryCourt, tax, immigration/residence, employment termination, medicalContextual banner (string 2 / category variants) recommending Rechtsanwalt / Steuerberater / authority contact, shown above the analysis, non-dismissible for the session.
UrgentDeadline ≤ 3 days or expiredEscalation banner (string 3) prioritized above all other banners; reply-draft screen repeats it.
CombinedSensitive and urgentBoth banners; analysis header additionally surfaces the professional-help recommendation as the first "next step".

Constraints

6. What the AI is never used for

7. Governance