If you are preparing a paper for a Call for Papers (CFP), AI can be useful for topic selection, research planning, finding research gaps, structuring arguments, improving writing and reviewing your draft. The important part is to use AI as a research assistant, not as a substitute for verifying authorities and sources.
Prompt 1 — Understand the CFP
I am participating in a Call for Papers. Here is the CFP: [PASTE CFP] Analyse the CFP carefully and identify: - Central theme - Sub-themes - Specific areas that appear to be encouraged - Topics that may be too broad - Topics that could produce a strong legal research paper - Any word limit, formatting, citation or submission requirements Do not invent requirements that are not present in the CFP. Based only on the CFP, suggest the most promising research directions.
Prompt 2 — Find a Strong Research Topic
I need to write a legal research paper for the following Call for Papers: [PASTE CFP] Suggest 15 specific research topics suitable for this CFP. For each topic provide: - Proposed title - Central legal issue - Research question - Why the issue is relevant - Possible scope of the paper Avoid generic topics. Prefer focused, researchable questions involving legislation, judicial decisions, regulatory developments, policy or emerging legal issues.
Prompt 3 — Identify the Research Gap
I am considering this research topic: [INSERT TOPIC] Help me identify potential research gaps. Analyse: - What aspects of the issue are already commonly discussed? - What questions remain insufficiently examined? - What legal contradictions or uncertainties may exist? - What recent developments could create a new research question? - What specific gap could make the paper more original? Do not claim that a research gap definitely exists unless it can be supported by actual literature. Clearly distinguish between a potential gap and an established gap.
Prompt 4 — Build a Research Question
My proposed topic is: [INSERT TOPIC] Develop 5 strong research questions for a law research paper. The questions should be: - Specific - Legally researchable - Narrow enough for a [INSERT WORD LIMIT]-word paper - Capable of being answered through legislation, case law, academic literature and policy material - Suitable for critical analysis rather than merely descriptive writing For each question, explain what the paper would need to investigate.
Prompt 5 — Create a Research Plan
I am writing a legal research paper on: [INSERT TOPIC] Create a detailed research plan. Divide the research into: 1. Primary legislation and regulations 2. Important judicial decisions 3. Government or regulatory materials 4. Academic literature 5. International materials, if relevant 6. Comparative law, if useful 7. Recent developments 8. Arguments supporting the existing position 9. Criticisms of the existing position 10. Possible reforms For every category, tell me what I should specifically search for. Do not invent sources or case names.
Prompt 6 — Analyse a Judgment
Analyse the following judgment for use in my research paper: [PASTE JUDGMENT / PROVIDE TEXT] Prepare: - Facts - Issues - Arguments of the parties - Decision - Ratio decidendi - Important observations - Statutory provisions considered - Earlier cases relied upon - How the judgment affects the legal position - Any limitations or unresolved questions Do not add facts or legal principles that are not supported by the judgment.
Prompt 7 — Compare Two Legal Positions
I am researching: [INSERT ISSUE] Compare the following two legal positions: Position A: [INSERT] Position B: [INSERT] Analyse them from: - Statutory interpretation - Judicial precedent - Constitutional principles, if relevant - Policy considerations - Practical consequences - Advantages and weaknesses Then identify which position appears stronger and explain why. Do not treat your conclusion as established law. Clearly distinguish legal authority from analytical reasoning.
Prompt 8 — Develop the Paper Structure
My research question is: [INSERT RESEARCH QUESTION] My tentative argument is: [INSERT ARGUMENT] Create a detailed structure for a [INSERT WORD LIMIT]-word legal research paper. Include: - Introduction - Background/context - Existing legal framework - Relevant case law - Existing scholarship - Core legal analysis - Counterarguments - Critical evaluation - Reform/suggestions, if justified - Conclusion For every section, explain what argument or question it should answer. Avoid creating sections merely to increase the word count.
Also Read: Career in Legal Tech and AI: Opportunities, Skills, Pros and Cons
Prompt 9 — Critically Review My Draft
Review the following legal research paper as an academic reviewer: [PASTE DRAFT] Evaluate: - Clarity of research question - Strength of thesis - Originality - Legal reasoning - Use of authorities - Structure - Counterarguments - Logical consistency - Unsupported claims - Repetition - Weak paragraphs - Conclusion - Whether the paper actually answers its research question Do not rewrite the entire paper. First identify the weaknesses and explain how each can be improved.
Prompt 10 — Improve Academic Legal Writing
Edit the following section of my legal research paper: [PASTE TEXT] Improve: - Academic tone - Legal precision - Logical flow - Paragraph structure - Clarity - Conciseness - Transitions - Strength of legal reasoning Preserve my original argument and do not introduce new authorities, facts or claims. After editing, briefly identify the major changes you made and any sentence where the underlying legal claim should be verified with an authoritative source.
One Extra Prompt — The Most Useful One
Before submitting the paper, use this:Act as a strict peer reviewer for my legal research paper. [PASTE FULL PAPER] Assume that the paper will be reviewed by law professors and legal researchers. Identify: - Any factual claim requiring verification - Any case citation that should be checked - Any statutory provision that should be verified - Unsupported assertions - Overstated conclusions - Logical gaps - Weak counterarguments - Places where I am describing rather than analysing - Places where the argument lacks originality - Sections that can be removed without weakening the paper Do not invent corrections or authorities. Where verification is required, clearly flag the point instead of guessing.
Best workflow: CFP → Topic → Research Gap → Research Question → Research Plan → Sources → Case Analysis → Argument → Draft → AI Review → Independent source verification → Final submission.
