A recent article from Bloomberg Law argues that legal departments should consider embracing “agentic” AI — not just simple generative‑AI tools — but only with care. Agentic AI refers to systems that, unlike standard generative models which respond to prompts, can autonomously plan, retrieve data, use tools, and execute multistep tasks across integrated applications.
The key message is that agentic AI has far greater potential value for legal operations than generative AI alone. Where generative AI might draft a document or summarise a clause, agentic AI could independently run workflows such as contract review, compliance checks, or even full case‑management tasks — potentially offering real efficiency gains to legal teams. However, this power comes with significant risks. Because the AI may act without real‑time human supervision, issues like liability for unauthorized actions, data‑security vulnerabilities, or unintended consequences of automated decisions become much more serious than the usual worries about “hallucinations” or bad content.
To use agentic AI wisely, legal departments are advised to carefully assess each tool’s “autonomy spectrum”: how much autonomy the agent has (from simple suggestions to full execution), and how much human oversight remains (guardrails, overrides, audit trails).By placing a proposed system correctly on that spectrum, teams can calibrate risk management — avoiding over-reacting to low-risk tools or underestimating high-risk ones.
In short: the future of legal operations doesn’t lie in rejecting powerful new AI — it lies in thoughtful, measured integration. With proper governance, oversight, and realistic understanding of capabilities, agentic AI can transform legal workflows. Without that, the very autonomy that gives these tools power could lead to serious pitfalls.
