Review a document
What happens between upload and results, how the review editor is laid out, and how to pick a review back up later.
A review is one pass of the BriefCatch engine over one document. It produces writing suggestions, citation-format corrections, and consistency findings, and it opens the door to RealityCheck, which is a separate, explicitly started run.
From upload to results
Upload or pick a file
From My Documents, choose Upload document, or add one from a connected drive. The upload dialog validates the file and asks where the copy should live afterwards. See My Documents.
Analysis runs
The editor opens and shows progress: uploading, extracting text, analyzing, extracting citations. During busy periods you may see Queued — position N. That is a real queue, not an error.
Results arrive
Suggestions populate the sidebar as each stage completes. Citation extraction starts automatically once the writing pass is done, so the Citations tab can still be working while the others are ready.
You work the suggestions
Accept, reject, or ignore each one. See Work with suggestions.
Do not upload the same document again because a review is still queued. A second upload is a second document and a second run.
The review editor
The screen has three parts:
- The header — the file name, how many suggestions remain, the save state (Saving…, Saved HH, or Save now), and a File menu with Export to Word (.docx), Open in Word, and PDF export. Back to My Briefs returns to the library.
- The document — a real editor. You can type in it. Edits are saved back to the stored copy, and the toolbar carries the usual formatting controls, zoom, and a ruler.
- The review sidebar — tabs across the top, suggestion cards below, and the score band at the bottom.
The sidebar also switches between views: BriefCatch (the suggestions), Reports, BriefChat, Reality Check, and Settings.
Progress and the score
The bottom of the sidebar shows a writing score and a band — Excellent draft, Strong draft, Solid draft, or Needs work — alongside a count of how many suggestions you have accepted and how many are left.
The score moves as you work: it is derived from how many suggestions are still outstanding, so it climbs as you accept or dismiss them. Treat it as a progress indicator for the review, not as a verdict on the brief. It is an editorial signal, and it says nothing about whether the argument is correct or the filing is sound.
Re-analyzing
Re-analyze document runs the engine again over the current text. Reach for it after substantial edits, when suggestions no longer line up with the passages they refer to. On an expired trial the control is replaced by Your trial has expired — upgrade to re-analyze.
Re-analysis replaces the current findings. Anything you had already accepted stays in the document; anything outstanding is recalculated.
Coming back later
The library keeps recent documents with their review status, suggestion progress, and expiry. Opening a reviewed document reopens the review where you left it.
Details in the library opens the document’s history — previous review runs, and version and author history where available.
If the stored document has expired, its metadata may still be listed but the document cannot be opened. Re-upload the source file to review it again.
When something goes wrong
- “Analysis service is unavailable. Please try again later.” — the engine could not be reached. The document is safe; retry.
- “Failed to load suggestions. Please try again.” — results exist but did not load. Refresh before re-analyzing.
- Progress stops advancing — if the product offers Try again, use it once. See Troubleshooting.