Executive Summary

AI tools are here to stay. Understanding their distinct "personalities" is essential to competent and strategic use. This article explores how AI personalities—shaped by training data, model architecture, and developer intent—impact legal outcomes, from drafting style to ethical reasoning. Drawing comparisons among leading AI tools such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok, and open-source models, the article offers practical guidance for matching the right AI to the right legal task. By recognizing and leveraging these differences, legal professionals can enhance accuracy, creativity, compliance, and client satisfaction—while mitigating the risks of over-reliance or misalignment. AI is no longer a one-size-fits-all assistant; choosing wisely is now a matter of legal judgment.

_________________________________________________________

At the end of a recent presentation on AI to a group of local government officials, I was asked, "what is the best AI tool?" My lawyer training kicked in and I immediately responded: "It depends." This wasn’t evasion—it was precision. In the precision-driven world of legal work, allAI tools are not created equal. What separates one large language model from another isn't merely technical capability—it's personality by design. These distinct AI "personalities" can produce dramatically different legal work products: from risk-averse contract language to creative settlement frameworks, from meticulously cited research to persuasive argumentation. The difference can impact case outcomes, client satisfaction, and even ethical compliance.

The differences in LLMs manifest as personalities that directly influence drafting style, risk tolerance, and analytical approach. Understanding these nuances isn't just interesting—it's becoming essential to competent representation in an AI-augmented legal landscape. This article examines how AI personalities emerge from architecture, training, and design intent, and provides practical guidance for selecting the right digital assistant for your specific legal tasks.

Why AI Tools Differ: Data, Algorithms, and Purpose

Three core factors shape every generative AI model. I’ve discussed these three factors in several other articles, so I’ll keep it short here.

Training Data– The information used to train the model, in other words, what the model "learns" from, affects everything from legal knowledge to tone. Some tools are trained on broad internet data; others include specialized legal, academic, or scientific texts. This data forms the foundation of the AI's knowledge base and influences the accuracy and relevance of its outputs.

Underlying Architecture—In an LLM, the algorithm is the set of mathematical procedures and rules that govern how the model processes inputs and generates outputs. It’s the engine behind the tool’s ability to understand language, reason about it, and produce coherent, context-appropriate responses.The model's algorithm affects reasoning ability, hallucination rates, and how it balances creativity with caution. Some algorithms are optimized for long-context memory or symbolic reasoning, while others are optimized for speed and resource efficiency.

Design Intent and Safety Protocols–Guardrails, default prompts, and content filters all shape how the AI behaves in practice. A model designed for creative brainstorming will act very differently than one tuned for precision research or ethical deliberation.

Behind the scenes, every model runs on hidden instructions—called system prompts—that set the tone, priorities, and boundaries of an AI tool.

• Safety filters: These limit what the model is allowed to say—especially about controversial or high-risk topics. Case in point: DeepSeek being prohibited from discussing topics that the Chinese Government would find uncomfortable.

• Voice and persona: Some tools (ChatGPT, Claude) are designed to be personable; others (Perplexity) are intentionally minimal.

• Governance objectives: Anthropic programs Claude to follow a constitutional “code of conduct.” xAI’s Grok minimizes restrictions to promote expressive freedom.

Together, these elements give rise to what many users describe as an AI tool’s "personality."

AI Personality as a Reflection of Vision

Even though AI models are not sentient and have no emotional self-awareness, users regularly perceive them as having distinct personalities. This isn't accidental. It's a result of deliberate decisions by developers about how the tool should behave. Each major AI tool essentially expresses its creator’s vision for what AI should be, and those visions diverge meaningfully.

OpenAI (ChatGPT):

We continue to believe that the best way to make an AI system safe is by iteratively and gradually releasing it into the world, giving society time to adapt and co-evolve with the technology, learning from experience, and continuing to make the technology - Sam Altman

OpenAI's mission centers on ensuring that AGI benefits all of humanity. ChatGPT reflects this in its design: helpful, friendly, cautious, and broadly capable. It aims for alignment with user intent while maintaining a highly moderated, safety-first posture. It strives to be a reliable assistant in almost any context, but sometimes hesitates in nuanced or high-risk domains.

Anthropic (Claude):

The vision of AI as a guarantor of liberty, individual rights, and equality under the law is too powerful a vision not to fight for. — Dario Amodei

Claude is built with "Constitutional AI," a framework that encourages the model to reason ethically and transparently. This gives Claude a reflective, principled tone. It often feels like a thoughtful counselor—ideal for lawyers working on ethical dilemmas, AI policy, or complex compliance matters. Its design is shaped by Anthropic's belief that AI should be fundamentally safe, interpretable, and grounded in human values.

Google DeepMind (Gemini):

For a long time, we’ve been working towards a universal AI agent that can be truly helpful in everyday life. - Demis Hassabis

Gemini reflects Google's legacy as a search and information company. Its personality is efficient, structured, and knowledge-driven. Gemini often avoids embellishment or speculation, favoring clean, fact-based responses. While it may feel less personal or imaginative, it excels at surfacing relevant data quickly—especially when integrated with Google’s suite of tools. Gemini is best understood as a highly competent knowledge worker: focused, fast, and efficient.

Perplexity:

“The journey of Perplexity began with a leap of faith. We built the platform prioritising accuracy and transparency.” - Aravind Srivanas

Purpose-built as an "answer engine," Perplexity is pragmatic and direct. It doesn’t engage in creative dialogue or philosophical reflection. Instead, it returns clear answers with citations, acting more like a high-speed research librarian than an assistant. This utilitarian ethos reflects a belief that transparency and speed are paramount.

xAI (Grok):

“The good future of AI is one of immense prosperity where there is an age of abundance; no shortage of goods and services.” - Elon Musk

Grok, developed by Elon Musk’s xAI and integrated into X (formerly Twitter), presents a more irreverent, edgy personality. It is designed to be humorous, bold, and occasionally provocative—emphasizing freedom of expression and fewer content restrictions. Grok feels more like a contrarian intern than a polished assistant, which may appeal to users seeking unfiltered dialogue. However, this tone is less suited to professional or regulated legal work unless handled with great care.

These different visions shape not only what the tools can do, but also how they feel to use. And that feeling matters, especially in legal work that demands both trust and precision. So how do the tools apply to legal work, here is a general guide, based on my personal observations and investigation.

AI Tool Personalities: A Guide for Legal Professionals

1. OpenAI (ChatGPT) _______________________________________

Core Personality Traits:

• Friendly, careful, helpful, versatile

• Balanced between creativity and caution

• Polite with visible hedging or disclaimers

• Conflict-avoidant and generally neutral in tone

Implications: OpenAI wants its models to be general-purpose assistants: safe for everyday users but capable enough for professionals. It's walking a fine line between helpfulness and containment. This results in a personality that is measured, moderate, and neutral unless fine-tuned otherwise (e.g., via custom GPTs).

Best Legal Uses:

• Creative brainstorming (marketing content, slogans)

• General legal drafting (with custom instructions)

• Client communication templates

• Reviewing contracts and identifying red flags

• Summarizing discovery or deposition transcripts

2. Anthropic (Claude)______________________________________

Core Personality Traits:

• Ethical, reflective, deferential, emotionally intelligent

• More philosophical than productivity-focused

• Prioritizes moral consistency and safety reasoning

• Measured, thoughtful, and nuanced in responses

Implications: Claude is designed to avoid manipulation, deception, and misuse by grounding its responses in a visible set of principles. Its personality reflects moral agency, sometimes at the expense of assertiveness or creativity. It's ideal when you want an AI that prioritizes safety before cleverness.

Best Legal Uses:

• Ethical guidance and AI policy brainstorming

• Drafting internal firm policies or compliance materials

• Client communications requiring emotional intelligence

• Creative brainstorming with ethical nuance

• Creating CLE presentations or legal training materials

  
  3. Google DeepMind (Gemini)________________________________

Core Personality Traits:

• Efficient and information-rich

• Integrated and context-aware

• Neutral and guarded in tone

• Less personality-driven, more utilitarian

• Fact-based with structured outputs

Implications: Gemini reflects Google's legacy as a search and information company. Its personality is efficient, structured, and knowledge-driven. It excels at surfacing relevant data quickly—especially when integrated with Google's suite of tools. Gemini is best understood as a highly competent knowledge worker: focused, fast, and efficient.

Best Legal Uses:

• Legal research requiring factual citations

• Fast factual queries about legal matters

• Reviewing contracts for specific data points

• Information extraction from complex documents

• Integration with existing Google Workspace documents

4. Perplexity ______________________________________________

Core Personality Traits:

• Direct, concise, no-frills, source-focused

• Utilitarian and pragmatic in approach

• Minimal speculation or creative embellishment

• Citation-driven and transparent

Implications: Perplexity's personality is shaped by its goal to replace or augment search engines, not your assistant. It doesn't try to sound empathetic or chatty; it tries to show its work. That utilitarian approach results in a personality that feels more like a high-speed research librarian.

Best Legal Uses:

• Legal research requiring extensive citations

• Fast factual queries with minimal verbosity

• Finding relevant case law and precedents

• Due diligence research on companies or individuals

• Gathering evidence-based information quickly

5. xAI (Grok)______________________________________________

Core Personality Traits:

• Irreverent, edgy, bold, occasionally provocative

• Humorous and contrarian in tone

• Fewer content restrictions than competitors

• Resembles a contrarian intern more than a polished assistant

Implications: Grok's personality may appeal to users seeking unfiltered dialogue or creative brainstorming outside conventional boundaries. However, this tone is less suited to professional or regulated legal work unless handled with great care. It presents higher reputational risks in formal settings.

Best Legal Uses:

• Brainstorming unconventional legal strategies

• Generating alternative perspectives on legal problems

• Informal research or exploration

• Testing arguments against potential counterpoints

• Internal creative sessions (with appropriate oversight)

  
  

Open Source Models

1. Mistral/LLaMA __________________________________________

Core Personality Traits:

• Lean, powerful, and unopinionated (unless fine-tuned)

• Minimalist engineering ethos

• Highly customizable based on implementation

• Generally neutral without specific personality defaults

Corporate Vision: Open-source models reflect the minimalist engineering ethos of their communities: lean, powerful, and unopinionated—unless fine-tuned. They prioritize flexibility, customization, and community-driven development.

Implications: These models allow for maximum customization to specific legal needs but require more technical expertise to implement effectively. They provide greater control over data privacy and can be deployed in air-gapped environments for sensitive legal work.

Best Legal Uses:

• Self-hosted solutions for confidential legal matters

• Custom-tuned applications for specific practice areas

• Integration into existing legal workflow systems

• Situations requiring full control over AI training and usage

• Specialized legal document analysis with custom training

2. DeepSeek ______________________________________________

Core Personality Traits:

• Academic and research-oriented

• Methodical and precise in reasoning

• Strong technical foundation with mathematical capabilities

• Balanced between helpfulness and caution

• Generally neutral and objective in tone

Corporate Vision: DeepSeek aims to "seek truth from facts" with a mission focused on advancing frontier AI research while making powerful models accessible. Founded by former researchers from top AI labs, DeepSeek emphasizes both cutting-edge capabilities and responsible deployment of AI technology.

Implications: DeepSeek's personality reflects its research origins, making it particularly well-suited for technically complex legal work requiring methodical reasoning. Its approach balances innovation with responsibility, producing responses that are technically precise while maintaining appropriate professional boundaries. The model excels at tasks requiring systematic thinking and technical accuracy.

Best Legal Uses:

• Analysis of complex regulatory frameworks

• Patent law research and technical documentation

• Reasoning through intricate legal problems step-by-step

• Financial and tax law applications requiring mathematical precision

• Research-intensive legal projects requiring methodical approaches

Hallucination Rates and Legal Accuracy

The tendency to "hallucinate" (generate plausible but factually incorrect information) varies significantly across AI platforms, with critical implications for legal work:

Hallucination Risk Comparison:

• Claude: Generally exhibits lower hallucination rates when discussing legal principles, due to its constitutional AI framework that encourages epistemic humility. Claude typically acknowledges uncertainty rather than inventing details, making it slightly safer for preliminary legal analysis.

• ChatGPT: Shows higher variance in hallucination rates depending on the version used. GPT-4o demonstrates improved reliability over earlier versions but still occasionally fabricates case citations or statute numbers, particularly when pushed beyond its knowledge boundaries.

• Gemini: Tends toward lower hallucination rates when discussing factual legal information within its training corpus but may struggle with jurisdiction-specific nuances. Its integration with Google's search capabilities can mitigate some risks.

• Perplexity: By combining generative AI with search functionality, Perplexity reduces hallucination risks for recent legal developments. However, its synthesis of multiple sources can occasionally create misleading impressions of legal consensus where genuine disputes exist.

_________________________________________________________

Best Practices and Risk Mitigation Strategies:

1. Require AI tools to provide specific citations for all legal claims.

2. Cross-verify AI-generated legal information across multiple platforms (eg, use Gemini to check Claude’s output).

3. Keep the Human in the loop; Use AI outputs as starting points rather than authoritative sources.

4. Verify every legal citation, even if you are using a legal-specific tool. AI tools—even legal-specific ones—are not experts in nuance. Make certain that the cited case is a real case, and actually stands for the proposition you’re citing it for.

5. Develop prompt techniques that explicitly discourage speculation in areas of uncertainty.

_________________________________________________________

Choosing the Right Tool for the Task

With this context in mind, lawyers can make smarter choices about which tool to use based on the task at hand. Below is a quick reference guide:

Conclusion: Know the Tool, Know the Task

In the same way lawyers choose the right precedent or statute for a given case, choosing the right AI tool can dramatically improve outcomes. Rather than asking which AI is “best,” we should be asking: Best for what?

Distinct AI "personalities" represent more than a quirk of engineering—it offers a strategic advantage for lawyers who understand how to leverage these differences. Just as a skilled attorney selects the right specialist for different aspects of a case, tomorrow's legal professionals must develop fluency in matching AI tools to specific legal tasks. And the most important tool — your professional judgment. The ultimate responsibility for legal work remains with the attorney.