Upload a Coded Draft Report to Claude for a Neutral-Language Review

1. Save a copy of the draft under a new name, such as "draft-coded-for-review.docx".
2. Use find and replace for each name, number and amount, and keep a private key in a separate document that never leaves your machine, so you can map codes back.
3. Read the copy once, looking for anything the find and replace missed: nicknames, initials, job titles that point to one person, small place names, unusual dates.
4. Keep your [evidence ref] placeholders or exhibit labels exactly as they are. The review depends on them.

What you should see: a draft where nothing identifies a real person, account or amount, and every statement of fact still carries its reference. Troubleshooting: If a job title or a unique event still points to one person, replace it with a general description.

Anthropic's help page lists the supported document types and the ways to upload.

1. Open a new Claude chat.
2. Click the "+" button at the lower left of the chat box and choose Add files or photos, or drag the file into the chat window.
3. Choose your coded copy and wait for the file to appear in the message box.

Anthropic's page says Claude analyzes text and visual elements in PDFs of 100 pages or fewer, and for PDFs from 101 to 1000 pages it processes text only. For a report, a Word file or a PDF of normal length is fine.

What you should see: the file name and a preview in the message box. Troubleshooting: If the file is rejected, check the file type against Anthropic's current upload page, or paste the text into the chat instead.

Type this in the same message as the upload.

Review the attached coded draft report. Do not rewrite anything.
Make a table with the columns: Sentence number, Sentence text (first eight words), Issue, Why.
Include every sentence that:
(a) states or implies intent, motive, character or credibility,
(b) states a conclusion rather than a fact from a record,
(c) uses a loaded or emphatic word such as obviously, clearly, simply or blatant,
(d) states a fact with no [evidence ref] after it.
If a sentence has more than one issue, list each issue on its own row.
After the table, list any sentence you were unsure about.

What you should see: a table with a row for each problem sentence, a short reason for each, and a final list of unsure items. Troubleshooting: If the table is long and unfocused, ask Claude to limit it to categories (a) and (d) first. If it rewrites sentences, repeat the instruction: "Do not rewrite. List only."

Do not assume the table is complete or correct.

1. Open your original draft next to the table.
2. For each row, find the sentence and decide whether you agree.
3. Scan the rest of the draft yourself for anything the table missed. A review can miss a sentence or over-flag a fair one.
4. Mark each row accept, reject or discuss.

What you should see: a marked-up table where you made the call on every row. Troubleshooting: If you disagree with many rows, tighten the prompt with your unit's own examples of acceptable wording.

1. Rewrite each accepted sentence in your own words, in the original draft. Keep the facts, the attributions and the exhibit references.
2. For a fact with no [evidence ref], find the exhibit and add it, or delete the sentence if the record does not support it.
3. Do not paste Claude's wording back in without reading it. If you ask for a suggested rewrite of one sentence, treat it as an idea.
4. Rerun the review on the revised coded copy to see what remains.

What you should see: a shorter table on the second pass, or none. Troubleshooting: If the same problem keeps coming back, check whether a template phrase is causing it.

The supervisor and counsel review the report. The AI check does not replace their review, and it does not decide whether anything in the draft is accurate or complete.