> LLMs literally do explain contracts in natural language. They also allow you to create contracts with just natural language. (With all the same caveats as using LLMs for programming or anything else.)

I can't generalize, but the last time I tried to use an LLM for looking at a legal document (month or two ago), it got a section completely wrong. And then when that was pointed out, it dug in its heels and insisted it was right, even though it was very wrong.

Interestingly there was a typo, which was obvious to any human, and would have been accepted as intended in a court, but the LLM insisted on using a strict interpretation accepting the typo as truth.

It was weird, because it felt like on the one hand the LLM was trained to handle legal documents with a more strict interpretation of what's written, but then couldn't cope with the reality of how a simple typo would be handled in courts or real legal proceedings.

So.... I dunno. LLMs can explain contracts, but they may explain then in a very wrong way, which could lead to bad outcomes if you rely on it.