Tools for law firms
Best AI visibility tools for law firms: seven compared by practice area and city
By Arnav Mukherjee, founder of TofuBofu · October 31, 2026
In the legal scans we've run, engines answering "best lawyer" questions leaned on two kinds of page. One was the big legal directories: Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers, Legal 500 and FindLaw. The other was rival firms' own posts titled "best <practice> lawyers in <city>".
In the answers we sampled, then, what a client read was stitched together from directory profiles and rival firms' own lists. That's the race you're in, practice group by practice group and office by office, and the tool you pick should show you where you stand in each one.
Why do law firms need a different test?
The question has two coordinates. Many clients don't ask for "the best law firm". They ask for a family lawyer in Austin, or a firm that handles commercial leases in Manchester. Practice area and city together decide the answer, so a tool needs to ask both, and a firm with five practice groups in three offices is fifteen different races.
Directories carry weight. Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers, Legal 500 and FindLaw appeared in the answers we saw. Those profiles are yours to keep accurate and linked from your site.
The format engines cite is the one you may not be allowed to write. A rival's "best lawyers in <city>" post is a comparative claim. Whether your firm can publish one depends on the rules that govern lawyer advertising where you practise, so check the advertising rules of your bar or regulator before you copy the format. We won't tell you what they say; your bar or regulator will.
That pushes a firm toward content that answers the client's question directly: practice-area explainers, FAQ pages built from what clients ask on the first call, and short explainer videos. Our read is that these are both safer under advertising rules and closer to what a worried client types into ChatGPT before calling anyone.
What engines cited in our legal scans, and the content a firm can publish once it has checked its own bar's rules.
How did we rank them?
- Practice area by city. Can the tool ask a localised question for each practice group? TofuBofu localises to city level; ask every other vendor to show you.
- Drafts a lawyer can approve. A firm needs a first draft to edit, not a brief to start from. Nothing should publish without a human yes.
- Evidence you can read. The full engine answer and its citations, so a partner can see which directory or rival got the mention.
- Fit for firm size, and enough questions. Five practice groups in three offices is fifteen questions before any variation. That fits our Dominate plan's 25 queries and Semrush's 25 prompts, and it outruns our Fix plan's 10, so count yours before you buy any of them.
TofuBofu is ours. Semrush and Profound come next here, ahead of where we'd put them for an MSP, because law has large firms with real marketing departments that will use their depth. Prices were read on each vendor's own page on 31 October 2026.
Which tool fits which firm, at a glance?
| Tool | Firm it suits | Writes the content? | Entry price |
|---|---|---|---|
| TofuBofu | Small and mid-sized firms | Yes, from Fix | Free; Fix $99/mo |
| Semrush | Firms already on Semrush; large firms on Enterprise AIO | Toolkit no (Content Toolkit sold separately); Enterprise AIO yes | Toolkit $99/mo |
| Profound | Large firms, big teams | Yes | 7-day trial, then demo |
| Peec AI | Firms with a marketer; clean and fair, in our view | Briefs and rewrites of existing pages | $95/mo |
| HubSpot AEO | Firms on HubSpot wanting a low-cost scan | No; drafting needs Marketing Hub Pro | $45/mo annual |
| Writesonic | Firms wanting a writer; Action Center on Enterprise | Yes | $79/mo annual |
| Otterly.AI | Firms wanting the lowest paid entry | Briefs; drafts via its separate GEO Content Creator | $29/mo |
The seven tools, reviewed for law firms
1. TofuBofu
- Best for: small and mid-sized firms with a lean marketing team, or none, that want to scan, diagnose and fix. The scan asks the buying questions real clients ask, localised to your market down to city level, keeps every engine's full answer and citations, and names the firms engines pick instead of you.
- Price (read 31 Oct 2026): free Track, 1 scan a month with 5 queries and content ideas only. Fix $99/month: 4 scans, 10 queries, 10 drafted articles. Dominate $499/month: 25 queries, 25 articles, 10 video scripts, 4 newsletters. Rule from $1,999/month: the same numbers, done for you by our team.
- Engines: ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini and Google AI Mode, every plan, search on for every engine.
- Writes the content? Yes. Drafted articles (practice-area posts, FAQ and comparison pages) from Fix; newsletters and video scripts from Dominate. Drafts publish to WordPress, Webflow, HubSpot, GitHub or a webhook only after you approve, which is where your lawyer's review goes. The next scan shows whether engines now name you on the query it targets.
- Where it falls short: no Google AI Overviews (we track Google AI Mode, because Google shows no AI Overview on most vendor-shortlist questions) and no Bing Copilot. Video scripts start at Dominate. Track has no drafts. Finished videos are made with our team, not self-serve. We don't check drafts against your bar's rules, and that includes our comparison-page drafts, which make the kind of claim those rules cover; your lawyer checks them. We're a small company, younger than the enterprise vendors.
Neither of our named customers is a law firm, but one of them did the kind of work a firm in a regulated profession needs. Inotek Pharma Solutions, a pharmaceutical design and engineering firm, tracks its AI visibility with us, and we wrote it a video script comparing EU GMP and US FDA requirements: a rules topic, explained carefully, for a buyer who has to get it right. Robgence, a robotics training-data company on Dominate, shows the approval step a partner would want: it publishes the articles we draft to its own blog through GitHub once it's happy with them, and our team made finished videos for it. We're the only AI visibility platform we checked that turns its own citation findings into video scripts as part of the plan, plus finished videos made with you.
2. Semrush
- Best for: a firm whose agency already runs Semrush, and, through Semrush Enterprise AIO, a large firm with its own content team.
- Price (read 31 Oct 2026): AI Visibility Toolkit $99 a month per domain, billed annually, with 25 prompts, sold on its own with no other Semrush subscription needed. Enterprise AIO is demo-only pricing.
- Engines: not verified for this post; check the toolkit's own pages.
- Writes the content? Not in the AI Visibility Toolkit, which gives audits and optimisation guidance. Semrush sells drafting separately in its Content Toolkit, $60 a month billed annually, for full long-form drafts, and Enterprise AIO drafts too.
- Where it falls short: the $99 Toolkit leaves a firm without a writer holding a blank page per practice area, unless you add the Content Toolkit or move to Enterprise AIO.
3. Profound
- Best for: a large firm with a marketing department that wants nine engines on one Enterprise contract.
- Price (read 31 Oct 2026): free 7-day trial with 50 prompts; Enterprise is custom-priced through a demo.
- Engines: the trial covers ChatGPT, Gemini and AI Overviews. Enterprise lists ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode, Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, DeepSeek, Claude, Google AI Overviews and Exa Search.
- Writes the content? Yes. Posts, images and newsletter drafts, plus a YouTube metadata agent template. Hosted MCP server and REST API.
- Where it falls short: built and priced for enterprise, so a small practice pays for a contract sized for a big team. Our Profound review goes deeper.
Find out which firm AI engines name for your practice area. Our free scan asks real buying questions across five AI engines and shows who gets named instead. No card, no call.
Check your AI visibility free4. Peec AI
- Best for: a firm with a marketing manager who'll act on a tracker that is, in our view, clean and fairly priced.
- Price (read 31 Oct 2026): Starter $95, Pro $245, Advanced $495 a month; Enterprise custom.
- Engines: Starter, Pro and Advanced include three models, chosen from ChatGPT, Google AI Mode, AI Overviews, Microsoft Copilot, Gemini and Naver AI, with more, Perplexity among them, as paid add-ons without switching plans. Claude is on Enterprise.
- Writes the content? Partly. Content briefs and recommended actions on every plan, and a content optimizer, described in its 13 October 2026 changelog, that suggests rewrites to pages you already have, which you accept, edit or reject. On the pages we read it doesn't draft new articles from scratch. MCP on all plans, API from Pro.
- Where it falls short: three models included, extra ones paid per model, and it reworks pages you have rather than drafting a new practice-area explainer. See our Peec review.
5. HubSpot AEO
- Best for: a firm already on HubSpot that wants a low-cost scan.
- Price (read 31 Oct 2026): $45 a month billed annually, $50 monthly. No HubSpot subscription required.
- Engines: ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity.
- Writes the content? Not on the standalone plan. It recommends what to create or update; generating blog posts from those recommendations needs Marketing Hub Professional or Enterprise plus HubSpot credits.
- Where it falls short: the standalone plan doesn't draft; drafting needs Marketing Hub Professional or Enterprise plus credits. We tested its pitch in HubSpot AEO claims vs reality.
6. Writesonic
- Best for: a firm that wants a writing platform, with citation-driven topics on Enterprise.
- Price (read 31 Oct 2026): Starter $79, Basic $199, Growth $399 a month, billed annually; Enterprise custom. Starter tracks 50 prompts daily and includes 15 AI articles a month; Basic includes 25, Growth 50.
- Engines: Starter tracks ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews; Enterprise tracks nine platforms.
- Writes the content? Yes. Starter includes 15 AI articles a month and Basic 25. Its Action Center, which groups competitor citations by intent, surfaces uncovered topics for its Article Writer and ranks page refreshes by citation impact with one-click push to your CMS, is available on Enterprise; Growth gets an Action Center trial of 5 off-page and 5 on-page actions a month. It also sells a video-script generator, plus APIs and MCP.
- Where it falls short: Starter tracks three engines. As with any tool here, a lawyer should review every draft before it goes live.
7. Otterly.AI
- Best for: a firm that wants the lowest paid entry price of the seven. Its case studies include B2B SaaS companies and agencies, so judge it on price and engines.
- Price (read 31 Oct 2026): Lite $29, Standard $189, Premium $489 a month, lower if paid annually; Enterprise custom.
- Engines: ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot at base. Claude, AI Mode and Gemini are paid add-ons.
- Writes the content? Content briefs in the plan; a separate GEO Content Creator tool generates articles, listicles and comparisons, and its page doesn't say whether that's in the paid plans. MCP and API from Standard.
- Where it falls short: reaching Claude, AI Mode or Gemini means paying for add-ons, and we couldn't confirm whether Content Creator drafts come with the paid plans.
Which one should your firm choose?
- Choose TofuBofu if you're a small or mid-sized firm, nobody writes content full time, and you want practice-area explainers, FAQ pages and video scripts drafted for a lawyer to approve.
- Choose Profound or Semrush Enterprise AIO if you're a large firm with a marketing department and the budget for a demo-priced contract.
- Choose Semrush's toolkit if your agency already runs your SEO in Semrush.
- Choose HubSpot AEO if you're on HubSpot and want a low-cost first look, no HubSpot subscription required.
- Choose Peec AI if you have a marketer and want what is, in our view, a tidy dashboard.
- Choose Otterly.AI if you want the lowest paid entry price. For B2C brands we'd point you to Otterly; its homepage shows consumer brands such as BenQ, Avis Budget Group and eToro.
Before any tool, do two things. Make sure every directory profile you hold is current and linked from your site. Then write one explainer per practice area answering the first question a client asks, and record a two-minute video of a partner answering it. Our guide to AI visibility for local businesses covers the local half of this.
Frequently asked questions
What is the best AI visibility tool for a law firm?
For a small or mid-sized firm without an in-house content team, TofuBofu, because it measures questions localised to your city and drafts the explainers, FAQ pages and video scripts that answer them. A big firm with its own marketing department and an enterprise budget fits Profound or Semrush Enterprise AIO. A firm on HubSpot that only wants a low-cost check can use HubSpot AEO.
What do AI engines cite when someone asks for a lawyer?
In the legal scans we've run, engines cited legal directories such as Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers, Legal 500 and FindLaw, and rival firms' own posts listing the best lawyers for a practice area in a city. Your directory profiles and your own practice pages are the two places to start.
Can a law firm publish a best lawyers in my city post?
Engines cite that format, which is why rival firms publish it. Whether your firm can make comparative or superlative claims depends on the rules that govern lawyer advertising where you practise. Check your bar or regulator's advertising rules before publishing anything that ranks firms or calls your own the best.
What content helps a law firm get named by AI engines?
Our view: practice-area explainers that answer the question a client asks before calling, FAQ pages built from real client questions, and short explainer videos with a transcript. They answer the buyer directly and stay on the safe side of claims about outcomes or rankings.
Do AI visibility tools write legal content?
Several draft something. Profound drafts posts and newsletters, Writesonic writes AI articles on every plan and, on Enterprise, from citation-driven topics, Semrush drafts through its Content Toolkit and Enterprise AIO, HubSpot generates blog posts from AEO recommendations on Marketing Hub Professional or Enterprise, with credits, and Peec AI suggests rewrites to existing pages. TofuBofu drafts a typical month's articles and FAQ pages from the questions you lose on Fix, adds newsletters and video scripts on Dominate, and nothing publishes until you approve it. Every draft, from any tool, should go past a lawyer before it goes live.
Does TofuBofu have law firm customers?
Our named customers aren't law firms. Robgence is a robotics training-data company and Inotek Pharma Solutions is a pharmaceutical design and engineering firm. We've run scans for legal brands, which is where the citation pattern in this post comes from.
Sources and further reading
- Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit and Semrush Enterprise, read 31 October 2026
- Profound pricing, read 31 October 2026
- Peec AI pricing, read 31 October 2026
- HubSpot AEO, read 31 October 2026
- Writesonic, read 31 October 2026
- Otterly.AI pricing, read 31 October 2026
- TofuBofu's own legal scans, completed scans to 31 October 2026: the directories and rival posts engines cited, reported as a pattern rather than a count
- Peec AI changelog, read 31 October 2026: the content optimizer, described in its 13 October 2026 changelog
- Otterly.AI case studies and GEO Content Creator, read 31 October 2026
- HubSpot, set up and analyze AI visibility, read 31 October 2026: the standalone plan recommends; generating blog posts needs Marketing Hub Professional or Enterprise and credits
- Semrush AI pricing and Enterprise AIO content optimisation, read 31 October 2026
- Writesonic pricing, read 31 October 2026: plans, prompts, engines and article counts
- Semrush Content Toolkit pricing, read 31 October 2026: drafting sold separately
- Writesonic AI Visibility Action Center, read 31 October 2026
