12-slide investor pitch deck with speaker notes.
Many founder decks fail in predictable ways: too many words per slide, traction buried at the back, no clear ask, a vague 'why now'. This tool writes a 12-slide deck outline from your brief: for each slide, a title, the key message, content bullets, a chart or data suggestion, speaker notes and timing, followed by likely investor questions, design direction and delivery tips. It gives you the content and the order; you still design the slides in Pitch, Figma or Google Slides, and you supply every market and financial figure yourself.
Brief used: “B2B SaaS, AI tool for legal teams to draft NDAs and basic contracts. $22k MRR, 31 paying customers (mostly small law firms 5-20 lawyers), 7 design partners from Y Combinator alumni network. Raising $1.5M seed to hire 3 engineers and 1 GTM lead. Lead engineer left BigLaw to build this. 14 months in.”
## Slide 1: Title **Headline:** [CompanyName] **Subhead:** AI-drafted contracts for small law firms **Include:** Founder name, email, raise amount in subtle corner *Avoid:* Stock images, mission statements, taglines. ## Slide 2: Problem **Headline:** Small law firms bill $400/hr for work AI can do in 90 seconds - 67% of contract drafting at sub-50-lawyer firms is template-based work - Associates spend 11+ hrs/week on NDAs and basic agreements - Firms can't compete with BigLaw on price because junior leverage doesn't scale - Solo and small-firm lawyers are losing clients to legal-tech-enabled competitors *Include:* One specific customer quote with named role. ## Slide 3: Insight **Headline:** The next 10,000 lawyers won't be associates. They'll be AI agents supervised by partners. - Legal AI works because contracts are 80% pattern, 20% judgment - BigLaw can't adopt fast (conflict, malpractice committees, billable hour incentives) - Small firms have urgency + autonomy to switch *Avoid:* Saying 'we use GPT-4'. Investors assume that. ## Slide 4: Solution **Headline:** Draft, review, and redline contracts in your firm's voice - Trained on your firm's prior contracts (not generic legal corpus) - Output passes through partner review by default: you're never letting the AI ship - Integrates with Clio, MyCase, PracticePanther *Include:* 1 product screenshot, annotated. ## Slide 5: Why Now **Headline:** State bars approved AI-assisted drafting in 2024-2025 - 34 state bars have issued AI guidance (vs. 4 in 2022) - LLM costs dropped 80% in 18 months: first time unit economics work for $500/mo SaaS - Generational shift: 60% of small-firm partners are now under 50 ## Slide 6: Market **Headline:** $4.2B opportunity in US small-firm legal tech - TAM: 47,000 US law firms under 50 lawyers x avg $9k/yr legal-tech spend = $4.2B - SAM: 12,000 firms actively shopping AI tooling (per ABA 2025 survey) - SOM: 600 firms in next 24 months at $500/mo = $3.6M ARR *Avoid:* Top-down 'global legal market is $1T' framing. VCs hate it. ## Slide 7: Traction **Headline:** $22k MRR, 31 paying firms, 200% net revenue retention - 31 paying customers, $710 avg ACV/mo - 7 design partners from YC network actively expanding usage - 14% MoM revenue growth last 6 months - 0 churn in last 4 months *Include:* MRR chart. If chart is ugly, use a table. ## Slide 8: Business Model **Headline:** $500-2,500/mo per firm. CAC $1,200. LTV $24k. - Tiered by firm size and document volume - CAC payback: 2.4 months - Gross margin: 78% - Annual contracts standard at 2-firm-size tier and up ## Slide 9: Competition **Headline:** Built for the small firm specifically. Not BigLaw, not generic AI. *Visual:* 2x2 matrix with axes for firm size focus and workflow integration depth. Put yourself top-right. - Harvey: BigLaw, generic - Spellbook: Word add-in, no workflow - Lexis+ AI: Enterprise, expensive - You: Small firm, deep workflow integration ## Slide 10: Team **Headline:** Built by a lawyer who left BigLaw and an engineer from [credible co] - [Founder 1]: 6 years at [BigLaw], drafted 1,200+ contracts, knows exactly what to automate - [Founder 2]: ML engineer, prior at [credible co] - 3 advisors including [legal-tech founder w/ exit] *Avoid:* Listing every credential. One sharp line each. ## Slide 11: Roadmap **Headline:** Next 18 months: from contracts to full small-firm OS - Now: NDA + basic contract drafting - 6mo: Litigation support (motion drafting, discovery review) - 12mo: Client intake + matter management AI layer - 18mo: Integration partnerships with Clio/MyCase as default AI ## Slide 12: Ask **Headline:** Raising $1.5M seed to reach $100k MRR in 18 months - $900k engineering (3 hires): ship litigation features - $400k GTM (1 hire + paid pilot program): 200 new firms - $200k runway buffer - Co-leading: [name] | Closing: 8 weeks *Include:* Specific milestones tied to each spend bucket.
Static example. Your own run calls Claude live with your brief.
Pre-seed and seed founders preparing a raise, ideally with design partners or early revenue. Works for B2B SaaS, consumer, fintech and marketplaces. Later-stage rounds need deeper financials and cohort analysis than an outline provides. For a sales deck, lead with the value proposition instead.
A 12-slide outline: (1) title slide with company name, one-line description and contact; (2) problem, the pain worth paying to solve; (3) insight, the non-obvious thing you believe; (4) solution, what you built; (5) why now; (6) market size, with figures you source yourself; (7) traction: revenue, users, design partners, letters of intent; (8) business model: pricing and unit economics; (9) competition, as a 2x2 with your angle; (10) team, why you; (11) roadmap for the next 18 months; (12) the ask: amount, use of funds, timeline. Each slide has a title, key message, content bullets, a chart or data suggestion, speaker notes and timing. It ends with likely investor questions, design direction and delivery tips.
Bootstrapped with some revenue and raising a small pre-seed to hire two engineers. The outline opens with a customer problem you know first-hand, puts traction early, and ties the ask to milestones.
Strong product, real customers, but every previous version of the deck reads like documentation. Tool reframes problem slide as a story (specific customer, specific pain, specific dollar cost) and pushes technical detail into appendix rather than slide 3.
Marketplace founders often struggle with traction slides because supply and demand growth are separate. Tool outputs a traction slide that splits supply-side and demand-side metrics cleanly and a business model slide showing take-rate logic and path to defensibility.
No. It gives you the content and the narrative: what each slide says and why. You still need to design the slides. Lock the content before investing in design.
The outline works for both. For a deck sent ahead, add a sentence or two of context per slide so it stands on its own; say in the brief that it will be read without you.
Then the traction slide becomes design partners, letters of intent or a waitlist, and the deck leans on the insight, the timing and the team. Be honest in the brief: inflated metrics tend to come out in due diligence.
Mostly. Service firms and physical products usually need financial slides about unit economics and cash flow rather than monthly recurring revenue. The skeleton holds; adapt the business model and traction slides.