The Interactive editor is RYTZ’s paragraph-level affidavit refinement surface. Where the Create from scratch wizard builds the draft and the Improve audit reviews it as a whole, the Interactive editor is for working on it sentence by sentence. Route:Documentation Index
Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://help.rytz.com.au/llms.txt
Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
app.rytz.com.au/interactive-affidavit-editor.
What it does
The editor combines a writing surface with three live overlays:Admissibility flags
Each paragraph gets evaluated as you write. Hearsay, opinion, irrelevance, and form issues surface as inline flags with explanations.
Rewrite proposals
Click a flagged sentence (or any sentence) and the editor offers 1–3 rewrite proposals — each preserving the underlying fact while addressing the flag.
Annexure suggestions
Sentences that name documents, dates, or events get cross-referenced against your Evidence Portfolio. The editor suggests “this sentence could become annexure JL-3 if you reference [item]”.
Tone analysis
Inline indicators for tone — emotional, accusatory, hedging, evasive. Affidavits read better when they sound factual; the tone overlay flags drift.
When to use it
Three moments in the affidavit workflow where the editor is the right tool:| Moment | Why the editor |
|---|---|
| After the wizard exports a first draft | Refine before swearing |
| After the Improve audit returns recommendations | Apply the audit findings inline |
| Mid-draft when you’re stuck on a paragraph | Get unstuck with rewrite proposals |
The editing surface
The interface has three panes:- Centre — the affidavit text. Numbered paragraphs, your text, click-to-edit.
- Right — the active flag panel. When you click a paragraph, this pane shows the flags, rewrite proposals, and annexure suggestions for that paragraph.
- Left — navigation + audit summary. Outline of the affidavit (each paragraph as a clickable item), with overall progress indicators (paragraphs flagged, paragraphs reviewed, paragraphs annexured).
Working through a paragraph
Click the paragraph
The right pane populates with this paragraph’s flags. Each flag has:
- A category (hearsay, opinion, irrelevance, form, tone, missing-evidence)
- A specific sentence or phrase highlighted in the text
- An explanation of the issue
- 1–3 proposed rewrites
Read the flag
Don’t act yet. Read the explanation. The platform tells you why the flag fired (e.g. “the phrase ‘Lucy told me’ introduces hearsay; under section 59 of the Evidence Act, what someone else said is generally not admissible to prove the truth of what they said”).
Choose a rewrite
Three options for each flag:
- Accept proposal — the editor swaps the original sentence for the proposed rewrite
- Modify proposal — the rewrite is loaded into your text but you can edit before saving
- Dismiss — keep the original. Useful when the flag doesn’t apply (the platform can be wrong; you know your matter).
Address annexure suggestions
If the paragraph references a document or specific event, the right pane shows candidate Portfolio items.Click a candidate to insert the annexure label (JL-1, JL-2, …) into the paragraph at the right point. The label is auto-assigned based on citation order.If the candidate isn’t quite right, click “Find different item” to search the full Portfolio. If no item exists, click “Add to Portfolio” — opens the evidence upload flow in a modal so you can capture the missing item without leaving the editor.
Keyboard shortcuts
The editor is keyboard-friendly for fast review:| Key | Action |
|---|---|
↓ ↑ | Move to next / previous paragraph |
A | Accept the top rewrite proposal |
M | Open the modify-proposal editor |
D | Dismiss the current flag |
Tab | Cycle through flags within the current paragraph |
⌘S / Ctrl+S | Save (auto-save fires every 30s anyway) |
? | Show keyboard shortcuts panel |
What the flags catch
The editor surfaces six categories of issue. Each has a specific legal grounding.Hearsay flags
Triggers on phrases like “X told me”, “X said”, “I heard X say”. Under sections 59–69 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), evidence of what someone else said is generally inadmissible to prove the truth of what they said. Exceptions (s60–69) cover business records, contemporaneous statements, etc. The editor flags potential hearsay and suggests the safer phrasing — usually “I observed” or “I personally heard”.Opinion flags
Triggers on language like “I think”, “I believe”, “in my view”, or characterisations like “she was hostile” or “he was drunk”. Section 76 of the Evidence Act excludes opinion evidence except in narrow circumstances. The editor proposes factual descriptions instead — what you observed, not what you concluded.Irrelevance flags
Triggers on content that doesn’t bear on the orders being sought. Affidavit content has to be relevant to a fact in issue (s55–58 of the Evidence Act). The editor checks against the orders you’re seeking (declared in the wizard or pulled from your Master Case File) and flags drift.Form flags
Triggers on Family Law Rules compliance issues — paragraphs over 5 lines, missing date specifications, ambiguous “the parties” references where names should be used, jurat-block formatting issues.Tone flags
Triggers on emotional, accusatory, or hedging language. Not legally inadmissible, but credibility-eroding. The flag is informational — the editor proposes a factually-equivalent rewrite in neutral tone.Missing-evidence flags
Triggers on factual assertions that should be supported by an annexure but aren’t. The editor checks the Portfolio for candidate items; if none exist, prompts you to add one.Reviewing in passes
A pattern that works well:Pass 1 — Hearsay + opinion
Sweep through every flagged hearsay or opinion paragraph. Apply rewrites or dismiss. Don’t try to fix everything else yet.
Pass 2 — Form + tone
Sweep through form flags (paragraph length, dates, ambiguous references) and tone flags. Smaller fixes, faster pass.
Pass 3 — Annexures
Walk through every paragraph that names a document, photo, or event. Cross-reference to Portfolio items. Auto-assign labels.
Pass 4 — Final read
Read the affidavit end-to-end as if you were the judge. No editor, no flags. Last chance to catch what the AI missed.
Saving and exporting
The editor saves continuously. Every 30 seconds, anything you’ve touched is persisted to the Master Case File’s affidavit drafts collection. When ready to export:- DOCX — for editing in Word or another word processor
- PDF — for filing (Family Law Rules-compliant form)
- Markdown — for backup, or for re-importing later
What the editor will not do
Same boundaries as the rest of the Affidavit Preparation toolkit:- It will not check whether your facts are true
- It will not assess matter strategy
- It will not write the affidavit for you
- It will not replace lawyer review for high-stakes matters
What’s next
Improve an existing draft
Run an audit on the post-edit version before swearing.
Bundles for court
Once final, bundle annexures into a court-ready PDF.
Affidavit overview
Step back to the framing — what affidavits are and why they’re hard.
Privacy and data
How draft affidavits are stored, encrypted, and protected.