Skip to main content

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.

The AI assistant is grounded in primary sources, but the quality of the answer is heavily shaped by the quality of the question. This page is the practical guide to phrasing questions well.

​
The single best practice

Ask one question at a time. A focused question gets a focused answer. A compound question (“what is X, and what about Y, and how does Z work?”) often gets a sprawling answer that’s mediocre on all three. If you have multiple questions, ask them in turn. The chat keeps context across the session.

​
Three patterns that work

Pattern 1 — Concept question

“What is the Rice v Asplund threshold?”Direct concept questions get the cleanest answers. The chat retrieves the relevant statutes + cases and explains the concept with citations.

Pattern 2 — Situational question

“My ex wants to enrol our daughter in a private school. We have shared parental responsibility. Can she do this without my consent?”Situational questions surface the legal framework that applies to your facts. The chat will explain what shared parental responsibility means, what s64B covers, and what your options are.

Pattern 3 — Procedural question

“How long do I have to apply for a property settlement after divorce?”Procedural questions about timing, forms, fees, court process — the chat handles these well because the answers are generally fixed by statute or court rules.

Pattern 4 — Comparative question

“What’s the difference between a parenting plan and Consent Orders?”Comparative questions surface the relevant frameworks side by side. Often the most useful kind because they help you choose between options.

​
Three patterns that don’t work

Anti-pattern 1 — 'What should I do?'

“My ex won’t agree to the parenting plan. What should I do?”The chat won’t tell you what to do — that’s legal advice. Re-phrase as: “What are the typical options when one party won’t agree to a proposed parenting plan?” — that gets a useful framework answer.

Anti-pattern 2 — 'Will I win?'

“If we go to court, will the judge give me 50/50 care?”No responsible system predicts judicial outcomes. Re-phrase as: “What does the court typically consider when assessing a 50/50 care arrangement?” — gets the s60CC factor analysis.

Anti-pattern 3 — Compound question

“What’s a parenting plan, and what’s a Consent Order, and which one should I do, and how long does each take, and what does each cost?”Too much in one question. Break it into 2–3 separate questions and ask them in turn.

Anti-pattern 4 — Vague

“Tell me about family law.”Too broad. Re-phrase as: “What are the main parts of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and what does each cover?” — gets a structured answer.

​
Worked examples

​
Example 1 — Parenting

Bad: “Help me get more time with my kids.” Better: “My ex currently has the children Mon–Fri and I have them weekends. They’re 6 and 8. I want to move toward 50/50. What does the court typically consider when assessing a change of this kind?” Why it’s better: specifies the existing arrangement, the children’s ages, the proposed change, and asks for a framework answer (not a prediction).

​
Example 2 — Property

Bad: “How do I get my fair share?” Better: “We were married for 12 years, both worked full-time, no kids. The asset pool is roughly 800kincludingthehouse.Hebrought800k including the house. He brought 200k from a pre-relationship inheritance into the deposit. How does the contributions assessment typically apply to facts like these?” Why it’s better: specifies relationship length, contribution history, asset pool size, and the specific issue (initial contribution erosion under Bonnici / Polonius).

​
Example 3 — Procedural

Bad: “How long until court?” Better: “I’ve just filed an Initiating Application in the FCFCOA Brisbane registry for a parenting matter. What’s the typical timeline from filing to first procedural hearing?” Why it’s better: specifies the registry, the type of matter, the procedural stage. Gets a concrete timeline answer.

​
Using citations as the source of truth

Every substantive answer ends with citations. The citations are often more useful than the prose. If the chat tells you “The court considers the s75(2) factors when adjusting for future needs” and cites Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s75(2) — the section number is what you can take to a lawyer, paste into a court submission, or look up directly. The prose is the explanation; the citation is the proof.

​
When to escalate to a lawyer

The chat is excellent for understanding the framework. It’s not a substitute for legal advice on your specific situation. Escalate when:
  • You’re about to sign a document with substantive legal effect (parenting plan, settlement deed, BFA)
  • You’re filing or responding to court documents
  • You have an active safety risk or family-violence concerns
  • The amount at stake (financial or in time with your children) is significant
  • You’ve been given specific advice by the other party’s lawyer and need your own analysis
A 30–60 minute consult with a family lawyer typically costs $300–500. If your matter is consequential, that’s the best money you’ll spend.

​
Next

How the AI works

What the chat is grounded in and what its limits are.

Frequently asked

The questions we hear most often from new users.