Detailed Task Description Requirements
Task description requirements specify the level of detail that must accompany every time entry. Vague descriptions like 'legal research,' 'review documents,' or 'attention to matter' provide zero meaningful information about what work was performed, making it impossible to evaluate reasonableness or identify inefficiencies. Effective task description clauses require specificity about what was done, why it was done, and what was produced or accomplished. They should require identification of the specific documents reviewed, the legal issues researched, the parties to communications, and the subject matter discussed. This level of detail transforms invoices from opaque records into transparent work product that can be evaluated, benchmarked, and optimized. Task description requirements are the enforcement mechanism for almost every other billing guideline. Without adequate descriptions, you cannot verify staffing levels, identify block billing, assess the reasonableness of research time, or evaluate whether work was performed at the appropriate level.
description Sample Clause Language
"Each time entry must contain a description sufficient to identify the specific task performed and its purpose. Generic descriptions such as 'legal research,' 'document review,' 'attention to matter,' or 'file review' are not acceptable. Descriptions should identify the subject matter, the specific documents or issues involved, and the purpose of the work."
"Every time entry must include: (a) a specific description of the task performed; (b) the subject matter or legal issue addressed; (c) for communications, the identity of all participants and the subject discussed; (d) for document review, the type and approximate number of documents reviewed; (e) for research, the specific legal question investigated and sources consulted. The following descriptions are prohibited and will result in the entry being returned for rebilling: 'attention to matter,' 'file review,' 'legal research,' 'draft correspondence,' 'review documents,' or any other description that does not identify the specific work performed. Entries lacking sufficient detail will be reduced by 50% or returned for revision."
"Each time entry must provide sufficient detail for the Company to evaluate the necessity, reasonableness, and efficiency of the work described, including: (a) the specific task performed using an active verb (e.g., 'Drafted motion for summary judgment on statute of limitations defense' rather than 'Work on motion'); (b) the deliverable or outcome (e.g., 'Completed first draft of Section III addressing damages calculation'); (c) for communications: all participants, method (call/email/meeting), and specific topics discussed; (d) for document review: document types, approximate count, and purpose of review; (e) for research: the precise legal question, jurisdictions researched, and conclusion reached. Entries containing any of the following will be automatically rejected: 'attention to,' 'work on,' 'review of,' 'regarding,' or any similarly vague descriptor when used alone. Rejected entries must be resubmitted with compliant descriptions within 10 business days or the charges are deemed waived."
Get All 20 Clauses as a Template Pack
Download our Outside Counsel Guidelines Template Pack — 20 ready-to-use clauses at 3 strictness levels, plus enforcement tips and common violations.
lightbulb Why This Clause Matters
Vague time entry descriptions are the invisibility cloak of legal billing. When a firm bills 3.0 hours for 'document review,' you have no idea whether the attorney reviewed 5 critical documents or 500 irrelevant ones, whether the review was productive or duplicative, or whether the work could have been done more efficiently by a junior resource. Requiring detailed descriptions makes the invisible visible and gives you the information needed to make informed decisions about legal spend.
warning Common Violations
Using boilerplate descriptions like 'attention to matter' or 'review correspondence' across dozens of entries
Describing communications without identifying participants or subject matter
Recording research time without specifying the legal question being investigated
Using the same description template for entries spanning multiple days and varying amounts of time
check_circle Enforcement Tips
Configure your e-billing system with a keyword blocklist that auto-rejects entries containing prohibited phrases
Set minimum character counts for time entry descriptions (e.g., 50 characters minimum)
Review a random sample of entries from each invoice to spot-check description quality
Provide firms with examples of acceptable and unacceptable descriptions during onboarding
The Honor System Connection
Vague billing descriptions are how the honor system perpetuates itself. When you cannot see what was done, you cannot question whether it was necessary or efficient. Every vague entry is a small act of opacity that, multiplied across thousands of entries, creates a fog over your legal spend. Detailed description requirements are not bureaucratic overhead — they are the lens that brings your spending into focus.
Learn about the Honor System in Legal Billing arrow_forwardlink Related Clauses
Related Resources
Glossary Terms
analytics Key Statistics
Vague time entry descriptions appear in 25-35% of legal invoices and correlate with 15% higher billing per hour compared to detailed entries
Source: Legal Billing Review Industry Report, 2024
Implementing task description requirements reduces billing disputes by 40% because entries are self-documenting
Source: ACC Legal Operations Survey, 2024
Firms that adopt detailed description standards see a 5-10% natural reduction in billed hours as timekeepers self-edit their work
Source: CLOC State of the Industry Report, 2023
Frequently Asked Questions
What detail should outside counsel include in time entry descriptions? expand_more
Time entries should identify the specific task performed, name all participants in communications, reference specific documents by name, state the purpose of research, and avoid vague language like 'attention to matter' or 'file review.' Each entry should allow the reviewer to assess reasonableness independently.
Why do task description requirements matter for legal spend control? expand_more
Detailed task descriptions are the foundation of billing oversight. Without specificity, reviewers cannot assess whether time was reasonable, work was performed at the appropriate level, or tasks were duplicative. Vague entries hide inefficiency and make it impossible to benchmark costs accurately.
What entry descriptions should be automatically rejected? expand_more
Auto-reject entries using vague language such as 'attention to matter,' 'file review,' 'general research,' 'case management,' or any description that does not specify the actual task performed. Also reject entries referencing only internal activities without identifying the substantive work product.