LexLint.io

Developersbeta

Search the docs /
Docs menu

Get started

Quickstart Install: Claude Code Install: Codex Install: other clients API keys

Concepts

How a run works The app profile The severity model What a run does not say

Tools

check_access claim_trial_key set_profile run_lint get_law resolve_domain_jurisdiction submit_feedback upload_lint_run

Guides

A whole run, end to end Console TestPack in CI

Reference

Endpoint and transport lexlint.yml schema Errors Changelog

Help

Support and feedback

Concepts

What a run does not say

A lint is not legal review: what a finding means, and what it cannot tell you.

Step 5 of the worked run covers what a re-run means and what it does not.

The findings do not disappear on re-run: obligations apply whether or not you have met them, and LexLint reports what applies. What changed is that every finding now maps to a shipped mitigation, each with a citation for counsel to start from. The app is not "compliant": LexLint cannot know that, and says so. What the team has is the basics caught early, at the moment they were cheapest to fix.

LexLint is a lint, not a lawyer. Its findings are research summaries of public legal sources, provided to catch basic issues early in development. They are not legal advice, they create no attorney-client relationship, and they are not authorization to access any system. For decisions that matter, consult qualified counsel in the relevant jurisdiction.

No "compliant"

Three rules bound what the output can claim. A jurisdiction LexLint has no current data for is a WARN, never a silent pass. Every finding carries its as-of date and a staleness flag, because laws change faster than any law library can follow. And the passing state is no basic issues found: the word "compliant" does not appear in LexLint output, because a lint cannot know that.