What is the right to explanation?

Under GDPR Article 22 and related transparency rules, people subject to solely-automated decisions can obtain meaningful information about the logic involved and contest the outcome. This template helps you respond to such a request clearly and lawfully.

How much detail must I disclose?

You must give meaningful information about the logic and the significance and consequences, not the full algorithm or trade secrets. Plain-language key factors and how they were weighed generally satisfy this without exposing proprietary detail.

Is this template legal advice?

No. It is a starting structure. Automated-decision rules vary by jurisdiction and case, so have your data protection officer or legal counsel review any response before it is sent.

Do I need to offer an appeal?

For decisions in scope of Article 22, you generally must let the person obtain human intervention, express their view, and contest the decision. The template includes a human-review and appeal section for that reason.

Where is my data processed?

Nowhere external — the template is assembled in your browser from what you type. Nothing is uploaded or stored, so you can safely include case-specific details while drafting.

Right to Explanation Response Template

Right to explanation response template

When a user asks why an automated system rejected their loan, flagged their account, or scored their application, you may have a legal duty to respond with meaningful information about the decision. Vague or evasive replies create compliance and trust risk. This tool drafts a structured, plain-language response that explains the outcome, the key factors, and the user’s right to human review and appeal.

How it works

You enter the decision type, a short description of the AI system, the outcome the user received, and the main factors that influenced it. The tool assembles these into a complete response letter: an opening that acknowledges the request, a plain-language summary of how the decision was made, the key factors and how they were weighed, a statement of significance and consequences, and a clear human-review and appeal path. You then add your contact details and statutory deadline and send after review. Everything is generated locally.

Tips and notes

Explain factors, not the full algorithm. “Meaningful information” means the logic and significance, not source code or trade secrets.
Avoid jargon. The reader is usually not technical; plain language is part of the legal standard.
Always offer human review. Article 22 decisions require a route to contest and obtain human intervention.
Mind the deadline. Requests usually carry a statutory response window; track it from the date received.