How Jace Reads Your Attachments: PDFs, Docs, And Images As Drafting Context

A procurement manager receives a contract renewal from a vendor. The PDF includes a new 60-day notice clause buried on page four. The email body says nothing about it. The manager replies, "Looks good, let's proceed," without opening the attachment. Three months later, they try to switch vendors and discover they're locked in for another year because they missed the notice window.

This is not a rare edge case. It happens constantly. The email body is the tip of the iceberg. The attachment is the rest.

An email assistant that ignores attachments is only reading half the conversation. It drafts responses based on incomplete information. It misses the numbers, the terms, the visual details that actually determine what a safe reply should say.

Jace treats attachments as drafting context. It reads the PDF, the Word doc, the screenshot. It factors that content into the draft it creates for you. Then you review, verify, and decide whether to send.

This is not automation. This is augmentation. The draft is a starting point. You are still the decision-maker.

TL;DR

Jace reads text-based PDFs, Word documents (.docx), images, and text files attached to email threads. It uses that content as context when drafting replies. Drafts are review-first by default: you approve before anything sends. This means attachments inform the draft, but you verify the details before committing.

Why Attachments Are The Real Thread

Most email threads are incomplete without their attachments. The body says, "Please review the attached proposal." The actual proposal is the conversation.

When someone sends a contract, the terms are in the PDF. When a client sends a brief, the requirements are in the Word doc. When a designer shares a mockup, the feedback request is in the screenshot.

Replying based only on the email body is like responding to a question you only half-heard. You might get lucky. Or you might agree to terms you never read, miss requirements you should have caught, or ignore details that were clearly visible in the attachment.

Jace reads full threads, including quoted replies. It imports up to three years of email history, prioritizing recent and important conversations. When an attachment is present, that content becomes part of the context Jace uses to draft a response.

This matters especially with recurring contacts. If a vendor you worked with two years ago reappears with a new proposal, Jace can reference prior history. The draft might note, "This is the same vendor from the 2024 Q3 project." That context changes how you approach the reply.

Attachments are not side content. They are often the primary content. Any assistant that ignores them is working with half the picture.

What Jace Treats As Drafting Context

When Jace drafts a reply, it considers:

The current email thread. This includes the message you're replying to, all previous messages in the thread, and quoted replies nested within those messages. Jace reads the full conversation, not just the latest message.

Attachments in the thread. Supported formats include text-based PDFs, Word documents (.docx), images, and text files. Jace extracts the content and treats it as part of the conversation context.

Prior email history. Jace imports up to three years of email history, prioritizing recent and important threads. If you've communicated with this sender before, that history can inform the draft.

This means when you receive an email with a contract attached, Jace doesn't just see the email body. It sees the contract terms. When you receive a brief in a Word doc, Jace sees the requirements. When someone sends a screenshot of an error message, Jace sees the error.

The draft that Jace creates reflects this fuller context. It might reference specific terms from a PDF, pull requirements from a brief, or acknowledge details visible in an image.

This does not mean Jace is always right. It means Jace has more information to work with. Your job is to verify that the draft accurately reflects what you want to say, and that any referenced details are correct.

How To Review Attachment Based Drafts Safely

Jace drafts. You decide. This is the review-first model.

When a draft references attachment content, your review process should include:

Confirm the correct attachment version. If the sender attached multiple files, or if there were previous versions in the thread, make sure the draft references the right one. A contract from last month is not the same as the one attached today.

Confirm numbers, dates, and terms referenced. If the draft mentions a payment term of "Net 30" or a deadline of "March 15," open the attachment and verify. Jace extracts content, but extraction is not the same as interpretation. You confirm.

Confirm who is on To and CC. Attachment-driven replies sometimes involve sensitive content. Before sending, check that the recipients are correct. A draft referencing contract terms should not accidentally go to the wrong party.

Confirm the draft doesn't over-commit. A draft might say, "We agree to the proposed timeline." That's a commitment. Make sure you actually agree before sending.

Confirm any clause references match the document. If the draft says, "Per Section 4.2 of the agreement," open Section 4.2 and verify. Clause numbers can shift between document versions. The draft is a starting point, not a legal review.

This checklist takes sixty seconds. It's the difference between a confident reply and an expensive mistake.

Three Scenarios

Scenario 1: Vendor Sends A PDF Contract

The situation. A vendor emails you a service agreement as a PDF. The email body says, "Attached is our standard agreement for your review. Let me know if you have questions."

The moment of failure. You reply, "Looks good, we're ready to proceed," without opening the PDF. Page six includes an auto-renewal clause with a 90-day notice requirement. You're now locked into terms you never reviewed.

The moment of leverage. Jace reads the PDF. The draft it creates says, "Thanks for sending the agreement. A few questions: the 90-day notice clause in Section 6.3 seems longer than our standard terms. Is that negotiable? Also, can you clarify the payment terms on page four, specifically whether the Net 45 applies to all invoices or only the initial payment?"

The trade-off. Jace surfaced the relevant terms. But you still need to verify that Section 6.3 actually says what the draft claims. Open the PDF. Confirm the clause. Then send.

Scenario 2: Client Sends A Word Doc Brief

The situation. A client emails you a project brief as a .docx file. The email says, "Here's what we're thinking for the next phase. Let us know your availability."

The moment of failure. You reply based on the email body alone. You say, "We're available to start next week." The brief includes a requirement for a deliverable format you don't support. The project kicks off, and the mismatch surfaces three weeks later.

The moment of leverage. Jace reads the Word doc. The draft it creates says, "Thanks for the brief. I've reviewed the requirements and have a few clarifying questions: the deliverable format mentioned on page two (interactive PDF with embedded video) is outside our standard scope. Would a static PDF with linked video work instead? Also, the timeline references 'Phase 1 completion by end of month,' but does that mean deliverable submission or client approval?"

The trade-off. Jace extracted the requirements and flagged the questions. But you need to confirm the brief actually says "interactive PDF with embedded video." Open the document. Verify the wording. Then send.

Scenario 3: Image Attachment (Screenshot Or Mockup)

The situation. A colleague emails you a screenshot of a dashboard error. The email says, "This keeps happening. Can you help?"

The moment of failure. You reply, "Try clearing your cache," without looking at the screenshot. The error message clearly says "Database connection timeout." Your suggestion wastes their time and yours.

The moment of leverage. Jace sees the screenshot. The draft it creates says, "Looks like a database connection timeout based on the error message. A few things to check: is the database server reachable from your network? Have there been any recent changes to the connection credentials? Let me know and I can dig deeper."

The trade-off. Jace interpreted the visible error. But screenshots can be cropped, outdated, or misleading. You should still glance at the image to confirm the draft's interpretation matches what's actually shown.

Rules That Improve Attachment Handling

Jace supports natural language rules that shape drafting behavior. Rules are behavior instructions. They don't apply labels or trigger actions. They influence how drafts are written.

Here are eight rules you can use to improve attachment-driven drafts:

1. "When an attachment is present, summarize the key terms in three bullets before the draft." This ensures the draft includes a quick summary of what Jace extracted, making your review faster.
2. "Highlight amounts and dates pulled from attachments for my review." Numbers are high-risk. This rule makes them stand out so you can verify them quickly.
3. "When referencing clauses, quote the clause title and verify it matches the document." Clause references should be specific. This rule encourages precision.
4. "If a contract is attached, always ask at least one clarifying question before agreeing to terms." This prevents premature commitment. The draft will include a question, giving you negotiation room.
5. "When a brief or requirements document is attached, list the key deliverables in the draft." This ensures you and the sender are aligned on scope before work begins.
6. "If an image attachment is present, describe what I should notice before reviewing." Useful for screenshots and mockups. Jace will call out the relevant visual details.
7. "When a PDF contract includes payment terms, surface the payment schedule in the draft." Payment terms are often buried. This rule brings them forward.
8. "If this sender has attached documents before, note any differences from prior versions." Useful for recurring vendors or clients. Jace will flag changes in terms or requirements.

These rules shape drafts. They don't replace your review. Think of them as instructions that make the draft more useful as a starting point.

Common Mistakes

Mistake 1: Approving a draft without opening the attachment. The draft references terms from a PDF, but you send without verifying. The terms are wrong or outdated. Instead: Always open the attachment before approving a draft that references it. Sixty seconds of verification prevents days of cleanup.

Mistake 2: Trusting extracted numbers blindly. The draft says, "The proposal totals $47,500." You send. The actual total was $74,500. The numbers were transposed. Instead: Verify any number the draft mentions. Open the document, find the figure, confirm it matches.

Mistake 3: Replying based only on the last message. The sender's latest email says, "Just following up." You reply without checking the thread. The original message had an attachment with critical details. Instead: Review the full thread before approving. Jace reads the full thread, but you should too.

Mistake 4: Assuming all attachments are supported. You expect Jace to read a scanned PDF or an unsupported file type. The draft misses key content because the attachment wasn't processed. Instead: Know what's supported: text-based PDFs, Word docs (.docx), images, and text files. Scanned PDFs without text layers are not supported.

Mistake 5: Ignoring who's on the recipient list. The draft references confidential contract terms. You send without checking CC. The wrong party now has access to sensitive information. Instead: Check To and CC before every send, especially when attachments contain sensitive content.

Mistake 6: Over-relying on the draft for legal or financial decisions. The draft interprets contract language. You treat that interpretation as legal advice. Instead: Jace drafts. It does not provide legal, financial, or compliance advice. For high-stakes decisions, involve the appropriate professionals.

FAQ

Can an AI email assistant read PDF attachments? Jace reads text-based PDFs attached to email threads. It extracts the content and uses it as context when drafting replies. Scanned PDFs without a text layer are not supported.

How do I reply to emails with contracts safely? Review the draft Jace creates, but always open the contract yourself. Verify that any terms, clauses, or numbers referenced in the draft match the actual document. Check the recipient list before sending.

Can AI read screenshots in email threads? Jace can process image attachments, including screenshots. It factors visible details into the draft. You should still glance at the image to confirm the draft's interpretation.

How do I avoid mistakes when AI uses attachments as context? Use the review checklist: confirm the correct attachment version, verify numbers and dates, check recipients, ensure you're not over-committing, and confirm clause references match the document.

Does this work with Gmail and Outlook without switching clients? Jace works on top of Gmail and Outlook. For Gmail, there's a web app and a Chrome extension. You don't need to switch email clients.

What file types does Jace support as attachments? Jace supports text-based PDFs, Word documents (.docx), images, and text files. Scanned PDFs and other formats are not currently supported.

Can I customize how Jace handles attachments? Yes. Use natural language rules to shape drafting behavior. For example, you can instruct Jace to summarize key terms, highlight amounts and dates, or always ask clarifying questions when contracts are attached.

Is auto-send available for attachment-based replies? Auto-send exists but is opt-in per label. By default, Jace is review-first: drafts require your approval before sending. This is especially important for attachment-driven replies where verification matters.

CTA

If you're ready to stop replying to half-read threads, try jace.ai for review-first drafting that treats attachments as the context they are.