We introduce a conceptual framework for analysing legislative designs in democratic systems, emphasizing two core dimensions: versatility and precision. A law’s versatility reflects (a) the breadth of its topical coverage, (b) the diversity of target audiences it addresses, and (c) the range of policy instruments it combines. The precision of a law is a consequence of (a) the vagueness of its language, (b) the extent to which it allows for derogations, and (c) the discretion it leaves to the bureaucracy through delegation provisions. These dimensions highlight the trade-offs legislators face between adaptability and inclusiveness, on one hand, and legal certainty and specificity, on the other.

Leveraging state-of-the-art natural language processing tools, this study proposes a systematic approach to capture these dimensions in legislative texts, presenting initial findings from the European Union. Integrating insights from public policy and legal scholarship, we explore how laws differ across policy domains, institutional contexts, and time, shedding light on the dynamics of democratic governance.

This work addresses a critical gap in legislative analysis, where studies often remain confined to specific policy areas. The proposed typology—ranging from versatile but imprecise “sledgehammers” to narrowly focused yet precise “scalpels”—provides a robust tool for understanding legislative trade-offs. It opens avenues for examining whether domain-specific demands, institutional structures, or universal patterns shape legislative designs. Ultimately, our approach deepens our understanding of the structures of democratic legislation. It offers policymakers, legal practitioners, and scholars a framework to navigate and improve legislative designs, enhancing democratic accountability amid increasingly intricate governance challenges.