Criticism of arbitration (and American arbitration in particular) often focuses on the burdens and costs of discovery. While “soft” tools for controlling discovery exist (in the form of greater supervision of the process by tribunals), “hard” tools may offer a better means to ensure proportionality—right-sizing of the discovery process. Such tools do not principally rely on the discretion of the tribunal, but rather focus on specific procedural steps that tend to focus parties and their counsel on improved efficiency in the conduct of discovery. This article outlines some such “hard” tools for discovery management, and suggests means to implement such tools in arbitration regimes.