Skip to main content

​
A Structured Review, in Chat

Attach the documents, say what each one is, and ask for the review. This is the conversational pattern for reviewing specific documents (a submittal, a spec section, two competing proposals, a Basis of Design) against each other or against your design documents, with findings you can act on. It works across the disciplines a project throws at you: a fabricator’s steel submittal against the structural drawings, an architectural door schedule against the spec, an MEP shop drawing against the design intent, a contractor’s proposal against the tender documents.
Three ways to review, one habit of checking. This page is the chat review of documents you attach or tag. The Review Agent is for conversations across a whole ingested drawing set. A Drawing Review is the formal, set-wide QA/QC run that produces a findings report. Start here for specific documents; move up when the question covers the whole set.

​
How to Run One

1

Attach the documents and give each a role

Attach with the + button, or tag files already in your project with @ (Mentions guide). Then assign roles in plain language: “The first file is the submittal; the other two are the design drawings it must match.” Before the review starts, ask the agent to list the files it can see, so the review runs on everything you sent.
2

Say what a finding looks like

Ask for a structured review and define the structure: each finding with its location in both documents, what differs, why it matters, and the suggested action. Name your code and jurisdiction, and ask the agent to quote the clause text behind any code-based finding, so every citation is ready for a reviewer to verify.
3

Push on the gaps

After the first pass: “List everything you did not compare.” The answer tells you whether the review covered dimensions but not finishes, or details but not notes, and becomes the brief for the second pass.
4

Turn findings into action

Real discrepancies become RFIs (Generate RFIs & RFAs) or review comments. Ask for the findings as a comment log or comparison table when you need a file to circulate; name the format and the agent produces it.
The setup for a submittal review, ready to send: documents attached, roles assigned, finding format defined.
The message box with a submittal and two drawings attached and the review request written out

​
Four Reviews Engineers Run

Example: submittal review
@Steel_Stair_Submittal.pdf @S-501.pdf @S-502.pdf

The first file is the fabricator's submittal; the other two
are the design drawings. Compare member sizes, connection
details, materials, and finishes. For each discrepancy give
me: the submittal page, the drawing reference, what differs,
and whether it warrants a comment or an RFI.
One comparison per request. Submittal vs drawings is one review; spec vs drawings is another. Separate requests produce separate, traceable findings lists instead of one blended answer.

​
When the Question Covers a Whole Set

For questions that span every sheet of a project (“where is this detail called out?”, “does the callout on S-301 resolve?”), switch to the Review Agent: it works inside a project folder, follows callouts and cross-references between sheets, and cites the sheet and detail behind each answer.
The Review Agent home screen with suggestion cards for reviewing drawings, checking RFI responses, and comparing spec sections
And when you want a formal record rather than a conversation, launch a Drawing Review: the set-wide QA/QC run that sweeps every sheet and delivers a findings report you can interrogate afterwards. You are the engineer of record: the review surfaces the discrepancies, and the acceptance codes and dispositions stay yours to assign.

​
Next Steps

Review Agent

Chat with a whole drawing set: callouts, details, findings.

Drawing Review

The formal set-wide QA/QC run with a findings report.

Generate RFIs & RFAs

Draft the RFI once a discrepancy is confirmed.

Mentions & Attachments

Tag documents already in your project with @.
Questions? Email support@stru.ai or book a call.