CONTEXT(CLONE)
Sign in

Find conflicts between specifications, schedules and drawing notes

For: Design manager or lead consultant coordinating disciplines before tender or construction issue

Pattern: Hierarchical decompositionNeeds a connectorDesigned for 30 to 500 agents
Get early accessSign in to use

The pain today

Architectural, structural and services documents are written by different teams. A fire rating, product standard or tolerance in the specification differs from the door schedule or a drawing note, and the clash becomes a site query or a claim.

The ask

“Go through the specification sections, schedules and drawing notes for this project. Working discipline by discipline and section by section, find every place where two documents state different requirements for the same element, and quote both with their revision.”

Plain words, as you would say it to a colleague. Edit it to fit your case before you send it.

What you attach or connect

  • Specification sections as text
  • Door, finishes and equipment schedules
  • Drawing notes and legends extracted as text
  • Document register with revisions

The unit of work

One worker task per one specified element across its documents.

Why a swarm fits

The set is a tree: project, discipline, section, element. A leaf needs only the few passages that mention one element. Elements are independent, and each level is checked before it rolls up.

Not for

Geometric clash detection or anything that lives only in the drawing geometry. It reads text, not drawings or models.

The decision tree

6 typed decisions, each with an action for every answer

At fixed moments in a run, the engine puts one narrow question to a decision model. The decision model never writes text: it answers yes or no with a probability, picks from listed options, or gives a score, about a small slice of the material. The engine then does exactly what this tree says, which is what makes the run auditable. The thresholds are the template's design values, not measured results.

  1. Planner, while planning

    Split or keep serialYes or no, with a probability

    While planning

    Does the document register list separate specification sections and schedules for this discipline that can be read independently?

    Sees only: One discipline's rows in the document register

    Why: Splits by section only where the register shows separable documents.

    • Yes: 0.60 or higherthenSplit the work
    • Unsure: 0.40 up to 0.60thenKeep serial
    • No: below 0.40thenKeep serial

  2. Split or keep serialYes or no, with a probability

    While planning

    Does this specification section name distinct elements, such as door types or equipment tags, that also appear in a schedule or drawing note index?

    Sees only: The section's element list and the schedule and note index

    Why: Creates one leaf per element only when the element is mentioned in more than one place.

    • Yes: 0.60 or higherthenSplit the work
    • Unsure: 0.40 up to 0.60thenKeep serial
    • No: below 0.40thenKeep serial

  3. Scope checkYes or no, with a probability

    Before work starts on a unit

    Is this document revision the current one in the register, not marked superseded?

    Sees only: One document's revision block and its register row

    Why: Excludes superseded sheets so old conflicts are not reported again.

    • Yes: 0.60 or higherthenAccept
    • Unsure: 0.30 up to 0.60thenEscalate to a strong model
    • No: below 0.30thenSkip this unit

  4. After workers, the judge checks

    Evidence checkA choice among options

    After a worker answers

    Do the two quoted statements refer to the same element tag or type, in the same location or condition?

    Sees only: Two quoted statements with their document references

    Why: Prevents false clashes between statements that were never about the same thing.

    • Same element and conditionthenAccept
    • Same element, different location or conditionthenSkip this unit
    • Cannot tell from the quotesthenEscalate to a strong model

  5. Reconciler, while merging

    Conflict checkA choice among options

    While reconciling

    Do the two statements give different fire ratings, product standards, materials, sizes or tolerances for that element?

    Sees only: Two statements already confirmed as the same element

    Why: Turns every real difference into a coordination query with both quotes attached.

    • Same requirementthenAccept
    • Different requirementthenMark unresolved
    • One is silentthenMark unresolved

  6. Accountable person, before anything is settled

    Person decidesYes or no, with a probability

    Before anything is reported as settled

    Does the conflict concern fire rating, structure, escape, accessibility or a building services safety device?

    Sees only: One conflict with both quotes

    Why: The lead designer and the licensed engineer or architect resolve every conflict; the swarm picks no side.

    Accountable: The lead designer and the responsible licensed engineer or architect own the resolution of every conflict.

    • Yes: 0.40 or higherthenAsk a person
    • Unsure: 0.15 up to 0.40thenAsk a person
    • No: below 0.15thenAccept

The fleet: who does what

Model tiers by role, not brands: you choose the models. Strong reasoning models plan and reconcile, small fast models do the wide work, and the judge is a decision model from a different family, so it does not share the workers' blind spots.

  1. Planner

    A strong reasoning model builds the tree from the document register and indexes where each element is mentioned.

    Decisions here:1. Split or keep serial2. Split or keep serial3. Scope check

  2. Workers

    Small fast workers from an open-weight family compare the stated requirements for one element across its documents.

    Designed for 30 to 500 agents, one worker task per one specified element across its documents. Each worker receives only its own unit.

  3. Judge, from a different model family

    A decision model from a different family decides whether two statements truly conflict or describe different conditions.

    Decisions here:4. Evidence check

  4. Reconciler

    A strong reasoning model rolls conflicts up by section and discipline and drafts coordination queries.

    Decisions here:5. Conflict check

  5. Accountable person

    The lead designer and the responsible licensed engineer or architect own the resolution of every conflict.

    Decisions here:6. Person decides

Checked before anything is accepted

  • Each conflict quotes both documents with revision and location
  • Statements are compared only when they refer to the same element and condition
  • Superseded revisions in the register are excluded before comparison

What comes back

  • Conflict list per element with both quotes
  • Draft coordination queries per discipline
  • Elements specified in one document and absent in another
  • Section-level status map

What to measure

  • Conflicts confirmed by the design manager
  • Site queries later raised on reviewed sections
  • Review time per specification section
  • Cost per section

Names of measures only. No result is claimed for this template.

Templates open in the workspace chat with the ask filled in. Nothing runs until you send it.

Get early accessSign in to use

More in Real estate and construction

Level subcontractor bids against the scope, by specialist brief

For: Commercial manager, quantity surveyor or estimator comparing trade package bids

Bids for the same package arrive in different formats with different exclusions, qualifications and programme assumptions.

Pattern: Specialist panelRuns today6 decisionsDesigned for 4 to 80 agents

Stress-test a delay claim against the project record

For: Contracts manager or claims consultant preparing or defending an extension of time claim

The record of a delay is spread over site diaries, information requests, instructions, meeting minutes and letters.

Pattern: Adversarial reviewNeeds live models6 decisionsDesigned for 10 to 250 agents