Skip to main content

​
Why Respond to Findings?

Responses to findings serve multiple purposes:
  • Document design decisions and justifications
  • Track action items and resolutions
  • Communicate with team members
  • Create an audit trail for reviews
  • Provide explanations for clients or reviewers

​
How to Respond

1

Select a Finding

Click on a finding from the results list.
2

Review the Finding

Read the AI’s explanation and check document references.
3

Type Your Response

Enter your response in the text area.
4

Submit

Click “Submit Response” to save.
[SCREENSHOT PLACEHOLDER: Response text area with submit button]

​
Response Content

​
What to Include

A good response typically includes:
  • Acknowledgment - Confirm you’ve reviewed the finding
  • Assessment - Your determination (valid issue, false positive, needs investigation)
  • Action - What will be done (fix, no action needed, clarification)
  • Details - Specifics about the resolution or reasoning
  • Attribution - Your initials and date (optional but helpful)

​
Response Template

[Acknowledgment of issue]
[Your assessment]
[Action being taken or reasoning]
[Relevant details]
- [Your initials], [Date]

​
Response Examples by Severity

​
Critical Finding Response

Finding: Exit door D-101 is 32” wide, does not meet IBC 1010.1.1 minimum 36” requirement. Response: 
Confirmed - this is a code violation that must be corrected.
Action: Revising door D-101 to 36" wide on drawings A-101 and A-102.
Updated door schedule will be included in next submission.
- JD, 2024-01-15

​
Major Finding Response

Finding: Beam size B12 shows as W16x31 on structural drawings but W16x26 in calculations. Response: 
Reviewed both documents. The calculation is correct - W16x26
is adequate. The drawing has an error.
Action: Updating drawing S-201 to show W16x26 to match calculations.
No structural change required.
- MS, 2024-01-15

​
Warning Response (Action Taken)

Finding: Consider specifying high-efficiency HVAC units to exceed minimum energy code requirements. Response: 
Agreed - this is a good optimization opportunity.
Action: Updating mechanical specifications to require SEER 16
units instead of code minimum SEER 14. This aligns with owner's
sustainability goals.
- RK, 2024-01-15

​
Warning Response (No Action)

Finding: Foundation depth of 6 feet may be excessive for given soil conditions. Response: 
Reviewed with geotechnical engineer. 6-foot depth is required
to reach bearing stratum per soils report section 4.2.
Shallower depth would be in fill material.
No change required.
- JD, 2024-01-15

​
Pass Response

Finding: All exit doors meet IBC minimum 36” width requirement. Response: 
Confirmed - no action needed.
- JD, 2024-01-15
For Pass findings, a simple acknowledgment is often sufficient. You may choose not to respond to every Pass item.

​
Inconclusive Response

Finding: Could not locate seismic design category in uploaded documents. Response: 
Seismic Design Category D is shown on drawing S-001, General Notes,
Note 3. This may not have been captured in the AI's analysis.
Confirmed SDC D is correct per site location and building use.
No action needed.
- MS, 2024-01-15

​
Response Best Practices

Include specific drawing numbers, page references, section numbers, or other details that help others understand your response.
Clearly state what action is being taken (or why no action is needed).
Write responses that could be shared with clients or external reviewers.
When disagreeing with a finding or taking no action, explain why.
Include your initials and date so team members know who responded and when.
Provide enough detail to be useful, but don’t write excessively long responses.

​
Collaborative Responses

​
Team Reviews

When multiple team members are reviewing:
  • Assign findings to appropriate discipline leads
  • Each person responds in their area of expertise
  • Coordinate on interdisciplinary items

​
Version Control

If updating documents based on findings:
  • Reference the new drawing/document version in your response
  • Note the date of the update
  • Track which revision addresses which findings

​
Follow-up Reviews

After addressing findings:
  • Consider re-running the workflow on updated documents
  • Verify that changes resolved the Critical/Major items
  • Document the verification in your response

​
Common Response Scenarios

​
False Positive

When the AI incorrectly flagged something as an issue: 
This is a false positive. The required information is present
on drawing M-301, detail 5/M-301. The system may not have
recognized this detail reference.
No action required.

​
Information Not in Scope

When a finding relates to something outside the current scope: 
This item is not part of the current design scope. Per contract,
landscaping will be designed by landscape architect.
Not applicable to this review.

​
Deferred Item

When an issue will be addressed later: 
Acknowledged. This detail will be developed during shop
drawing phase per specification section 05 12 00.
Noted for tracking during construction phase.

​
Response Status

Submitting a response typically changes the finding’s status from “Pending” to “Closed” or similar, helping you track progress through the review. Use status filters to:
  • See which findings still need responses
  • Review all completed items
  • Track your progress
[SCREENSHOT PLACEHOLDER: Findings filtered by Pending status]

​
Exporting Responses

Responses are included in Excel exports:
  • Response column shows your text
  • Export includes timestamp
  • Share with stakeholders
See Exporting Results for details.

​
Next Steps

Filtering & Searching

Find specific findings to respond to

Exporting Results

Export findings and responses to Excel