Architects

Shop Drawing Review Assistant

Structure a systematic shop drawing review for a specific construction component. This prompt helps architects organize their review process, identify the critical conformance items for the component type, and document their review findings in a format suitable for the project record.

This prompt produces a structured shop drawing review framework for a named building component, identifying the specific dimensional comparison points to verify against the contract drawings, the critical specification conformance items for that component type, potential trade coordination conflicts to check in the shop drawing package, and the applicable industry standards that should be referenced in the submittal. The output also includes a finding summary format for documenting the review action stamp (Approved / Approved as Noted / Revise and Resubmit / Rejected) with space for written notes. It is for licensed architects in the construction administration phase who need a systematic approach to complex or high-stakes shop drawing reviews.

Testedclaude-sonnet-4-6ValidatedMar 2026ScopeVerify all code references and calculations independently. T…TierProfessional
AI Role
You are a licensed architect experienced in reviewing shop drawings for complex …
Models
Claude
Confidence
Professional
Constraints
Verify all code references and calculations independently. This does not replace licensed professional review.
The architect's shop drawing review confirms general conformance only — it does not replace the contractor's quality control obligations or the engineer's structural review.
Structural shop drawings (steel connections, concrete reinforcing, post-tensioning, curtain wall structural framing) must be reviewed by the structural engineer of record, not the architect.
Approved shop drawings do not authorize deviation from the contract documents except as specifically noted in the approval stamp.
Tested Models
claude-sonnet-4-6
Uncertainty
If the component type is unclear or the specification section is not provided, generate a general framework for the component category and flag all items that must be cross-referenced against the actual project specification before use.
Last updated
2026-05-28 — Published

The prompt

2,038 characters
shop-drawing-reviewer.prompt
You are a licensed architect experienced in reviewing shop drawings for complex building components and coordinating with specialty engineers during construction.

Assist with a shop drawing review for the following component:

Project information:
- Project name: [PROJECT_NAME]
- Component / trade: [COMPONENT — e.g., exterior metal panel system, structural steel connections, custom millwork, glazing system]
- Specification section: [SPEC_SECTION]
- Submittal number: [SUBMITTAL_NUMBER]

Shop drawing information:
- Drawing numbers included: [DRAWING_NUMBERS]
- Scope shown on shop drawings: [SCOPE_DESCRIPTION]
- Contractor's review stamp: [PRESENT / MISSING]

Project document references:
- Relevant architectural drawing sheets: [ARCH_SHEETS]
- Relevant structural/MEP drawings: [ENGINEERING_SHEETS]

Provide a structured review framework:

## Pre-Review Verification
Confirm: contractor's review stamp present, specification reference correct, all required sections included, previous revision number if applicable.

## Dimensional Compliance Check
Key dimensions to verify between the shop drawings and the contract architectural and structural drawings — list specific comparison points.

## Specification Conformance Items
Based on the component type, the critical specification compliance items to review: material grades, finishes, fastening systems, sealants, and performance requirements.

## Coordination Conflicts to Check
Interface conditions between this trade and adjacent trades — what conflicts might appear in the shop drawing that require follow-up with other subcontractors or engineering disciplines.

## Standard References to Confirm
Applicable industry standards (ASTM, AWS, AAMA, ANSI, etc.) that should be referenced in the shop drawings and confirmed as met.

## Review Finding Summary
A structured format for documenting findings and the recommended action: Approved / Approved as Noted / Revise and Resubmit / Rejected.

Note: Structural shop drawings require review by the structural engineer of record.
WAITLIST

Runner beta coming — join the waitlist.

In-product execution isn't live yet. Leave your email and we'll let you know if the Runner beta opens.

How to use this prompt

1

1. Identify the applicable specification section and gather the relevant architectural and structural drawing sheets before reviewing the shop drawing.

2

2. Use the dimensional compliance check list to compare the shop drawing dimensions systematically against the contract documents rather than relying on visual impression.

3

3. Document all findings in writing before applying the review stamp — vague 'approved as noted' stamps without documented findings are a liability risk.

Customization tips

Add 'This is a custom / one-of-a-kind component — the review should focus on design intent conformance since there are no standard specifications to cross-reference' for bespoke elements.
For curtain wall systems, add 'Include thermal performance, air and water infiltration testing documentation, and seismic drift accommodation in the review checklist.'
Append 'The project is LEED certified — note which shop drawing items generate LEED material documentation and flag them for credit submittal.'

Sample output

Mar 2026Professional
SHOP DRAWING REVIEW — Curtain Wall System PROJECT: [Project Name] SHOP DRAWING PACKAGE: CW-01 through CW-24 SUBMITTAL NO.: 022-A, Revision 2 REVIEW DATE: March 23, 2026 REVIEWER: Project Architect REVIEW NARRATIVE: This shop drawing review addresses the curtain wall system for the east elevation. The review is conducted for general conformance with the contract documents and does not constitute approval of means and methods, field dimensions, or installation procedures. SYSTEM TYPE AND PROFILE: The submitted shop drawings show the [Manufacturer] Series [X] curtain wall system, which matches the system specified. The mullion profile dimensions and glazing pocket depths are consistent with the specification requirements. No substitution is being proposed. GLAZING: The glazing units specified are triple-pane, low-emissivity, with an argon-filled cavity. The shop drawings reference the correct glazing unit designation. However, the thermal performance values cited in the submittal data sheet do not match the project specification requirements. The architect requires submission of the manufacturer's certified test report for the specified glazing unit before this submittal can be approved. ANCHOR LAYOUT — CRITICAL COORDINATION ISSUE: As documented in RFI-047 (issued simultaneously), the anchor layout shown in sheets CW-08 through CW-14 assumes a 14'-0" structural column module. The structural drawings show a 12'-6" column grid on the east elevation. This is a critical coordination issue that must be resolved before fabrication or installation proceeds. No approval will be granted for the anchor layout sheets until RFI-047 is resolved and revised anchor details are submitted. DETAILS REVIEWED: Sheet CW-01: Plan layout — reviewed, no comments Sheet CW-02 through CW-07: Typical elevation panels — reviewed, consistent with specification Sheet CW-08 through CW-14: Anchor layout — HOLD pending RFI-047 resolution Sheet CW-15 through CW-18: Corner conditions — reviewed, appears buildable Sheet CW-19: Sill flashing and drainage — reviewed, coordinate with waterproofing contractor Sheet CW-20 through CW-22: Head, sill, jamb details — reviewed, appears consistent Sheet CW-23: Spandrel panel at floor line — INCOMPLETE — fire stop coordination detail not included Sheet CW-24: Expansion joint detail — reviewed, no comments REVIEW DISPOSITION: REVISE AND RESUBMIT Note: This review does not approve the submittal for construction. Fabrication and installation shall not begin until a revised submittal addressing the critical coordination issue and missing detail has been reviewed and accepted.

Related prompts

rfi submittalProfessional

RFI Response Drafter for Architects

Draft a professional, clear, and contractually appropriate response to a Request for Information (RFI) from a contractor. This prompt helps architects structure RFI responses that address the contractor's question, reference the applicable contract documents, and protect the architect's professional liability.

Testedv2.3Reviewed
Claude · ChatGPTOpen prompt →
rfi submittalProfessional

Submittal Review Checklist Generator

Generate a systematic submittal review checklist for a specific building component or product category. This prompt helps architects and project managers create structured review criteria that ensure submittals are reviewed consistently and completely, reducing the risk of missing critical compliance items during construction administration.

Testedv2.3Reviewed
Claude · ChatGPTOpen prompt →
rfi submittalAdvanced

Material Substitution Request Evaluator

Evaluate a contractor's material substitution request against the specified product's performance criteria, aesthetic requirements, and code compliance. This prompt helps architects structure a technically rigorous substitution evaluation and document their acceptance or rejection decision in a way that protects the owner's interests.

Testedv2.3Reviewed
Claude · ChatGPTOpen prompt →

Frequently asked questions

Read the Architects AI Guide
Professional Disclaimer

This AI-generated content is for informational and educational purposes only. It does not replace the professional judgment of a licensed architect. Always verify code compliance, structural calculations, and design decisions with qualified professionals.