Design misses can cost ~10% of a capital project and cause an average project delay of 20%*. VeriSpec automates design reviews: it reads your design intent on one side, reviews an uploaded drawings package on the other, and gives you a fully checked compliance report including marked-up drawings. What manually takes 12 hours to review, VeriSpec does in minutes.
Figures from VeriSpec's internal pilot reviews, 2026.
Catch it in the design, not in the field.
Add automated design reviews to your workflow and further reduce costly RFIs and Change Orders during construction. Between the owner's design intent and the design engineer's package, every requirement gets checked — line by line, discipline by discipline, all disciplines in parallel. Engineers use it before submission to catch gaps in their own package. Owners use it to verify that the design meets their intent.
Run the discipline set against the owner's design intent before submission. Every missed size, rating, or acceptance criterion surfaces with a citation to the page — so the gap is closed by your team, not raised as an RFI by the contractor.
Your reviewing engineers get every requirement of the design intent checked against the submitted package, with pass and miss evidence side by side. Milestone reviews go from days of cross-referencing to a verified report your team acts on.
What takes an engineer a working day of cross-referencing a single discipline against the design intent, VeriSpec completes in minutes — with every finding cited to the page.
A missed size, rating, or acceptance criterion found before issue becomes a construction-time RFI or a Change Order priced at the contractor's markup.
Cleaner packages mean fewer construction surprises — projects delivered on schedule, and site safety and availability maintained.
The design engineer — or the owner's reviewing engineer — uploads the design intent and the drawing package. VeriSpec parses both into structured, addressable requirements and details.
For every requirement, VeriSpec locates the corresponding evidence in the drawings and decides: satisfied, missing, or needs review — with a citation back to the source.
You get a conformance report: green ticks for what's met, flags for what's missed, each linked to spec clause and drawing location so your engineers verify in minutes, not days.
Today VeriSpec checks the drawings package against the design intent. Checking the project specifications against the design intent is on the roadmap.
A frontier model can read a drawing. It can't prove what it says, it doesn't know what a reviewing engineer would call a defect, and it doesn't get better after your review. VeriSpec is the three layers that sit between the model and a report you can sign.
General AI models can understand engineering, but they don't review like a Subject Matter Expert. VeriSpec has the mind of an engineer, and reviews like one. It recognizes actual design misses, understands valid design decisions, and detects where ambiguous clauses sit. It gives you recommendations to close the design gaps or add clarity where needed. This review context is a specialized layer unique to VeriSpec, and does not sit in publicly trained AI models.
A general model answers fluently in text where a drawing has what you need. VeriSpec outputs a report with a verified 'Pass' or 'Fail' based on specific evidence in the drawings, notes, details, etc., with a marked-up drawing linked to the comment. What can't be sourced isn't published as decisive: the report says not evidenced instead of guessing.
Each finding is confirmed or rejected by an engineer, with a reason, and each ruling feeds back into the context layer. The reviews your team does today make the next package's review better, something a public AI model cannot do.
The model underneath is replaceable — VeriSpec runs on several and benchmarks each against engineer rulings. The context, the standard of proof, and the rulings are what you're buying.
Each discipline that used to be a separate engineer-day is reviewed simultaneously.
Redundancy, UPS & generator sizing, coordination, grounding, arc-flash.
CRAC/CRAH capacity, redundancy, airflow containment, chilled water.
Floor loading, seismic, raised-floor & equipment support criteria.
Detection, suppression, egress, compartmentation per code.
PDU/RPP layout, busway, capacity headroom, metering.
Cable routing, tray fill, separation, MMR/MDA provisioning.
Every finding carries its verified quote and its location on the drawing. See what a finished review looks like.
See a sample reportCRAH units provide N+1 redundancy at design day load.
Spec §4.2.1 · Drawing M-201, schedule note 3 · 6×(N=5)+1 confirmed
Pre-action sprinkler interlock with VESDA detection not shown.
Spec §7.4 requires double-interlock · No corresponding detail located in fire set
Chilled water ΔT stated as 10°F; spec targets 12°F.
Spec §4.3.2 · Drawing M-410 note 1 · Confirm impact on pump & pipe sizing
Every finding cites the spec clause and the drawing location — so review becomes verification.
Once your design is locked, VeriSpec uses the same building graph to generate step-by-step operating procedures for your equipment — written with your building's own equipment labels, with every dependency accounted for.
Ask "how do I safely isolate ATS-A?" and VeriSpec reads the facility graph to answer it — not from a generic template, but from this building's topology.
XYZ10 → XYZ10-UPS-A — so steps match what the operator sees in the field.Design intent documents and engineering drawings are some of the most sensitive IP a firm holds. VeriSpec is hosted by default, and for firms that need it, VeriSpec can be deployed inside your own environment.
We're onboarding a small group of data center engineering & design teams. Tell us about your spec workflow and we'll set up a review on your own documents.
No spam. We'll only reach out about your demo.
Thanks — choose a slot below and the invite lands in your inbox.
Calendar not loading? Open the booking page in a new tab.