Coordination conflicts buried in the bid set become your problem the moment you sign the GMP. InspectMind AI reviews the full document set before you commit to a price, surfacing structural-to-MEP conflicts, spec-versus-drawing mismatches, and scope gaps while you still have room to act on them.
Trusted by general contractors and CM firms
Coordination failures between architecture, structure, and MEP do not belong to your firm, but they land on your budget. When a conflict surfaces in the field, it generates an RFI, then a change order, then a potential sub claim. None of that comes out of the designer's contract. It comes out of yours. Change order prevention starts in preconstruction, not in the field. Every conflict you identify before GMP is a conflict you can negotiate rather than absorb.
Construction documents at bid stage still carry gaps. The gaps you cannot see become assumptions embedded in your estimate, and those assumptions become scope gaps when the full CD set is issued. Catching those gaps at bid, or at GMP, is the only window you have to address them before they belong to you. The bid document review phase is your highest-leverage point. Once the GMP is signed, incomplete-document risk transfers from the owner to you.
A single coordination conflict found in the field costs multiples of what it would have cost to resolve it in precon. Change orders compound, sub claims follow, and schedule delays are not recoverable once the project is running. A review that costs a few hundred dollars before GMP has a measurable return against any one of those outcomes.
InspectMind runs at the three decision points where precon teams carry the most risk: before bid, before GMP, and before buyout. Each phase has a different review focus, and each returns structured findings with specific sheet references and applicable code or spec citations, in hours. Manual review catches what a trained eye has time to find. InspectMind systematically checks the full document set against coordination criteria and code requirements every time, including the pattern-based conflicts that span disciplines and are easy to miss under bid deadline pressure.
The Constructability Checker reviews the bid set for coordination problems and constructability risk factors before your estimate is built. Findings give your precon team informed assumptions, defensible scope exclusions, and specific issues to raise in bid interviews. Walking into a bid with documented drawing conflicts is leverage. Walking out of GMP negotiations with them is exposure.
At GMP, the Spec and Drawing Coordination checker reviews the 80–100% CD set for conflicts between specifications and drawings. Findings become documented issues you can present to the design team before you sign. That documentation protects your contingency and gives you a factual basis for scope clarifications rather than a dispute after the fact.
The Plan Check checker reviews the issued-for-construction set for code compliance gaps and sheet-to-sheet conflicts before your subcontractors build their scopes off those documents. Subs who bid cleaner documents price tighter and file fewer change orders. Fewer sub claims mid-project protects your schedule and your owner relationship.
The risk in the bid set is already there. InspectMind surfaces it before you price it, so your team goes into GMP with documented findings rather than undisclosed assumptions.
Upload your gc preconstruction teams drawings. Eligible work emails get a first $100 covered ($100 credit). Results in hours.
“InspectMind caught 47 critical issues on our cold storage project: conflicts that would have cost us millions in field rework. It paid for itself on the first review.”
These reviews were run on real project document sets before GMP or contract execution. The findings below represent issues that would have surfaced as field conflicts, RFIs, or change orders.
InspectMind reviewed the Cold Summit Development cold storage facility documents and identified 47 critical issues before construction began. Aaron Bass, Director of Construction, described the findings in full: "InspectMind helped us catch real meaningful issues. Using it early in the process is going to absolutely help out in the field. For temperature-controlled facilities, this kind of AI-driven QA/QC is incredibly valuable. It immediately caught real issues like wood vs HDPE blocking conflicts and specs vs drawings mismatches." One critical issue in a temperature-controlled facility can trigger cascading rework across the envelope, mechanical, and structural scopes.
Read the case studyOn a complex transportation infrastructure project, InspectMind surfaced 43 issues at the pre-bid stage before any price had been committed. Multi-discipline projects carry compounded coordination risk because no single discipline reviewer sees the full picture. Finding 43 issues before bid means 43 fewer assumptions carried into the estimate.
Read the case studyA K-12 school project reviewed at plan check stage returned 375 issues across the full document set. That volume reflects what exists in a typical large institutional bid set before anyone has reviewed it systematically. For a GC pricing that scope, each unfound issue is a risk carried at the GMP price.
Read the case studyEach review runs on the same engine and returns findings cited to the sheet and code section.
Before Bid: Surface Risk Before You Price It
Before GMP: Validate the CD Set Before You Commit
Before Buyout: Give Your Subs Cleaner Documents
Drawing sets are sensitive. We treat them that way, with clear commitments on training, retention, and access.
We don’t train public AI or third-party models on your documents, and you can opt out of our own model improvement anytime.
Request deletion of any project, any time. NDAs are available for sensitive work.
Files live in secure cloud infrastructure with customer segregation.
Straight answers before your first check.
