construction-administration
Skill39 starsChanged 23 days agoMITView on GitHub
Support architectural construction-phase administration: RFIs, submittals/shop drawings, site observations, architect instructions, change tracking, payment-support records, punch/defects lists and as-built coordination. Use during tender clarification, construction, commissioning and closeout.
In this repository31 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- architectural-drawing-generationSkill
- architecture-orchestratorSkill
- architecture-programmingSkill
- architecture-red-teamSkill
- area-quantity-auditSkill
- autocad-dwg-workflowSkill
- building-envelope-performanceSkill
- cad-bim-automationSkill
- civil-site-designSkill
- concept-design-reviewSkill
- concept-schematic-designSkill
- construction-documentationSkill
- cost-planning-value-engineeringSkill
- drawing-qaSkill
- handover-fm-postoccupancySkill
- interior-fitout-designSkill
- life-safety-accessibilitySkill
- materials-specificationsSkill
- mep-coordinationSkill
- openbim-ifc-coordinationSkill
- precedent-researchSkill
- presentation-reviewSkill
- revit-workflowSkill
- rhino-grasshopper-workflowSkill
- site-analysis-feasibilitySkill
- site-regulation-researchSkill
- structural-coordinationSkill
- sustainability-daylight-energySkill
- visualization-renderingSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 15
Keep verified facts, project assumptions, design options, and unresolved questions visibly separate.
- Distinctive: line 34
Every response references the correct current issue/revision and does not conflict with prior decisions.
- Distinctive: line 41
Do not give legal advice, certify payment, accept nonconforming work, direct contractor means/methods, or make safety determinations …
- Distinctive: line 46
If the native application is unavailable, produce a reproducible plan, script, structured data, SVG/DXF artifact, or exact in-application …
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Construction Administration
Maintain a factual project record and route contractual/legal determinations to the responsible professional.
Preflight
- Contract/delivery context, issued drawing/spec revision, RFI/submittal/change logs, meeting/site records and defined architect authority.
- Response deadlines, responsible parties and whether the item affects cost/time/design/safety.
Keep verified facts, project assumptions, design options, and unresolved questions visibly separate. If a required input is absent, record it as UNKNOWN rather than inventing it.
Workflow
- Classify incoming item, link it to contract/issued information and identify affected disciplines/drawings/specs.
- Draft concise response or review comments that answer only within the architect's authority; distinguish clarification from design change.
- Track status, responsible party, dates, superseded information and downstream drawing/model/spec updates.
- For site observations/punch lists, record location, evidence, required action and verification status without asserting unseen conditions.
Deliverables
- RFI response draft
- Submittal/shop-drawing review comments
- Change/decision log
- Site observation or punch-list record
- Closeout/as-built action list
Verification
- Every response references the correct current issue/revision and does not conflict with prior decisions.
- Changes propagate to affected documentation and responsibility/status remain visible.
For file/model changes, compare the result against a pre-change baseline and report changed items, skipped items, failures, and checks actually run.
Professional boundaries
- Do not give legal advice, certify payment, accept nonconforming work, direct contractor means/methods, or make safety determinations outside the user's authority.
- Urgent life-safety/site hazards must be escalated to responsible professionals.
If a live CAD/BIM/GIS/analysis tool or MCP integration is available, inspect the current document/model and tool version before write operations. Prefer read-only inspection, dry runs, bounded samples, new output paths, and native undo/transaction mechanisms. Never claim a model or drawing was changed unless the tool confirms it.
If the native application is unavailable, produce a reproducible plan, script, structured data, SVG/DXF artifact, or exact in-application procedure instead of pretending to have operated the software.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.