building-code-review
Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Reviews architectural designs and drawing sets against building codes — IBC, NFPA, ADA, and local amendments. Use when checking designs for code compliance, answering code questions, reviewing egress and accessibility, or preparing for plan review submission.
In this repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- bim-interoperabilitySkill
- dxf-drawing-inspectionSkill
- egress-life-safetySkill
- ifc-model-analysisSkill
- mep-coordinationSkill
- specification-writingSkill
- sustainable-designSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
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
- Distinctive: line 12
Check an architectural design against the applicable building codes: structural, fire/life safety, accessibility, egress, and occupancy.
- Distinctive: line 50
Don't invent code numbers: If you don't know the exact section/edition, give the requirement and note "verify exact section" rather than …
- Very specific: line 54
Clarifying, not legal advice: always end with a note that final interpretation rests with the AHJ and a licensed professional.
≈ “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
Building Code Review
Check an architectural design against the applicable building codes: structural, fire/life safety, accessibility, egress, and occupancy. This is a knowledge skill: it structures the review and tells you what to verify — it does not replace a licensed code consultant.
When to use
- "Is this design up to code?"
- Reviewing drawings before submission to the AHJ (Authority Having Jurisdiction)
- Answering a specific code question ("What's the max travel distance?")
- Filling in a code-compliance checklist
Critical first step
Confirm the applicable code edition and jurisdiction. The International Building Code (IBC) is the base model code in most US states, updated every 3 years (2018, 2021, 2024…). States/cities amend it, and NYC, Chicago, California, Florida, etc. have significant local differences. Always ask which jurisdiction + edition the project falls under before ruling anything compliant or non-compliant.
Review workflow
- Establish project data — occupancy classification(s), number of occupants, building type, area, height, construction type, sprinkler status. Most code outcomes flow from these four inputs.
- Occupancy classification (IBC Ch. 3). Classify each use: A (assembly), B (business), E (educational), F, H, I, M, R, S, U. Mixed occupancies → separate or incidental-use analysis.
- Means of egress (IBC Ch. 10, NFPA 101):
- Occupant load from
area ÷ occupant load factor - Number of exits, exit width, travel distance limits
- Common path of egress travel, exit discharge
- Occupant load from
- Construction type & allowable area (IBC Ch. 5, 6, 7): based on construction type (I–V) and fire-resistance ratings; check height/area limits and sprinkler trade-offs.
- Accessibility (IBC Ch. 11, ADA/ABA Standards): accessible routes, door clearances (min 32" opening), ramp slopes (max 1:12), restrooms, signage, parking.
- Fire-resistive & compartmentation (IBC Ch. 7): rated assemblies, fire blocking, smoke barriers, corridor ratings, penetration protection.
- Energy (IECC/ASHRAE 90.1 & local): envelope, glazing ratio, insulation, HVAC efficiency — often its own review track.
- Produce findings as a checklist with: reference (code section), requirement, project condition, verdict (Pass / Fail / Needs confirmation), and severity.
Output finding format
F-01 IBC §1029.7.3 Corridor width min 72" clear
Condition: corridor shown at 66" between wall faces
Verdict: FAIL — widen corridor or justify as 2-way w/ discharge
Severity: HighEdge cases & cautions
- Don't invent code numbers. If you don't know the exact section/edition, give the requirement and note "verify exact section" rather than fabricating one. Cite edition explicitly.
- Existing buildings → IBC Ch. 34 (existing structures) or IEBC, not new-construction IBC.
- Historic buildings → preservation easements + AHJ special provisions often override parts of IBC.
- Assembly spaces → occupant load and exit capacity dominate; use the tightening factor for fixed seating and tables/booths.
- Clarifying, not legal advice: always end with a note that final interpretation rests with the AHJ and a licensed professional. See
references/for what to check per chapter.
Files
references/code-checklists.md— per-chapter review checklists with common requirements.references/key-codes.md— the code & standard landscape (IBC, NFPA 101/13/70, ADA, IEBC, IECC, ASHRAE 90.1), with editions.
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.

