Does every finding cite the sheet, page, or clause it came from?

Why it matters: Both Document Crunch and Provision describe findings or answers that cite the source document. Document Crunch says if it cannot cite a flag, it does not say it. Provision's Chat Agent and Risk Review are described as source-cited. Trunk Tools' TrunkText is described as checking work with sources. In the demo: Ask them to open a finding and show the exact clause or sheet callout, then confirm it matches the uploaded file version.

Is the output machine-only, or reviewed by people before delivery?

Why it matters: Delivery models differ elsewhere in this category: Buildcheck says in-house experts verify findings before delivery, while InspectMind states AI findings can be wrong or incomplete and should be verified. For contract-review tools, ask who stands behind a risk flag before your team relies on it. In the demo: Ask whether the demo output is raw AI, human-checked, or a mix, and what that means for turnaround and liability.

What is the turnaround: minutes, hours, or days?

Why it matters: Provision describes reviewing drawings, specs, and contracts in minutes and cutting line-by-line contract review from hours to same-day turnaround (case-study claims). Drawing-review peers in the directory publish different figures (Buildcheck 5-10 days; InspectMind usually hours). Contract tools should state their own SLA clearly. In the demo: Time a full package you care about (contract + key specs), not a single clause, and ask what is included in that turnaround.

What is behind the accuracy figure?

Why it matters: Provision claims 95% verified accuracy across real project documents. We recorded no accuracy percentage from Document Crunch or Trunk Tools. We report these as claims; none has been verified. In the demo: Ask on what document set, measured how, and against what answer key. Our planned Round 2 metrics include recall on critical estimator clauses and citation accuracy.

Which document types does it handle together (contracts, specs, drawings, RFIs, addenda)?

Why it matters: Provision's Chat Agent is described as reading drawings, specs, contracts, RFIs, and addenda. Document Crunch describes contracts, specs, and addenda, plus Project Assist for submittals, notices, and RFIs. Trunk Tools' Cortex reads project documents and drawings into a knowledge graph, with tools for bids, RFIs, submittals, and bulletin changes. In the demo: Upload the mix you actually get at bid time (prime contract, key divisions, and at least one addendum) and ask one cross-document question.

How are your documents stored, and are they used to train models?

Why it matters: This question is on our category hub. Document Crunch says contracts stay with the customer and cites SOC 2 by default. Provision says it is SOC 2 Type II certified. Ask every vendor the same way. In the demo: Ask for the answer in writing before uploading client contracts, including retention, subprocessors, and training-data policy.

Can risk findings and scopes export into the systems you already use?

Why it matters: Provision describes RFI and redline generation from identified risks. Document Crunch describes generating project artifacts for submittals and notices. Trunk Tools describes drafting RFI and submittal responses. Export paths into your CMS, email, or estimate workbook still need to be demonstrated. In the demo: Ask to see a finding land in your format (PDF redline, Word, Excel, or your PM system) with clause citations intact.

Does Risk Review or equivalent let you set preferred positions and severity rules?

Why it matters: Provision's Risk Review describes severity levels, default positions compared against uploaded language, filters for clauses that deviate from preferred templates, and customizable risk lists. Document Crunch describes codifying experts' standards into reviews or playbooks. In the demo: Bring two or three of your preferred clause positions and ask the tool to flag deviations on a sample contract.

Home / Guides / Questions to ask an AI contract and document review vendor before a demo

Questions to ask an AI contract and document review vendor before a demo

A checklist for estimators and preconstruction teams getting ready for an AI contract or document-review demo. These are our suggestions, drawn from the questions on our contract, document and drawing review category hub and the measures in our planned Round 2 (Contract & Spec Review) protocol. They are not findings: Means & Methods Lab has not tested any tool yet. Where a question mentions a vendor, it points to something that vendor publishes, so you can see why the question matters.

SUGGESTIONS, NOT FINDINGS. No tool has been tested by Means & Methods Lab. Vendor facts are desk research from vendor websites and are not verified. Updated 2026-10-14.

The questions (8)

Q01Does every finding cite the sheet, page, or clause it came from?
WHY IT MATTERS · Both Document Crunch and Provision describe findings or answers that cite the source document. Document Crunch says if it cannot cite a flag, it does not say it. Provision's Chat Agent and Risk Review are described as source-cited. Trunk Tools' TrunkText is described as checking work with sources.
IN THE DEMO · Ask them to open a finding and show the exact clause or sheet callout, then confirm it matches the uploaded file version.
Q02Is the output machine-only, or reviewed by people before delivery?
WHY IT MATTERS · Delivery models differ elsewhere in this category: Buildcheck says in-house experts verify findings before delivery, while InspectMind states AI findings can be wrong or incomplete and should be verified. For contract-review tools, ask who stands behind a risk flag before your team relies on it.
IN THE DEMO · Ask whether the demo output is raw AI, human-checked, or a mix, and what that means for turnaround and liability.
Q03What is the turnaround: minutes, hours, or days?
WHY IT MATTERS · Provision describes reviewing drawings, specs, and contracts in minutes and cutting line-by-line contract review from hours to same-day turnaround (case-study claims). Drawing-review peers in the directory publish different figures (Buildcheck 5-10 days; InspectMind usually hours). Contract tools should state their own SLA clearly.
IN THE DEMO · Time a full package you care about (contract + key specs), not a single clause, and ask what is included in that turnaround.
Q04What is behind the accuracy figure?
WHY IT MATTERS · Provision claims 95% verified accuracy across real project documents. We recorded no accuracy percentage from Document Crunch or Trunk Tools. We report these as claims; none has been verified.
IN THE DEMO · Ask on what document set, measured how, and against what answer key. Our planned Round 2 metrics include recall on critical estimator clauses and citation accuracy.
Q05Which document types does it handle together (contracts, specs, drawings, RFIs, addenda)?
WHY IT MATTERS · Provision's Chat Agent is described as reading drawings, specs, contracts, RFIs, and addenda. Document Crunch describes contracts, specs, and addenda, plus Project Assist for submittals, notices, and RFIs. Trunk Tools' Cortex reads project documents and drawings into a knowledge graph, with tools for bids, RFIs, submittals, and bulletin changes.
IN THE DEMO · Upload the mix you actually get at bid time (prime contract, key divisions, and at least one addendum) and ask one cross-document question.
Q06How are your documents stored, and are they used to train models?
WHY IT MATTERS · This question is on our category hub. Document Crunch says contracts stay with the customer and cites SOC 2 by default. Provision says it is SOC 2 Type II certified. Ask every vendor the same way.
IN THE DEMO · Ask for the answer in writing before uploading client contracts, including retention, subprocessors, and training-data policy.
Q07Can risk findings and scopes export into the systems you already use?
WHY IT MATTERS · Provision describes RFI and redline generation from identified risks. Document Crunch describes generating project artifacts for submittals and notices. Trunk Tools describes drafting RFI and submittal responses. Export paths into your CMS, email, or estimate workbook still need to be demonstrated.
IN THE DEMO · Ask to see a finding land in your format (PDF redline, Word, Excel, or your PM system) with clause citations intact.
Q08Does Risk Review or equivalent let you set preferred positions and severity rules?
WHY IT MATTERS · Provision's Risk Review describes severity levels, default positions compared against uploaded language, filters for clauses that deviate from preferred templates, and customizable risk lists. Document Crunch describes codifying experts' standards into reviews or playbooks.
IN THE DEMO · Bring two or three of your preferred clause positions and ask the tool to flag deviations on a sample contract.

What to bring

A recent bid package you already reviewed by hand (or a public sample): prime contract or subcontract form, key specification divisions, and one addendum.
A short list of risk clauses you always check (notice, liquidated damages, retainage, escalation, indemnity, DBE).
Two or three preferred contract positions from your playbook.
A timer, so you can note minutes to first useful answer and minutes to clear the package.

Tools mentioned (alphabetical, not ranked)

Bluebeam Max · Drawing review & markup
Buildcheck · Drawing review & QA
Document Crunch · Contract & document review
InspectMind · Drawing review & QA
Nomic · Drawing review & QA
Provision · Contract & document review
Trunk Tools · Document intelligence

Side-by-side comparisons

Means & Methods Lab has no commercial relationship with any vendor on this page. Rankings and placement are never for sale. See how we make money.

Questions to ask an AI contract and document review vendor before a demo

The questions (8)

What to bring

Tools mentioned (alphabetical, not ranked)

Side-by-side comparisons

Related