You're a GC project manager leveling subcontractor bids for {trade} on a {project type}.

Here is the scope of work from the specification and the drawing list, and here are {n} subcontractor proposals.

For each proposal, give me four lists:

1. Scope in the spec the proposal doesn't mention at all

2. Scope the proposal explicitly excludes

3. Scope where the proposal describes something different from the spec (different product, different extent, different standard)

4. Allowances, alternates, unit prices, or qualifications that appear in this bid and not the others.

Then check each proposal for whether it addresses: layout and survey, hoisting and material handling, temporary protection, fire watch, off-hours or weekend work, dumpsters and cleanup, as-builts, warranty duration, bonding, and who holds the permit for their scope.

Finally, tell me what I'd have to add to each bid to make them a true apples-to-apples comparison, and which bidder is carrying the most risk in qualifications.

If a proposal is silent on something, write "not stated." Don't assume it's included and don't assume it's excluded.

You're a GC project manager reviewing a subcontract before issuing it to a {trade} subcontractor on a {project type}.

Here's the subcontract, and here's the prime contract if you need the flow-down language.

Pull out and explain in plain English

- Every notice requirement. For each one: what triggers the clock, how many days, what form the notice has to take, who it goes to, and what happens if it's late

- Payment terms, including whether it's pay-when-paid or pay-if-paid, how many days after my receipt, and what documentation conditions payment

- Retainage: percentage, when it reduces, what releases it

- Liquidated damages and any consequential damages language

- Backcharge rights and the process required before I can exercise them

- Change order procedure: who can authorize, what happens to work directed verbally, and the markup caps

- Everything flowed down from the prime contract, and anything in the prime that should have flowed down but didn't

- Termination and suspension rights on both sides

- Insurance and indemnity, and whether the limits match what the prime requires

For each item, tell me what I have to do to stay compliant and what it costs me if I don't.

Then list the three provisions a subcontractor's attorney would push back on first.

If the contract doesn't address something, write "not stated." Don't tell me what's typical or standard.

You're a GC project manager reviewing a {trade} submittal against spec section {number and title}.

Here's the spec section, and here's the submittal.

Don't summarize either document.

List every place the submittal deviates from, skips, or substitutes what the spec requires. Check specifically:

- Manufacturer and product, and whether it's a named acceptable manufacturer or a substitution request

- Every performance criterion the spec sets (strength, rating, R-value, gauge, class, grade, whatever applies) against what the submittal shows

- Finish, color, texture and tolerance

- Testing and certification requirements, and whether the certificates are actually attached and current

- Every attachment the spec lists as required (product data, shop drawings, samples, calculations, warranties, installer qualifications)

- Whether the submittal covers the full scope of the section or only part of it

- Any note in the submittal that quietly changes the scope ("by others," "not in contract," "field verify")

Output a table: Item | What the spec requires | What the submittal shows | What I should ask.

If the submittal doesn't address something the spec requires, write "not stated" in the submittal column rather than leaving it blank.

At the end, tell me which single item is most likely to cause a problem in the field if I approve this as-is.

You're a GC project manager reviewing a change order request from a {trade} subcontractor.

Here's the change order request with its backup, and here's the contract clause they're claiming under.

Work through it in this order:

1. Entitlement. Which parts of this claim does the cited clause actually support? Which parts does it not? Is there a different clause that fits better, or one that defeats it?

2. Notice. What notice requirement applies to this type of change? What event started the clock, and what date was that? Does the backup show notice was given in the required form, to the required person, within the required window? If the backup doesn't show it, say so.

3. Pricing. Does the breakdown match the contract's terms for labor rates, burden, equipment rates, material markup, subcontractor markup, and overhead and profit caps? Are any line items double-counted between direct cost and markup? Is there time claimed for work that appears in the base scope?

4. Schedule. Are they claiming time as well as money? Is the delay on the critical path, and does their backup demonstrate that or just assert it?

5. Then give me five questions to ask before I sign, ordered by how much money each one moves.

If the documentation doesn't show something, say it doesn't. Don't assume it happened off-paper.

You're a GC superintendent reviewing a three week lookahead schedule on a {project type}.

Here's the lookahead. Here's the current submittal log and procurement log if you need them.

Find:

- Activities with predecessors nobody wrote down. Name the missing predecessor

- Two or more trades working in the same area on the same day, and whether they can actually coexist there

- Any inspection, permit, submittal approval, or long lead delivery that has to land before a listed activity but doesn't appear on the lookahead

- Activities whose duration doesn't match the crew size shown

- Work scheduled before the area it depends on is scheduled to be complete

- Anything scheduled on a day the site won't be available (weather-sensitive work, owner-occupied hours, street closure windows)

Rank everything you find in this order: inspection and permit holds first, then long lead material, then trade stacking, then everything else.

For each item, give me the specific call I should make today and what I'm asking that person for.

If the lookahead doesn't give you enough to judge something, list it as a question rather than an answer.

You're a GC project manager about to send an RFI to the {architect / structural engineer / MEP engineer}.

Here's my draft RFI, the relevant drawing note, and the relevant spec language.

Rewrite it so it can only be answered one way:

- State the conflict as a conflict, not as confusion. "Detail 5/A-501 shows X, spec section Y requires Z" beats "please clarify"

- Cite the exact drawing number, detail number, and spec section and paragraph

- Give the schedule impact: which activity this holds, its current start date, and the date I need an answer to protect it

- Give the cost exposure if there is one, and say if there isn't

- Propose the answer I believe is correct, so they can confirm or correct it instead of starting from a blank page

- Name what I'll proceed with if I don't hear back by the date, if the contract lets me do that

Then tell me two things. First, what's still ambiguous in my version.

Second, what a designer could answer that would technically respond to my RFI and leave me exactly where I started.

Here are my raw notes from an OAC meeting on a {project type}.

Give me two tables.

Table one, commitments: what was promised, who promised it, the date they committed to, and what activity or decision it's tied to.

Table two, open decisions: every decision that was discussed and left open, who owes the answer, what's blocked until it lands, and how long it's been open if my notes mention it coming up before.

Then, separately, list anything that was discussed where the notes are ambiguous about whether a decision was actually made, so I can confirm it before it becomes a dispute.

Don't guess at owners. If nobody was named, write "unassigned." Don't add action items that weren't discussed. Don't smooth over a disagreement in the notes into an agreement.

You're a GC project manager. I need to send a {delay notice / backcharge notice / notice to cure / notice of default} to {party}.

Here's the situation, the relevant dates, and the contract clause that governs it.

Write it so it:

- Opens by citing the clause and confirming this notice satisfies its requirements, including the timing

- States facts and dates only. No characterization, no blame, no adjectives

- Lays out the chronology in order, with each date tied to a document I can produce

- Says exactly what I want them to do, and by what date

- States the consequence under the contract if they don't, without threatening anything the contract doesn't give me

- Stays professional enough that we can still work together Monday morning

Then, separately from the letter, tell me:

- What a lawyer reading this in two years would say is missing

- What in my version could be read against me

- What document I should have in the file before I send it

You're a GC project manager preparing for substantial completion on a {project type}.

Here are the closeout requirements from Division 01, any owner-specific closeout requirements, and my current closeout log.

List everything required that I don't have yet, grouped by who owes it:

- O&M manuals and the format required

- Warranties, including start dates and any that have to be issued directly to the owner

- Attic stock and spare parts, by quantity and storage location

- Owner training sessions, including who attends and whether they have to be recorded

- Record drawings and as-builts, and the format and medium required

- Commissioning reports and functional test documentation

- Certifications, test reports and inspection sign-offs

- Permits, certificates of occupancy, and any agency close-out

- Final lien waivers and consent of surety

- Keys, access credentials, and control system handover

For each missing item, tell me who owes it, roughly how long it takes to produce, and what it blocks. Then order the whole list by what to chase first based on lead time.

If my log is ambiguous about whether something is complete, list it as missing.