Before a site visit, a project manager may need to review a plan, a selection log, recent client messages, and notes from the last walk. The preparation task is specific: decide what needs to be checked while the right people are at the property.

Datum recommends using AI to draft a visit question list from those records. Each question should identify the unresolved decision, the evidence already available, and what someone needs to observe or ask. The project manager reviews the list before the visit and keeps responsibility for measurements and decisions.

Name the purpose of this visit

Start with the job, rooms, visit date, attendees, and decisions the visit should support. A selection meeting and a pre-installation check need different questions. Provide the current approved documents and clearly label earlier versions that explain an unresolved issue.

Anthropic’s context-engineering guidance recommends keeping the information supplied to an AI focused and sufficient for its task. Its September 2025 article is established guidance, not a new construction product announcement. For visit preparation, Datum’s application is to assemble the records relevant to the visit and keep links to the originals.

Ask the person preparing the packet to list the files supplied. If a referenced drawing or message is missing, show that gap. “No answer found in this packet” is narrower and more useful than claiming nobody has answered the question.

Separate a recorded answer from a field check

Have AI organize proposed questions by room or visit sequence. Preserve the distinction between a fact recorded in a document, a conflict between records, and a condition that must be checked at the property. A dimension on an old plan remains a recorded dimension until the responsible person verifies its relevance.

  • Question: what exactly needs to be confirmed?
  • Reason: which selection, scope item, or next step depends on the answer?
  • Existing evidence: which file, revision, page, or dated message raised the question?
  • Needed evidence: a measurement, a photograph, a document clarification, or a decision from a named person.
  • Follow-up: who will record the answer, and where will unresolved items remain visible?

Let the project manager remove questions already settled in an authoritative record. Keep any required field verification even when a document contains an answer. AI should not cancel a planned check because two text descriptions appear consistent.

Make the evidence easy to open

Anthropic’s current Citations documentation describes document-linked answers, including page references for PDFs. It also states that image citations are not supported. A linked passage can help a reviewer find the text behind a proposed question; it does not prove that the question is necessary or that a physical condition matches the record.

For a question based on a photograph or drawing detail, retain the file reference and describe what the reviewer needs to inspect. If the detail is unclear, ask for a better source or a field check. Avoid asking AI to turn an uncertain visual estimate into an exact measurement.

A kitchen question should lead to a specific check

Consider a hypothetical kitchen project. A selection log names a refrigerator model, while the visit notes refer to a different model without recording whether the change was approved. A useful question is: which model is currently approved, and which specification sheet should the person checking the opening use?

The draft should point to both records and leave the model unresolved. The project manager can seek the approval record before the visit, then decide what still requires an on-site measurement. This separates an office question from a field task and gives the visit a clearer purpose.

After the visit, keep the original questions alongside the recorded answers. Mark items as answered, deferred, or still requiring evidence. A discussion about a possible change should remain a discussion until the authorized person records the decision. Do not let a polished visit summary silently update the approved scope or selection log.

Try it on a visit your team already completed

Use only the records available before that visit. Have the project manager compare the draft with the questions that mattered on the day. Record missed questions, unnecessary questions, mistaken claims that an issue was resolved, and the time spent checking the draft.

Also inspect whether the list directs each question to someone who can answer it. A client may confirm a preference but cannot supply a missing manufacturer specification. If the draft repeatedly confuses those roles, narrow the task and improve the packet before using it to prepare a live visit.

Bring an example of your visit-preparation task to a conversation with Datum. We can discuss how your own team could build and test a question list around the records it already keeps.

Sources Read

Next step, if this note maps to a problem on your desk: book a conversation with Adam. Thirty minutes, weekday evenings, Eastern time.

Related Field Notes