Automated Submittal Review
Nomic reviews a contractor submittal against the contract documents you provide—project specifications, drawings, or both—and returns an annotated submittal and review report with an approval recommendation for A/E confirmation.
Attach the submittal and at least one governing document to a conversation, then ask for the review—no workflow required:
- The submittal — the contractor document under review.
- The project manual or specifications — the primary requirements when provided.
- The drawing set — sheets, details, dimensions, and schedules that govern or refine the review.
Assistant reads the submittal end to end and checks it against the documents that are attached. It uses specifications as the primary source of requirements when available and uses drawings to refine the context. If only one governing document is attached, it continues the review without asking for the other and qualifies checks that need the missing document. If neither is attached, it asks you to provide specifications or drawings rather than guess at requirements.
Nomic reviews what the contractor actually submitted. It does not fill in gaps on the contractor's behalf — missing warranties, test reports, or samples are reported as outstanding items, not inferred.
What you get back
A review report in chat and an annotated submittal with callouts for findings anchored to the submitted document. The report has five sections:
| Section | Contents |
|---|---|
| 1. Approval determination | Approved / No Exceptions Taken, Approved as Noted, Revise and Resubmit, Rejected, or Reviewed for Record Only |
| 2. Submittal identification | Name, product or system, manufacturer and model, discipline, and submittal type — linked to source evidence |
| 3. Findings | Exceptions and verified compliant items, with links to submitted and governing documents |
| 4. Comment for review stamp | A copy-ready, plain-text approval comment covering the determination and every exception |
| 5. Close | Any qualification caused by missing governing documents and how to export the annotated submittal |
The review-stamp comment is written for copy-paste into Bluebeam Revu, using standard A/E comment phrasing ("Verify dimensions in field prior to fabrication", "Provide warranty information meeting the requirements of Spec Section …").
Every compliance claim cites the spec paragraph, drawing detail, or submittal page it came from, so a reviewer can check the determination against the source rather than take it on trust.
Run it as a workflow
Use the Submittal Review workflow (Workflows → Nomic) when submittals arrive on a steady cadence and you want every reviewer to produce the same report. Provide the submittal and at least one governing document—specifications, a drawing set, or both. The workflow keeps the review report in chat and uses the review panel for findings and callouts, so reviewers can compare the submitted document and governing material side by side. It can also be launched from the Agent API if you want to hang it off an existing submittal intake process.
Supported Context
Autodesk Forma Integration
Sync submittals, specs, and drawings from Autodesk Forma projects
Bentley Integration
Sync submittals, specs, and drawings from Bentley projects
SharePoint Integration
Attach synced SharePoint folders to project context for submittal reviews
Egnyte Integration
Attach synced Egnyte folders to project context for submittal reviews
Project Data Upload
Upload submittals, specs, and drawings directly
Related Resources
- Submittal Log Generator — build the submittal log itself from the project manual
- Workflows overview — when to package a review for a team
- Context Sources overview — connect the systems your submittals live in