Agentic Team · BTP
FR·EN
Request a demo

You design. Nothing gets re-keyed.

Project sheet, feasibility verdict, DXF drawings and quantity take-off — produced from your client's own documents. Every figure cites the document and page it came from. You pick up a dossier that holds, instead of retyping it.

Architect's worktable: site plan, massing axonometric, quantities spreadsheet

The problem

The first study cycle is the one nobody pays for

A client turns up with a brief, a PLU — the municipal zoning plan — and a land registry extract. Before you can design anything, someone has to read all of it, pull out the figures, cross-check them, and establish whether the brief even fits the site. Then retype the lot into your own tools. When the brief does not fit, that work is lost — and it was lost before it began.

The reading

Dozens of pages to mine for fifteen figures — and then, three weeks later, to work out which figure came from where.

The re-keying

The same dimensions retyped into the model, then the take-off, then the written statement. Every recopy is a chance to get it wrong.

The late verdict

The binding constraint surfaces after the concept sketch, once the brief has already been drawn three times over.

What it produces

A complete upstream dossier, every field carrying its source

Five deliverables, produced from the same documents, with no re-keying between them.

How it works

Three stages, and in one of them the system stops and asks you

01

You drop in the documents

Brief, zoning plan, land registry, your client's notes. As PDFs, exactly as they reached you.

02

The system stops

The sheet appears field by field, with its source. While a required field remains unproven, nothing is generated. You make the call, and your correction is timestamped and kept.

03

The deliverables come out

Feasibility, DXF, take-off, visuals. Each starts as soon as its own fields are proven — one deliverable never waits on another.

The system never guesses. An unproven field blocks the deliverable that depends on it, and asks you for the value.

This is the opposite of a tool that fills in the gaps: what you get back is either proven, or flagged as unproven. There is no third case.

A worked example

Apartment building, 24 units, Montreuil

Deterministic massing axonometric derived from the project sheet

The massing, computed from the sheet — site, coverage, height, target floor area. Deterministic: two runs give the same volume.

Visual intent conditioned by the massing

The visual intent, conditioned by that exact massing: same footprint, same number of storeys, same roof. An intent — never a project document.

The take-off, exactly as it comes out

Interior refurbishment, 80 m², 2.50 m floor-to-ceiling.

ItemDescriptionUnitQtyUnit priceWhere the figure comes from
01.1Strip out existing floor finish80the contractor'ssurveyed area
01.2Cart away fit-out debris4the contractor's80 m² × 0.05 m³/m²
02.1Dry lining and partitions190the contractor's80 m² × 0.95 lm/m² × 2.50 m
03.1Floor finish, supply and lay85.6the contractor's80 m² × 1.07 (waste)
03.2Skirtingslm76the contractor's80 m² × 0.95 lm/m²
04.1Paint to walls and partitions190the contractor's80 m² × 0.95 lm/m² × 2.50 m
04.2Paint to ceilings80the contractor'ssurveyed area

On a new-build project the same quantities are counted straight off the geometric model — walls, openings and storeys, with openings deducted — without going through a ratio at all.

No line carries a price, and none ever will.

A quantity is calculated and can be proven. A price is decided and must be owned: it belongs to the contractor doing the work. The same framework goes out to every contractor invited to tender, so they price against an identical breakdown — comparable line by line.

The boundary

A preliminary study. Never a permit document.

A DXF drawing is a feasibility drawing, a take-off is an order of magnitude, an image is an intent. That limit is not a disclaimer bolted on afterwards: it is what makes the tool useful without putting you at risk.

In France, engaging an architect is a legal requirement for any building permit filed by a company, whatever the floor area. This product replaces no one — it removes the part of the work you never invoice, so your time goes into design.

Reviewing a printed feasibility study in a practice

Confidentiality

What leaves the machine, and what does not

Your clients' documents are covered by agreements you have signed. You are owed a precise answer, not a reassurance about security. Here it is.

What stays local

The geometric model, the massing and the DXF drawings are computed on the machine and never leave it. Fonts are served locally: the page you are reading makes no request to any third party.

What leaves, and where it goes

When the documents are read, their text is sent to the analysis service to extract the sourced fields. When images are generated, the massing and the project description go to the rendering engine. These outbound paths are named, listed and documented — we walk you through them before you upload anything.

Get in touch

Bring a dossier. Judge it on the output.

The best demonstration is not a presentation: it is your own dossier, run through the system while we talk. Thirty minutes is enough to watch the sheet build itself, the checkpoint stop on a missing field, and the verdict land.

We work with a small number of practices during the pilot phase. Every exchange is covered by a confidentiality agreement signed before any document is uploaded.