This is not a course.

Use the built-in workflows — they're good, and they come with your subscription. They're also generic: invoice chasing, lead triage, month-end close. None of them has read your fee schedule or knows what your exclusions list says. What you're paying for is what it learns from: years of your own proposals, minutes, RFIs and zoning reports — and the judgment about which of your work shouldn't be automated at all.

Then you don't get those skills. Five documents are built from your material, and the audit picks them. The library I've already built is a head start, not the offer — a residential practice usually ends up with a different five than a commercial one.

It should be, and that's why the confidentiality clause is in the engagement letter rather than on this page. Your material goes into a private build used only for your practice — never reused for another firm, never used to train anything, deleted on request. Ask for the clause before the call and I'll send it.

Design. It drafts the documents around architecture, not the architecture. It doesn't make professional determinations — structural, life-safety, code and zoning conclusions stay yours; it cites, it doesn't decide. And it never sends anything: every output is a draft waiting for your review. Rhino, Revit and the rest of the desktop software are a separate conversation, after the paperwork rather than instead of it.

It will. Everything it produces is a draft, and you review it the way you'd review a draft from a junior. The zoning skill cites every number so you can check it. The RFI skill refuses to answer an RFI that's really a change request. I'd rather show you what it won't do.

No. It runs inside Claude's desktop app, installs with a button, and you use it by asking for a document the way you'd ask a colleague. The playbook and the recorded training are written for the person who joins next year, not for whoever sat in the room.

It establishes the project before it writes — from the email thread, or by asking — and saves into that project's folder, named by your own convention. Both are learned in the Build from how your files already sit. If it can't find the folder it asks; it never guesses. For minutes it reads the last set in that project first, so numbering continues, old business carries forward and the attendee list starts from last time.

The material, yes, any time — the fee schedule, the templates, the exclusions list all live in your own drive, never inside the plugin. Change the file and the next document uses it. The instructions themselves are versioned: send me what you want different and it comes back as an update everyone in the office pulls, so the whole practice stays on one version rather than three.

Things will — your rates, a template, the platform underneath. None of it looks like a fault: a stale fee schedule quotes last year's rates without erroring. Care exists for exactly this. Your reference material is reviewed, the system is kept working as the platform shifts, and there's a monthly session for whatever came up.

The playbook and the recorded training are written for the person who joins next year, not for whoever sat in the room. On Care, new staff are onboarded as part of the retainer — the quiet failure of these systems is the new hire who was never shown it and stopped using it, and that's the one thing I'm watching for.

The setup day is one day, on site, with whoever will use it. The Build is two weeks of my time, not yours — I need past proposals, minutes and your templates, and about three hours of you across the two weeks.

It works the other way round: everything is built from the documents you already have, so the output looks like yours, not mine. If a template for something doesn't exist yet, we create one that matches the design standards in the rest of your documents.

Your Claude subscription, which you buy directly from Anthropic. Nothing else — no per-seat fee from me, no platform of my own that you'd be locked into.