Tried an AI Review Tool and Turned It Off? Ask These First
Helonic is an AI construction drawing analysis platform for general contractors that tried an AI drawing review tool, stopped using it, and are deciding whether to try another. A team that turned off one AI drawing review tool is a careful buyer for the next one, which is good. The risk is buying a second tool that fails for the same reason, because nobody wrote down what the reason was.
Direct answer. Before evaluating Helonic or any other AI drawing review tool after a failed one, name which of five causes ended the last one: wrong findings, no location, another login, the wrong first project, or no owner. Each cause has one question the next vendor must answer on your set.
Why did the last tool get turned off?
| Cause | What the team saw | Ask the next vendor |
|---|---|---|
| Too many wrong findings | Reviewers dismissed most of the list, then stopped opening it | On our set, what share of findings will a reviewer keep? |
| No location | Every finding took minutes to check | Show me a finding opening on the sheet at the spot. |
| Another login | PMs never saw results unless someone forwarded them | What lands in Procore or Autodesk, and who needs a seat? |
| Wrong first project | The pilot ran on a DD set or a partial package | Which of our current bids is a fair test? |
| No owner | Runs happened, triage did not | Who on our team will sort findings, and how many hours a set? |
Two of these often happen together. Wrong findings with no location is a typical pair: checking was slow, so people stopped checking, so nothing was ever kept.
Who should you ask inside the company?
- The reviewer who stopped opening it. They know whether the findings were bad or just slow to check.
- A PM who was supposed to get its output. They know whether anything ever reached them.
- Whoever approved it. They know what result was promised, and whether anyone measured it.
Write the answers down in a paragraph. That paragraph becomes the decision rule for the next pilot, set before the run as described in what result means your pilot worked.
What should you pull from the old tool?
Three numbers, if you can still get them: findings kept versus dismissed, logins after the first month, and which project it ran on. A low keep rate points at the tool. Low logins with a decent keep rate points at the rollout. Use the same set for the next pilot if you still have it. Running a new tool on the set the old one failed on is the fastest fair test, and how to compare two pilots on the same set gives the score sheet.
What would make you turn the next one off too?
Decide that before you start. The kill criteria in which pilot results mean you should not buy are a good starting list. Run the pilot itself using how to pilot AI drawing review software, and judge the tool against what to look for in an AI construction drawing review platform.
How does Helonic answer the five questions?
Every Helonic finding opens boxed on the sheet. A reviewer keeps or dismisses each one, and confirmed findings go to Procore or Autodesk as RFIs through RFI generation, so only reviewers need a login. The keep rate and the right first project are answers you should get from a run on your own set, not from us.
Practitioner insight
“We blamed the software for a year. When we finally asked, the real story was nobody owned it. The runs were fine. Nobody was assigned to go through them.”
Conversations with preconstruction directors at general contractors that cancelled an earlier AI drawing review subscription.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why do teams turn off AI drawing review tools?
Who should we ask about why the last tool failed?
What data from the old tool helps the next evaluation?
Should the next pilot use the same project?
Milind Sagaram
Co-founder & CEO, HelonicMilind is the co-founder and CEO of Helonic, where he leads product and go-to-market for AI-powered construction drawing analysis. He works closely with general contractors, project managers, estimators, and owners to understand how drawing quality drives project outcomes - and where AI can reduce RFIs, change orders, and rework. Milind has interviewed hundreds of construction professionals across project delivery roles, from preconstruction estimators at ENR top-400 contractors to facilities directors at institutional owners, and uses those conversations to shape both product direction and the way Helonic talks about the work.
- Construction project delivery and preconstruction
- RFI and change order economics
- Owner and GC workflows for drawing QA/QC
- Estimating risk and bid-stage scope assessment
Last reviewed by Milind Sagaram · November 2026