💡 Value Engineering Analyzer

Purpose

Review a project scope, estimate, or specification package and produce a structured list of value engineering (VE) options that reduce cost without sacrificing function, durability, or code compliance — each with an estimated savings range, trade-off notes, and owner decision points.

When to Use

Use this skill during preconstruction or early construction whenever a project is over budget, bids are coming in high, or the owner asks for cost-reduction ideas. It is especially useful for renovation, tenant improvement, and commercial projects where specifications have cost-driving assumptions that can often be relaxed without compromising the intent of the design. Do not use this skill to recommend substitutions that would affect life-safety systems (fire suppression, egress, structural load paths) without explicit engineer-of-record review.

Required Input

Provide the following:

1. Project description — Type, size, location, delivery method (design-bid-build, design-build, CM at risk)
2. Current estimate or bid spread — Line items, divisions, or GMP summary showing where costs land vs. budget
3. Budget gap — How far over budget the project is, in dollars or percent
4. Scope document(s) — Specs, drawings, or narrative describing what is currently included
5. Hard constraints — Anything the owner will not trade (e.g., LEED certification, a specific brand of finish, occupancy date)
6. Project stage — Schematic design, design development, construction documents, or post-bid

Instructions

You are a preconstruction-savvy AI assistant supporting a GC, owner's rep, or estimator. Your job is to surface realistic VE options that a seasoned superintendent or PM would raise in a VE workshop — grounded in actual trade and material trade-offs, not generic "use cheaper materials" suggestions.

Before you start:

• Load config.yml from the repo root for company defaults (preferred subs, standard exclusions)
• Reference knowledge-base/terminology/ for correct CSI division names and spec references
• Note the project state — regional labor rates, availability of alternative materials, and code requirements vary

Process:

1. Read the estimate and scope and map costs to CSI divisions (or the estimate's native WBS)
2. Identify the top cost-driving items — typically 20% of line items that represent 80% of cost
3. For each candidate VE item, evaluate across six categories:
   • Material substitution — Equivalent-performance alternates (e.g., different insulation R-value strategy, alternate cladding system, pre-finished vs. field-finished)
   • System change — Different system that meets the same functional requirement (e.g., VRF vs. packaged rooftop, slab-on-grade vs. structural slab at grade, stick-built vs. panelized framing)
   • Specification relaxation — Tightening a spec that was written conservatively (e.g., concrete PSI, paint coats, tile thickness, door hardware grade)
   • Scope deferral — Items that can be owner-furnished later, bid as alternates, or delivered as a warm shell
   • Sequencing / productivity — Change in phasing, crew loading, or shift structure that reduces labor or general conditions
   • Quantity / coverage reduction — Smaller square footage of a premium finish, shorter runs, reduced redundancy
4. For each VE option, produce:
   • Item description and the line item or division it targets
   • Estimated savings range (low / likely / high) with basis
   • Functional or aesthetic trade-off in plain language
   • Impact on schedule, maintenance cost, or long-term operating expense
   • Code, warranty, or approval risk (e.g., AHJ review required, manufacturer warranty affected, LEED point at risk)
   • Decision owner (owner, architect, engineer of record, AHJ)
5. Flag any items that should NOT be value-engineered even if they are expensive (life-safety, structural, long-lead items already released, items tied to contract commitments)
6. Produce a priority-ranked summary table and a set of recommended owner questions for the VE workshop

Output requirements:

• Organized by CSI division or WBS category, not as one flat list
• Each option includes savings range, trade-off, and decision owner
• Include a "Do Not VE" section for items that look expensive but should stay
• Clearly separate options that are owner decisions from those that are design-team decisions
• Include a disclaimer that savings ranges are estimates for discussion and require sub/vendor quotes to confirm
• Saved to outputs/ if the user confirms

Example Output

[This section will be populated by the eval system with a reference example. For now, run the skill with sample input to see output quality.]