The code that governs your site
Estimating tools count what is drawn. This one measures the building and then holds it against the code you build under — 105 checks under Ontario’s pack, fewer where a jurisdiction’s pack is younger, each one citing the article it came from so you can check a finding instead of trusting it.
What it could not read
Every audit opens with how much of what it needed was actually on the drawings, and lists every assumption it had to make to finish. A tool that hides its gaps is a tool you have to check twice.
Jurisdiction is a setting
Eight jurisdictions carry shipped rule coverage across Canada, the United States and England, and the report cites that jurisdiction’s own articles. Ontario’s pack is the deepest, at 105 rules; younger packs run fewer checks and say so before showing you a finding, so a pass never reads as more than it is. Where a region has no rule set yet, the report says that too, instead of quoting the wrong code at you.
One trade, or all of them
Scope an audit to electrical, structural, mechanical, doors and hardware, low voltage or fire protection before you upload, and get that trade's findings instead of reading past a hundred that belong to somebody else.
Split sets, stitched
A building bigger than a sheet is drawn in parts, and every part overlaps its neighbour across the match line. Blueprint Auditor reads the grid lines two sheets share, works out where each one sits in the same frame, and merges them into one continuous floor layout, so a device drawn on both sides of a match line is counted once instead of twice. It reports how closely the shared grid lines agreed, in millimetres, so the join is something you can check. Tested on sets of twelve sheets in a single plan.
And when it will not stitch them
A floor plan and the reflected ceiling plan of the same floor share a grid exactly, and stitching those together would double every count on the level. So sheets are only joined when they are parts of one plan — same level, same discipline, overlapping without coinciding, and a sheet it cannot place is named beside the total, with the reason, because a silently dropped sheet is a silently missing count.
2D drawings to a 3D model
Open an IFC and it is built from the solids the model already carries. Give it a DWG, a DXF, or a PDF that kept its CAD line work, and the plan is extruded into a 3D model in seconds — walls, openings, floors and stairs, colour-sorted by what they are, with section cuts, orthographic elevations, on-model measurement and PNG or PDF export. An extruded model stands on an assumed storey height, on an assumption the viewer states, and the viewer says so on screen: it is a model of the drawing, not a survey of the building.
It grades its own work
Extraction accuracy is scored against drawings with hand-written ground truth, and invented output is charged at the same rate as missed output. Nothing here quotes a number that did not come out of that harness.
Nothing leaves your workspace
The model runs on infrastructure Marapone operates, and no commercial AI API is in the path. Your drawings are not sent to a third party, and they are not training anybody's model.
