Build the board around a decision
Organize selections by room, zone, element or another project structure that the reviewer understands. Include enough identifying information to distinguish products and intended locations. Notes and specification clauses should explain the decision without competing visually with material images and tool outputs.
Linked tool outputs are useful when the underlying inputs matter. A color palette, texture recipe or calculation can be reopened in its source tool rather than reduced to an unexplained screenshot.
Issue a fixed revision for review
The reviewer should see a focused board without account or editing controls. The review record should identify the project, board, revision, reviewer, role and time. Client approval and technical sign-off answer different questions, so keep them separate even when they refer to the same board revision.
- Use client approval for selections and project preferences.
- Use technical sign-off for professional coordination or review responsibility.
- Invalidate or supersede a sign-off when the approved information changes.
- Preserve a reference that can be checked after the review link is closed.
Compare substitutions with the approved item
A contractor proposal should remain attached to the item it would replace. Record the proposed product, reason, supporting image and note to the architect. Approval or rejection should be explicit and should not silently overwrite the originally approved selection.
Architect Assets projects are designed for this narrow decision workflow. They do not replace a full common data environment, contract administration platform or project-management system.