Aipedia: Architects

AI specification writing: who is liable?

Aipedia, by the Apex broking team · Last reviewed 2026-10-27

The architect who issues a specification is liable for it, whether a person or an AI tool drafted the clauses. Specification errors are a long-standing source of claims, and AI can introduce them faster and less visibly.

Part of: AI in Architects

In short

About 24% of AI-using practices use AI for specification writing or technical design (RIBA AI Report 2026). Generative tools can draft clauses that cite superseded standards, name products that do not meet the performance required, or lift manufacturer text that promises more than the product delivers. Architects Code Standard 3.2 requires architects to keep up to date with current standards, and 3.5 requires proper supervision. If a defect follows, the claim is against the architect and PI usually responds, subject to the wording and to how the error is defended.

How practices use AI for specifications

The RIBA AI Report 2026 found 24% of practices that use AI use it for specification writing or technical design. Typical uses are drafting clauses from a short description, converting a manufacturer's datasheet into specification language, updating an old project specification for a new job, and summarising product literature.

Used well, this saves time on routine preliminaries and standard clauses. Generative tools write fluent, confident text, though. They do not know which version of a standard is current unless told, may merge two products' properties, and can reproduce manufacturer marketing claims as if they were performance requirements.

The duties that apply

Architects Code Standard 3.2: keep up to date with current standards and good practice. An AI clause citing a withdrawn standard is the architect's error. See the Architects Code.
Standard 3.1: work within competence, which includes understanding what each specified performance requirement means.
Standard 3.5: supervision. A junior using AI to draft sections needs review by someone able to spot a wrong clause.
Standard 4.5: records of how products and standards were chosen.
Building Regulations Part 2A, reg 11K in England: designers must provide sufficient design information and ensure the design would comply if built.
RIBA Code, Principle 2, 1.1: act competently, conscientiously and responsibly.

The ARB and RIBA guide explains how these fit together.

What can go wrong

Illustrative scenario. An architect asks a generative AI chatbot to update an external wall specification from a project completed several years earlier. The output keeps an old reference to a test standard and describes an insulation product using wording from its brochure. The contractor buys to the specification. Later, the client's surveyor finds the installed build-up does not meet the performance now required, and the client claims remedial costs.

Other failure modes include specifying a product that has been discontinued, mixing proprietary and performance clauses so the contractor can substitute freely, and copying a manufacturer's text that carries its copyright. Apex's specification error scenario and design and specification claim examples show how such claims usually run.

How PI usually responds

A specification error is ordinary professional negligence, so architects' PI will usually respond regardless of the drafting tool, subject to the policy terms. The defence of the claim tends to focus on:

whether a reasonably competent architect would have specified the same thing at the time, which is harder to argue if the error was a standard the architect should have known was withdrawn;
the contractor's and manufacturer's share of responsibility, especially where a product substitution was involved;
the records showing what was checked and approved.

If the error involves fire performance, fire safety restrictions on the policy may apply. The ARB PII guidance sets the minimum of £250,000 each and every claim.

Practical controls

Use AI to draft, never to decide. A competent person signs off each section.
Check every cited standard against its current edition before issue.
Check named products against current manufacturer data, not the AI summary.
Strip marketing language: specify measurable performance, not adjectives.
Do not paste manufacturer text wholesale into the specification.
Keep a revision record showing who reviewed AI-drafted clauses.
Re-check inherited clauses whenever an old project specification is reused.

How Apex helps

Apex arranges PI for architects. A broker can review how your policy would handle a specification claim and whether any fire safety or product-related terms affect it.

Sources

Frequently asked

Is the architect liable for an AI-drafted specification?

Yes. The architect who issues the specification is responsible for its content. Using AI does not transfer liability to the tool provider in any practical sense, and the standard applied is that of a reasonably competent architect at the time.

Can AI-written specifications breach copyright?

They can if the tool reproduces substantial parts of a manufacturer's or another practice's text. Keep specifications in the practice's own words, describe required performance and avoid pasting protected material into documents issued to clients and contractors.

Does PI cover a specification error caused by AI?

Usually, because it is a negligence claim arising from professional services. The outcome depends on the policy wording, any fire safety restrictions, and how well the practice can show what was checked before issue.

Should a specification say AI was used?

There is no rule requiring it. What matters is that the specification is accurate and reviewed. Some practices note AI use in their internal quality records rather than the issued document, so they can show insurers and clients how each section was checked.

Check your PI covers how you use AI

Tell us about your firm and the work you do. A broker will review how your current PI treats AI-assisted work, or arrange new cover. No fee for a quote. Or call 0117 325 0027.

Start a PI quote Request a callback

Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England and Wales, company number 07014570. This page is general information about how AI is used in the profession and how insurance may respond. It is not legal, regulatory or insurance advice on your circumstances, and it does not guarantee that cover will be available or on what terms.