Integration paths

PreCheck supports three integration patterns. They differ in where the applicant experiences PreCheck — inside the city’s permit software, inside Archistar, or not at all — but the underlying assessment workflow is identical across them.

Flow 1, API Integration with Applicant-Facing Intake (Embedded intake): Applicant is lifted into AI PreCheck for intake, upload and self-assessment. Results return to the city system. Applicant Stays in city portal except during PreCheck intake City Permitting System ePL / Permit Software AI PreCheck Intake · AI Analysis · Self-Assessment Municipal Reviewers Review, validate and decide Benefits: Strong applicant experience with self-assessment capability; Iterative improvement before formal submission; Tight integration with city system; Best for improving submission quality and first-pass success. Flow 2, API Integration (Backend Only) (Backend-only): AI PreCheck runs in the background via API. Applicant never sees AI PreCheck. Applicant Stays entirely in city portal City Permitting System ePL / Permit Software AI PreCheck AI Analysis (Background) Municipal Reviewers Review, validate and decide Benefits: Seamless single system experience for applicants; Invisible automation in background; Strong enterprise integration; Best when city wants one applicant-facing portal. Flow 3, No Integration (Standalone Deployment) (Standalone): Applicant or staff use AI PreCheck directly via a city-provided link. Results shared back to city. Applicant Uses AI PreCheck directly via link AI PreCheck Intake · AI Analysis · Self-Assessment Municipal Reviewers Review, validate and decide Benefits: Fastest to implement; Lowest IT dependency; Ideal for pilots and phased adoption; Still supports self-assessment and iterative improvement.

The three patterns at a glance

Pattern	What it is	Applicant experience
Embedded intake	API integration; applicant briefly lifted into Archistar UI for intake	Stays in city portal except during PreCheck intake
Backend-only	API integration; permit software builds the entire UI	Never sees Archistar — fully inside the city portal
Standalone	No integration; applicant uses Archistar directly	Submits via Archistar; results shared with city

Self-assess — an optional layer

Self-assess lets the applicant review PreCheck findings, fix issues, and re-run before formally submitting to the city. It is the single strongest lever PreCheck offers on submission quality.

The self-assess loop has four nodes. Run PreCheck flows to Review findings; Review findings flows to Fix; Fix loops back to Run PreCheck (iterate as needed). From Review findings, the applicant can submit when ready.

Self-assess doesn’t fit every pattern equally:

Pattern	Self-assess fit	Why
Embedded intake	Natural fit	Applicant is already in Archistar’s UI for intake; review-and-iterate slots in cleanly
Backend-only	N/A	No applicant-facing Archistar surface, so there’s no in-flow self-assess loop; iteration runs through the city’s own channels
Standalone	Natural fit	Applicant submits in Archistar directly and can iterate before sharing the report back

If improving submission quality before formal review is a priority, embedded or standalone with self-assess enabled is the strongest configuration.

Choosing your pattern

If your city…	Start at
Has API-capable permit software and wants PreCheck visible in the applicant flow	Embedded intake
Has API-capable permit software and wants PreCheck to run invisibly in the background	Backend-only
Doesn’t have API-capable permit software, or wants to evaluate before integrating	Standalone
Has bespoke intake requirements not served by the standard question set	Custom solution

A few notes on the decision:

The choice isn’t permanent. Cities frequently start with standalone and migrate to embedded as their permit software matures. The assessment workflow is identical across patterns, so a future migration doesn’t disrupt how PreCheck works — only how submissions flow in and out.

Quality lift comes from self-assess, not pattern choice. Embedded and standalone are equivalent on submission quality if self-assess is enabled in both.

Speed to live varies sharply. Standalone can be operational in weeks. Timelines for embedded and backend-only are driven by permit-software vendor integration work.