Test Fit

The first real question on a site is arithmetic: how many floors of what plate, inside what cap, yielding how many units and how much parking. The arithmetic is the same on every site. The caps, the efficiency, and the unit sizes are the deal's own numbers, so they come from you, cited, and the scenarios print them next to every result.

Workflow

Step 1. Collect the site and the limits

Ask, in one message:

1. Site area, as your survey or summary states it.
2. The limits that govern: FAR or plot ratio, height in floors or feet, coverage, any hard cap you know of. For each: the value and where it came from. A zoning-summary file can be named and read.
3. Efficiency, gross to net, as you assume it, and why.
4. For unit yield: the unit types, their areas, and the mix. For parking: your ratio, with its source.

A limit with no source can still run, marked. A limit you decline to mark does not run.

Step 2. Frame the scenarios

Each scenario is a named set of choices: plate area, floor count, mix. Two or three at a time keeps the table readable; more run in batches. Never add a scenario the user did not ask for, however obvious the gap between two of theirs.

Step 3. Compute each scenario, showing every step

Scenario <name>
  site area              <as given>            [source]
  FAR cap                <as given>            [source]
    max buildable        <arithmetic>
  plate x floors         <as chosen>
    gross proposed       <arithmetic>          vs cap: <governs or clears>
  height check           <floors vs limit>     [source]
  coverage check         <plate/site vs limit> [source]
  efficiency             <as assumed>          [stated basis]
    net                  <arithmetic>
  unit yield             <net / mix arithmetic, per type>
  parking                <ratio arithmetic>    [source]
  governing constraint   <which limit binds first, from the arithmetic>

Every line carries its source. Any line on an unverified limit prints unverified beside its result, and the scenario summary repeats it.

Step 4. Report

The scenarios side by side: gross, net, units by type, parking, and the governing constraint of each. Then the caveat, every time:

Every limit and factor here came from you or your zoning summary. I did the arithmetic and supplied no values. This is early feasibility arithmetic, not a zoning analysis and not a massing: nothing here confirms a plate fits the lot. test-far checks a scheme; your zoning analysis governs.

Step 5. Save, if asked

Ask whether to write the study to a file and where. Write it directly, including the arithmetic. There is no template and no script.

Rules

• Never supply a limit, a factor, a unit size, or a ratio. There are none in this file.
• Name the governing constraint per scenario, derived from the arithmetic, not from intuition.
• Unverified limits are stamped where they print, and again in the summary.
• Run only the scenarios asked for.
• Show the arithmetic, every chain, every scenario.
• Never convert units on your own; a site in acres against plates in square feet stops for one conversion you confirm.
• Say on every run that this is arithmetic, not zoning analysis and not massing.

Anti-patterns

• Recalling a typical efficiency, parking ratio, or unit size to keep the chain moving. These are exactly the numbers a lender will ask the source of.
• Softening the unverified stamp because the scenario looks promising.
• Adding the scenario the user obviously should have asked for.
• Presenting the max-FAR scenario as the recommendation.
• Letting a scenario imply the plate fits the lot because the coverage arithmetic cleared.

Resources

None. This skill is one file. Output is written directly at the path you name.