A project manager is taking leave. The schedule is current, the files are shared, and another manager has agreed to cover. The remaining work is explaining which decisions may come due while the PM is away, what each one depends on, and who can make it.

Datum’s recommendation is to use AI to draft a dated coverage brief from the project records, then have both managers walk through it. The useful deliverable is a short list of decisions and follow-ups the covering manager can trace to their sources. It should also show what the supplied records could not establish.

Define the coverage window before gathering records

Write down the absence dates, the covering manager, and the person available for escalation. Include overdue items and decisions due during the absence. Ask the outgoing PM to flag later milestones that require preparation during that window, so a date filter does not hide work that must start now.

Supply the current lookahead, open questions, pending selections, delivery confirmations, and the latest client commitments. Record when each source was retrieved. Use the company’s approved AI environment and share only records the covering manager is authorized to see.

Check what the open-items list actually includes

Procore’s current Project Overview guidance describes open items such as RFIs, submittals, and inspections. It allows filtering by due date and links items to their details. It also says users can see open items only for tools they can access. Those permissions matter when preparing a handoff: a clean list may reflect limited visibility.

For this workflow, ask AI to list the records it received and the sources it could not access. Have the outgoing PM check that inventory against the work expected during the absence. An empty export should be labeled as an empty export, with its filters and access limits attached. It does not prove the project has no outstanding work.

Give each open decision a usable entry

Anthropic’s context-engineering guidance recommends selecting relevant information and retaining references that let an agent retrieve details when needed. The article was published in 2025; this is an application of established guidance, not a new product announcement. For a coverage brief, Datum applies that principle by keeping source links beside concise entries.

  • Item and location: the existing record ID, project area, and link to the underlying question or task.
  • Current state: the latest documented position, its date, and any conflicting record.
  • Next action: what needs to happen, by when, and whose response is needed.
  • Coverage responsibility: who follows up, who may approve, and who handles an unresolved decision.
  • Missing information: any unavailable document, unconfirmed date, or dependency requiring a person’s check.

Let AI extract recorded names and dates, but have the managers confirm coverage assignments. A name in an email does not establish that someone has accepted responsibility. Where a deadline is missing, preserve the gap instead of inventing a date that looks convenient.

Keep follow-up authority separate from approval

Consider a hypothetical kitchen project: the supplier expects a replacement fixture during the PM’s absence, while the client has asked whether another finish would work. The brief should preserve both statements. The covering manager can confirm delivery and route the finish question to the authorized reviewer. Neither statement establishes approval to change the order.

Before leave starts, record which decisions the covering manager may make and which require escalation. Link to the company’s existing approval rules. Keep credentials and access codes out of the brief; provide access through the company’s normal permission process. Confirm that the covering manager can open the linked records using their own account.

Rehearse the handoff and record what changes

Try the draft on a completed project or an upcoming absence with time for review. Ask the covering manager to find the next required action, identify the approver, and open the supporting record without help. Include an overdue item, an inaccessible source, and a later milestone whose preparation falls inside the coverage window. These are proposed test cases, not reported results.

Record missed items, unsupported assignments, broken links, and questions that still require the outgoing PM. Count the full preparation and review effort when comparing the AI-assisted process with the current handoff. A shorter draft is useful only if the recipient can act from it.

Keep the approved brief in the project’s shared workspace with an owner and a preparation timestamp. During coverage, record decisions and changed commitments in the existing project records. When the PM returns, use those changes to prepare the return handoff, preserving unresolved items instead of treating the absence as a fresh start.

Sources Read

Next step, if this note maps to a problem on your desk: book a conversation with Adam. Thirty minutes, weekday evenings, Eastern time.

Related Field Notes