Short answer
Evaluate an AI site selection tool by running it on sites you already understand and scoring the output, not the demo. The criteria that matter for data center work are source traceability, how power is reported (deliverable megawatts with a date, not map proximity), coverage of the other constraints (zoning, fiber, water, land), speed to a usable shortlist, and what happens after the screen. A tool that draws good maps but leaves your team to validate every site has not saved you the expensive part.
Key terms
AI site selection tool: software or a service that uses machine learning or language models to find, screen or rank parcels for a project.
Screen: filtering many parcels down to candidates using rules such as size, zoning and distance to infrastructure.
Validation: checking a candidate against primary sources so each finding can be relied on in an investment decision.
Source traceability: every finding links to the document, filing or dataset it came from.
The seven-point scorecard
Score each criterion from 0 to 2: 0 means absent, 1 means partial, 2 means strong.
| # | Criterion | What strong looks like |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Source traceability | Every claim links to a primary source you can open |
| 2 | Power realism | Reports deliverable megawatts and energization timing, not just distance to a substation |
| 3 | Constraint coverage | Zoning, fiber, water, easements, hazards and land control checked together |
| 4 | Known-site accuracy | Correctly flags the problems on sites your team already diligenced |
| 5 | Speed to shortlist | A usable shortlist in days, not a data export you still have to work |
| 6 | Work after the screen | Helps move a site to diligence and site control, or hands you a list and stops |
| 7 | Fit to your mandate | Handles your target markets, megawatt range and timeline |
A total of 12 or more out of 14 suggests the tool can carry real decisions. Below 8 usually means it is a research aid, not a site selection answer.
How to run the test
Pick three to five known sites. Include at least one that failed diligence and one that worked.
Give the tool the same brief you give your team. Markets, megawatts, timeline, acreage and deal breakers.
Compare findings with what you know. Did it catch the problem that killed the failed site? Did it overstate power anywhere?
Open the sources. Click through a sample of findings. If you cannot trace a claim, treat it as unverified.
Ask what happens next. Who confirms power with the utility, reviews title and zoning, and structures land control?
Decision rules
Traceability is a gate. If findings cannot be traced to sources, do not use the output in an investment memo.
Distance is not capacity. A tool that ranks sites by proximity to substations without capacity and timing evidence will overstate power.
Test on failures. The fastest way to learn a tool's limits is to see whether it catches a site you already know is bad.
Buy the outcome you need. If your bottleneck is validated sites rather than data, a data platform alone will not remove it.
Count your team's hours. Include the validation work the tool leaves behind when you compare cost.
Red flags
Rankings or scores with no visible sources
Power shown as available capacity on a map with no date
Results that look the same for every market
No answer to who validates the site after the screen
A demo only on sites the vendor chose
How Build approaches it
Build is built around the outcome rather than the screen: it sources sites, validates them against power deliverability, zoning, fiber, water and land with every finding traced to its source, and bundles the services needed to take a site from shortlist to usable land. What you get is validated powered sites, not a dataset to work through. If a site stalls, Build reopens the search with another one.
Checklist
Three to five known sites selected, including one failure
Same brief given to the tool as to your team
Findings compared with known diligence results
Sample of sources opened and checked
Power reported as deliverable megawatts with timing
Post-screen support defined (utility, title, zoning, land control)
Scorecard total recorded and compared across tools