After comparing the outlines, I found that the proposed approach overlaps the door handle even though the workpiece itself clears. That explains the misleadingly comfortable result in my initial sketch.

Use that measured layout to review the complete approach and retreat offline. Include the tool, cables and service access, then ask the integrator to assess a revised mounting arrangement

The buyer has suggested choosing a larger arm. I'm unsure whether that would address the access issue or simply increase our purchase while leaving the obstruction unresolved.

Going larger should open up mounting options. It might be the most straightforward option to explore

A different arm geometry may introduce its own clearance problems. Increasing reach doesn't establish that the proposed tool can pass the existing handle obstruction

Yes, I made that sound more certain than it's. Compare candidate geometry in the measured layout; a larger arm is only useful if the complete approach improves

@PriyaAli0220 On our separate machine job, the first pedestal position blocked a maintenance panel. The transfer looked excellent until the maintenance person asked how they'd open it.

Your example prompted me to compare our proposed pedestal with the service panel opening. That revealed another overlap to correct in the layout.

Would making the pedestal removable address service access, or would restoring its position introduce a further setup requirement to evaluate?

Restoring location and checking the installation would become part of that proposal. Ask the integrator to compare it with a layout that preserves routine service access

The fixture requires a straight approach segment. Should we establish that constraint in the model before exploring alternative positions for the robot base?

Yes. Include the required entry direction and withdrawal conditions, not just an end pose. A reachable point can still have no usable approach with the proposed tool

Our unloading retreat differed from loading because the held workpiece changed the envelope. Modelling the empty gripper alone gave us a very flattering answer.

@ThomasBrooks0799 I'll add both loaded and empty tooling to the model. The other unclear part of our quote is responsibility for the machine signals.

I've decided to base our arm selection on a measured access review. A workable layout for the complete tool and a qualified assessment will be conditions of choosing the arm.

Using an assessed layout as the condition gives the selection a clear basis beyond the reach sketch