They used different tool orientations. Neither drawing states which is intended for loading.

Then have the integrator define the loading sequence and review the corresponding orientations, because agreeing on a tool shape alone won't resolve a pose disagreement

I've returned both drawings for a joint review. Purchasing wanted a choice today; evidence doesn't support one.

Include who approves later tooling changes in that discussion, or the agreed clearance can disappear when somebody substitutes an adapter after the order

For the shared geometry, yes. But don't merge the disputed orientations into one tidy pose; attach each to its proposed loading step so the disagreement survives the drawing cleanup