I'm all in favor of a methodical inspections prior to accepting final delivery and making final payment.
After you take delivery, your leverage to get work done diminishes considerably, and the inconvenience of repairs increases considerably. I'm not suggesting that manufacturers won't or don't stand behind their products, just that things will happen a lot slower, and be a lot more inconvenient since you will want to be cruising.
Boats like all of us have are hand made, one at a time, in very low volumes, so massive opportunity for mistakes. Good QA procedures can mitigate this significantly, but different companies are more/less mature in this regard. Also, any time you make customization to a boat, it causes a builder to do something new and different, and opens up new opportunities for mistakes.
In the opening sentence I said "methodical inspection", and that can be accomplished many ways. Hiring a surveyor is probably the easiest, but I'd want to understand how they will focus differently on a new build vs a brokerage boat.
I'm also a big proponent of a buyers acceptance checklist. This stimulates the buyer to list everything in the, verify it's present, and make sure it works as it is supposed to. It's a great way to get to know your boat inside and out, to learn how everything works, and to be pro-actively involved. How deep this goes will depend on your skills and interest, but I think any amount that you are comfortable with is useful. Our checklist was 488 lines long. That, plus other inspections and sea trials generated a 185 line punch list.
With your AT 395 I expect the list will be much shorter. As I understand it, they are all built the same with some fixed list of options. This makes it much easier for a builder to control the build and quality. But I would still do the inspection in whatever form works for you - perhaps a hired survey plus your own list. I think it will be time and money well spent.