rfp-responder

Parses RFP requirements, builds proof-point matrices, and estimates winrates for bid decisions.

25.3k|3.6k|Updated Oct 19, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill rfp-responder
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: rfp-responder
Source: https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills/tree/main/commercial/skills/rfp-responder
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill rfp-responder

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes scripts (resource) and references (resource) and assets (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

Responding to RFPs, RFIs, RFQs, and security questionnaires requires parsing dozens of buyer-dictated requirements, mapping verifiable proof points to each one, and making an honest bid/no-bid call — work that teams often do ad hoc, missing mandatory disqualifiers until late or inventing claims to fill gaps.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • RFP Parsing: Extracts every requirement from an RFP document and tags it MANDATORY, WEIGHTED, or NICE-TO-HAVE using cue-word heuristics, capturing deadlines, scoring criteria, and format constraints.
  • Proof-Point Matrix & GAP Audit: Maps each requirement to a verifiable proof point (case study, certification, customer quote, attestation, benchmark) with STRONG / PARTIAL / GAP ratings, and flags win-themes that fail to thread across multiple requirements.
  • Winrate Estimation: Produces a Shipley-derived winrate estimate with confidence band and a BID / PARTNER-BID / NO-BID verdict, tuned by industry profile (SaaS, enterprise software, services, government, healthcare).
  • Use Case: A 40-page security RFP lands with a 10-day deadline. Run the parser on Day 1 to surface a mandatory FedRAMP requirement you cannot meet, then use the winrate estimate to make a defensible no-bid call before burning proposal capacity.

Quick Start

Parse the attached RFP document, score our fit against each requirement using our proof-point library, and recommend whether we should bid.

Frequently Asked Questions about rfp-responder

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I parse an RFP into structured requirements?

Run rfp_parser.py with --input pointing to your RFP markdown or text file. It splits the document into sections, extracts requirement lines, and tags each MANDATORY, WEIGHTED, or NICE-TO-HAVE based on cue words like must, shall, should, and preferred, outputting JSON or markdown.

How do I decide whether to bid on an RFP?

Feed deal context (fit percentages, incumbent strength, relationship, competitor count, late entry) into winrate_predictor.py. It produces a winrate estimate with confidence band and a verdict: below 20% triggers NO-BID, 20-34% suggests PARTNER-BID, and 35% or above recommends BID.

What is a proof-point matrix in RFP responses?

A proof-point matrix maps every RFP requirement to a verifiable evidence source such as a case study, certification, customer quote, technical attestation, or benchmark. Requirements with two or more tag matches and strong proof types rate STRONG; unmatched requirements surface as GAPs for leadership decision.

Does the RFP parser require external Python libraries?

No. All three scripts (rfp_parser.py, response_drafter.py, winrate_predictor.py) use only the Python standard library: argparse, json, re, sys, pathlib, collections, and statistics. No pip installs or NLP dependencies are needed.

When should I not use an RFP response automation approach?

Do not use it for free-form proposal narrative writing, contract redlining after award, marketing collateral, or pricing-model design. It handles buyer-dictated structured Q&A before award; narrative proposals and legal review belong to separate workflows.

Why does the winrate estimate penalize late entry to an RFP?

Late entry (entering after the RFP issued with no prior engagement) applies a -15 percentage point penalty because research shows late-entry vendors win only 8-12% of RFPs versus 25-35% for vendors engaged before issuance. The model reflects this structural disadvantage honestly.