Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →mohitagw15856/bid-tender-review
Analyse a construction bid or tender package for scope gaps, risk-shifting exclusions, unit-rate red flags, and front-loading in the schedule of values.
Passed 20 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 9 of 22 without it.
and 13 more in the full report
11 fixed9 passed either way2 still failing0 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 11 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
Commercial Plumbing Inc submitted a $600,000 bid excluding local municipal building permit fees, which our General Conditions specify are to be obtained and paid directly by the Prime General Contractor. Classify this exclusion.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Rates the subcontractor permit fee exclusion as Accept in the risk table. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
A low bid is only cheap if the scope is actually in it. This skill runs the review an experienced estimator or owner's rep would run before award: reconcile the bid against the bid documents, hunt the exclusions and qualifications that quietly shift risk back to the buyer, test unit rates against sanity ranges, and check the schedule of values for front-loading. The goal is a levelled, apples-to-apples view and a written list of what to clarify before signing — not after mobilisation.
Ask for these if not provided; if working from a thin brief, proceed and label every assumption [assumed]:
Work through four passes, in order:
1. Scope reconciliation. Walk the bid against the documents section by section. Classify every mismatch: Missing (silent — the most dangerous), Excluded (stated), Qualified (included "provided that…"), Allowance (a number, not a commitment). Flag anything priced "by others" with no other on the job to catch it.
2. Exclusion risk shift. For each exclusion/qualification, state plainly who carries the risk if it bites, and rate it:
| Rating | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Deal-breaker | Shifts a core contract risk (e.g. excludes rock/dewatering on a deep excavation, excludes tie-ins) |
| Negotiate | Common but movable — escalation caps, limited warranty, "design assist not design" |
| Accept | Standard trade practice (e.g. excludes permits the GC always pulls) |
3. Unit-rate and balance check. Flag rates far off the field of other bids or the estimate (>±20% is a look; >±40% is a flag). Watch for unbalanced bidding: high rates on early or likely-to-grow quantities, low rates on items likely to be deleted.
4. Front-loading detection. In the schedule of values, compare early-activity values (mobilisation, GCs, submittals, excavation) to their real cost. Mobilisation >3–5% of contract value, or the first 20% of schedule carrying >30% of value, means the bidder is financing the job with your money — a cash-flow and default-risk signal, and painful if you ever terminate for convenience.
test cases passed, vs 9 / 22 without
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.