Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Write a compliant, competitive response to an RFP/RFQ/ITT (government or enterprise procurement). Use when responding to a request for proposal, bidding on a tender, or answering a procurement questionnaire. Produces a compliance-matrix-driven response that answers every requirement, wins on evaluation criteria, and reads as low-risk to the buyer — structured to the scoring, not the seller's ego.
.claude/skills/mohitagw15856-rfp-response/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -20% | 0% |
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 23% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -3% | 0% |
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 29% | 0% |
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -6% | 0% |
Proposals lose on compliance far more than on quality — a missed mandatory requirement or an unaddressed evaluation criterion is an automatic deduction. This skill builds a response that maps to the RFP's own structure: every requirement answered, every scored criterion addressed with evidence, and risk framed down for a cautious buyer.
Ask for these only if they aren't already provided:
1. Compliance matrix — a table mapping every requirement to how/where you meet it. This is the backbone; missing rows lose points:
| Req # | Requirement | Compliant? | How we meet it (section ref) | |---|---|---|---|
2. Executive summary — the buyer's problem, your solution, and why you're the low-risk best-value choice — in their language, tied to their goals (not a company brochure).
3. Response by evaluation criterion — a section per scored criterion (technical approach, management/delivery, past performance, price). Answer what the rubric rewards, with concrete evidence and outcomes — not adjectives.
4. Past performance / proof — relevant work, references, and results that de-risk you.
5. Assumptions, risks & clarifications — what you assumed, how you mitigate delivery risk, and any questions to raise before the deadline.
Format check — confirm page limits, required forms/attachments, submission method, and deadline are all addressed.
Government/enterprise procurement practice (compliance matrix, evaluation-criteria-driven writing, best-value framing).
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→fail | 52,267 | 40,826 | -22% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 8,300 | 7,033 | -15% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | 54,972 | 33,932 | -38% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 8,297 | 6,612 | -20% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 57,364 | 46,122 | -20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 8,271 | 7,374 | -11% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | 14,444 | 12,676 | -12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,893 | 2,480 | +31% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 16,959 | 19,814 | +17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,801 | 2,488 | +38% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 13,382 | 16,513 | +23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,771 | 2,174 | +23% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→fail | 17,508 | 10,049 | -43% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,826 | 2,102 | +15% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 18,578 | 14,209 | -24% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,086 | 2,028 | -3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | 16,507 | 10,357 | -37% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,663 | 2,151 | +29% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 19,040 | 13,479 | -29% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,832 | 1,726 | -6% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→fail | 18,289 | 16,304 | -11% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,686 | 2,543 | +51% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 15,246 | 13,408 | -12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,560 | 1,967 | +26% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 14,107 | 32,936 | +133% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,441 | 4,534 | +215% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 13,111 | 22,663 | +73% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,820 | 3,187 | +75% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 17,776 | 14,122 | -21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,808 | 2,045 | +13% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 26,991 | 31,750 | +18% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,473 | 4,684 | +35% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 9,853 | 15,170 | +54% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,313 | 2,020 | +54% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 22,228 | 19,838 | -11% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,251 | 3,124 | +39% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 11,718 | 10,269 | -12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,859 | 2,124 | +14% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→fail | 22,580 | 20,206 | -11% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,639 | 2,751 | +4% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 13,749 | 11,041 | -20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,444 | 2,039 | +41% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 21,951 | 28,095 | +28% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,076 | 3,935 | +28% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +32 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases. 1 case got worse with the skill loaded, and it is included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.