rfp-response
GitHub用于撰写符合政府或企业采购要求的RFP/RFQ响应文档。通过构建合规矩阵，逐一回应强制性要求和评分标准，提供低风险的证据支持，确保格式合规并最大化中标几率。
触发场景
安装
npx skills add mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills --skill rfp-response -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "rfp-response",
"description": "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."
}
RFP Response Skill
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.
Required Inputs
Ask for these only if they aren't already provided:
- The RFP — the requirements, mandatory criteria, evaluation/scoring rubric, format rules, page limits, deadline.
- The offering — what you're proposing, and your relevant capability/experience/differentiators.
- Proof — past performance, references, certifications, metrics you can cite.
- Constraints — price/budget guidance, terms you can/can't meet.
Output Format
RFP response: [solicitation name/number]
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.
Quality Checks
- A compliance matrix covers every requirement (esp. all mandatory/"shall" items) with a section reference
- Each scored evaluation criterion has a dedicated, evidence-backed response
- The exec summary speaks to the buyer's goals and frames you as low-risk best value
- Claims are backed by concrete past performance/metrics, not adjectives
- Format rules (page limits, forms, submission method, deadline) are all satisfied
Anti-Patterns
- Do not skip any mandatory requirement — one missed "shall" can disqualify the whole bid
- Do not answer the criteria you wish they'd asked — answer their actual scoring rubric
- Do not lead with a company brochure — lead with the buyer's problem and outcomes
- Do not make unsupported claims — evaluators score evidence, not enthusiasm
- Do not ignore format/page rules — non-compliant submissions get rejected unread
Based On
Government/enterprise procurement practice (compliance matrix, evaluation-criteria-driven writing, best-value framing).
版本历史
- a38bc30 当前 2026-07-05 11:20
