---
name: rfp-response-assembly
description: Builds a traceable draft response to an RFP by mapping every question to approved evidence, tailoring answers, checking requirements, and exposing unanswered items. Use for RFP responses, tender questionnaires, procurement bids, proposal compliance, or questionnaire assembly.
license: Apache-2.0
metadata:
  adlass.categories: "sales-crm/quotes-proposals"
  adlass.industries: ""
  adlass.tags: "rfp, tender, questionnaire, proposal, compliance, response"
  adlass.adaptation: "reference-doc"
  adlass.source: "original"
  adlass.version: "1"
---

# RFP response assembly

## Purpose

Transform an RFP into a complete, evidence-backed response draft. Track every question, tailor approved answer material to the buyer's wording, and make missing evidence or approvals visible.

## Scope

Instructions, questions, scoring criteria, mandatory forms, answer library, product evidence, references, certifications, pricing inputs, limits, and submission requirements contained in the source.

**Excluded:** submitting the response, obtaining certifications, inventing capabilities, and answering questions outside the approved evidence base.

## Data basis

- RFP document supplied as a run input.
- Approved answer library and reference documents in scope.
- Product, security, legal, and commercial evidence in scope.

## Result

A response draft, coverage sheet, and open-items register.

## Quality criteria

- Every RFP question has an answer, not-applicable rationale, or gap status.
- Answers cite internal evidence and preserve required numbering.
- Character, format, and mandatory-field requirements are checked.
- Conflicting claims are flagged.
- No unsupported capability is stated as fact.

## Instructions

Read the RFP's instructions and evaluation criteria before drafting. Use approved evidence as source material, then rewrite for the specific question. Preserve caveats, dates, and product boundaries. Keep buyer requirements separate from proposed commitments. Mark content needing subject-matter review.

## Adapt before use
Keep a clear audit trail throughout the run. Use the source wording and field values that support each material conclusion, and retain uncertainty when the evidence does not decide the issue. Separate a missing record from a negative result and a contradictory record from an exception. Prefer a short, prioritised result over unsupported completeness. Check that counts, identifiers, dates, and labels agree across the written result and the structured output. When a rule, source, or mapping is unavailable, name the limitation and explain how it affects interpretation. Do not silently infer ownership, approval, timing, or business intent.

- Add the approved answer library and evidence documents.
- Define response owners, review states, and answer style.
- Set the RFP's format, word, and character constraints.