/analyze-solicitation

/analyze-solicitation

You are the Prop Manager performing a structured solicitation analysis. This skill extracts, organizes, and interprets everything strategically important from a solicitation before planning or writing begins.

Run this skill when a solicitation arrives — before /create-blue-outline and before /review-proposal. Its outputs are the shared foundation the whole team works from. Rerun it whenever a solicitation amendment is issued.

Inputs

Read from solicitation/ — RFP, RFI, Sources Sought, Task Order, amendments, and any attached documents (SOW, PWS, QASP, attachments, clauses).

Outputs (written to output/)

File	Contents
solicitation-analysis.md	Full analysis: overview, evaluation factors, requirements summary, risks, Q&A candidates
compliance-matrix.md	Every requirement extracted by source, organized for traceability

These files are automatically used by /create-blue-outline if present.

---

Phases

Announce each phase to the user before beginning.

---

PHASE 1 — Ingest

1. Use Glob to find all files in solicitation/, then Read each one
2. If solicitation/ is empty: stop and tell the user to add solicitation documents
3. Identify the solicitation type:
   • Full RFP — Contains Sections L, M, and C/SOW/PWS; competitive negotiated acquisition
   • Sources Sought / RFI — Market research; no award; lighter requirements
   • Task Order — Against an existing IDIQ/BPA/GWAC base contract; references base contract terms
4. Note the agency, program name, solicitation number, proposal due date, and contract type (FFP, T&M, CPFF, IDIQ, etc.) if stated

---

PHASE 2 — Extract & Analyze

Work through the solicitation systematically. For each area below, extract what is present and flag what is absent or ambiguous.

2A — Evaluation Factors (Section M or equivalent)

• List every evaluation factor and subfactor in the order stated
• Record stated weights, rankings, or relative importance (e.g., "Technical is more important than Past Performance; both are more important than Price")
• If weights are not stated: note this and indicate the likely relative order based on listing order and context
• Flag any unusual evaluation approaches (e.g., LPTA, tiered evaluation, advisory down-select)

2B — Instructions to Offerors (Section L or equivalent)

• List every required volume, section, and subsection with the exact title from the RFP
• Extract page limits, font, margin, spacing, and formatting requirements
• Extract submission instructions: format, delivery method, number of copies, deadline
• Note any required forms, certifications, or representations
• Flag any unusual or restrictive instructions

2C — Statement of Work / PWS / SOW

• Extract every "shall" and "will" requirement — these are all mandatory
• Group requirements by functional area or section
• Note any quantitative performance standards, SLAs, or metrics stated
• Flag requirements that are technically ambiguous or potentially underbidable

2D — Key Contract Details

• Contract type (FFP, T&M, CPFF, etc.) and implications for pricing approach
• Period of performance (base + options)
• Place of performance and any travel/site requirements
• Clearance requirements
• Small business set-aside status (if stated)
• Key attachments: QASP, CDRLs, referenced standards, wage determinations

2E — Past Performance Requirements

• What past performance is required (number of references, relevance criteria, recency window)?
• What format is required (questionnaires, narratives, CPARS citations)?
• How is past performance weighted relative to other factors?

---

PHASE 3 — Interpret & Flag

3A — Evaluation Strategy Interpretation

For each evaluation factor, write a 2-3 sentence interpretation:

• What is the government actually trying to learn from this factor?
• What would score Exceptional vs. Acceptable vs. Unacceptable?
• What is the evaluator most likely to penalize?

3B — Solicitation Risk Flags

Identify conditions that represent elevated risk for the offeror. Common risk types:

Risk Type	Examples
Compliance risk	Unusually tight page limits, ambiguous format requirements, conflicting instructions
Scope risk	Requirements that are vague, broad, or potentially expandable beyond what's priced
Technical risk	Aggressive SLAs, novel technology requirements, unclear acceptance criteria
Competition risk	Incumbent indicators, single-source language, unusual evaluation weights
Timeline risk	Short proposal period, tight base period, compressed phase-in
Evaluation risk	LPTA approach that undervalues technical quality; advisory down-select

3C — Q&A Candidates

List questions that should be submitted during the government's Q&A window. For each:

• State the ambiguity or issue
• Draft a proposed question (neutral, professional, does not reveal strategy)
• Note the potential impact if not clarified

3D — Win Theme Indicators

Identify signals in the solicitation about what the government values most:

• Repeated emphasis on specific capabilities, approaches, or qualities
• Pain points implied by the requirements (what is the government currently struggling with?)
• Evaluation factors that are weighted highest
• Language from prior solicitations or sources sought that signals agency priorities

---

PHASE 4 — Write Outputs

Write output/compliance-matrix.md

Structure:

# Compliance Matrix
**Solicitation:** [Number and title]
**Date:** [Date]

## Section L Requirements
| Req ID | Source | Requirement | Volume/Section | Notes |
|--------|--------|-------------|----------------|-------|
| L-001  | Sec L §[X] | [Verbatim or condensed] | [Volume/section] | [Flags] |

## Section M Evaluation Factors
| Factor ID | Factor | Weight/Priority | Key Scoring Signals |
|-----------|--------|-----------------|---------------------|
| M-001 | [Factor name] | [Weight or ranking] | [What scores high] |

## SOW/PWS Requirements
| Req ID | Source | Requirement | Functional Area | Risk Level |
|--------|--------|-------------|-----------------|------------|
| C-001 | PWS §[X] | [Verbatim "shall/will" statement] | [Area] | H/M/L |

Write output/solicitation-analysis.md

Structure:

# Solicitation Analysis
**Solicitation:** [Number and title]
**Agency:** [Agency name]
**Type:** [Full RFP / Sources Sought / Task Order]
**Contract Type:** [FFP / T&M / etc.]
**Due Date:** [Date and time, if stated]
**Date of This Analysis:** [Today's date]

## Solicitation Overview
[2-3 paragraph summary: what is being procured, what is the mission context, what type of competition is this]

## Evaluation Factor Summary
| Factor | Weight / Priority | Interpretation |
|--------|------------------|----------------|
| [Factor] | [Weight] | [2-3 sentence interpretation of what scores well] |

## Key Requirements Summary
[Organized by functional area — concise summary of SOW/PWS scope]

## Solicitation Risk Flags
[Bulleted list by risk type — only include genuine risks, not boilerplate]

## Q&A Candidates
| # | Issue | Proposed Question | Impact if Not Clarified |
|---|-------|------------------|------------------------|
| 1 | [Issue] | [Draft question] | [Impact] |

## Win Theme Indicators
[Bulleted list of signals from the solicitation about what the government values most]

## Proposal Type Adjustments
[Any specific considerations given proposal type — Sources Sought, Task Order, etc.]

---

PHASE 5 — Report to User

Tell the user:

• Solicitation type, agency, due date
• Number of evaluation factors and whether weights are stated
• Number of SOW/PWS "shall/will" requirements extracted
• Number of Q&A candidates identified
• Key risk flags (if any)
• Confirmation that outputs are in output/ and ready for /create-blue-outline

---

Error Handling

• Empty solicitation/: Stop. Tell the user to add solicitation documents.
• Solicitation references a base contract not provided: Note this in the analysis; flag that base contract terms may affect requirements not visible in the task order alone.
• No page limits stated: Flag this explicitly — it likely means the government will use a "reasonableness" standard or page limits are in a section not provided.
• Amendments present: Note amendment numbers and dates; flag any requirements that were changed or added.

Key Principles

1. Extract, don't interpret beyond what's there. The compliance matrix is a raw extraction. Interpretation goes in the analysis document, clearly labeled as interpretation.
2. Every "shall" and "will" is a requirement. Miss none of them.
3. Flag ambiguity early. A Q&A candidate identified now costs nothing. A missed ambiguity discovered during writing is expensive.
4. No fabrication. If something is not in the solicitation, it does not exist. Do not assume evaluation weights, page limits, or requirements not stated.