Bid Scope Compliance
Check a single vendor's bid against your spec or RFQ. The AI tells you what they covered, what they missed, what they added that wasn't asked for, and whether to bid-or-pass on the package.
What it does
Scope Compliance is the deep read of one vendor's proposal. Upload their bid plus your spec/RFQ, and the engine produces: a coverage percentage, a list of every line item marked covered / partial / missing / extra, critical-gap flags with severity, a pricing summary, and a bid / no-bid / conditional-bid recommendation with reasons.
Where Bid Leveling compares multiple vendors to each other, Scope Compliance compares one vendor to the source of truth. Use it when you're deciding whether a specific bid is complete enough to engage with, or when a bid is the only one you received and you need to judge its fitness.
When to use it
- A single vendor came back — you don't have competing bids to level — and you need to decide whether to accept, reject, or negotiate.
- You're a subcontractor deciding whether to bid on a package (inputs inverted: their RFQ is the spec, your estimate is the bid).
- You want a defensible record of what a vendor did or didn't include, in writing, before a handshake.
What to upload
Two documents:
- Spec / RFQ — the authoritative description of what's being bid on.
- Vendor bid — their response.
Formats: PDF, DOCX, XLSX, CSV. Multi-page bids/specs are fine — the engine reads up to ~100,000 characters per document before truncating (with a banner if it does).
Step by step
Open the engine
Sidebar → Engines → Scope Compliance.
Upload spec + bid
Two upload slots. Label matters — spec is the reference, bid is what's being evaluated.
Optionally set role
GC / Sub / Material Supplier — changes what counts as "standard" coverage. Default GC works for most users.
Run analysis
20–40 seconds typical.
Read the verdict
Top: coverage % in a donut, summary narrative, bid decision (BID / BID-WITH-CLARIFICATIONS / NO-BID) with reasons and risk exposure.
Drill into gaps
Critical gaps section lists every missing item with severity (critical / high / medium / low) and a short note on why it matters.
Decide and chain
Chain to Bid Leveling if more bids came in. Chain to Negotiation if you want leverage points against this vendor.
Understanding the results
% of spec line items this bid covers. Green ≥90%, amber 70–89%, red <70%.
BID / BID-WITH-CLARIFICATIONS / NO-BID verdict, a numeric score, win probability, risk exposure, and bulleted reasons on each side.
Every spec item flagged COVERED / PARTIAL / MISSING / EXTRA. Extras are items the vendor added that weren't asked for.
Ranked list of missing items by severity. Each gap has an item, severity label, and an explanatory note.
Spec total (if priced), bid total, delta. When the spec is just a narrative, pricing stays blank.
Questions the engine recommends asking the vendor before awarding — surfaces ambiguities you'd otherwise catch mid-project.
Every control, explained
Role selectorGC / Subcontractor / Material Supplier. Shifts what's expected at bid time — e.g., suppliers aren't expected to include labor.
Run analysisOne run per click.
Try with sample dataBridgeport scenario — Apex Electric's bid vs the $45M electrical RFQ. Shows two silent exclusions the engine caught.
Gap filterToggle between All / Missing / Partial / Extras in the line-item table.
Sort by severityOrders the critical-gaps list by severity descending.
Export PDFFormatted report with verdict, table, and gap detail. Standard artifact for a bid-review file.
Export XLSXRaw line-item status and gap list in spreadsheet form.
Chain to Bid LevelingMove into multi-vendor comparison.
Chain to NegotiationOpen the negotiation module with this bid's gaps pre-loaded as leverage points.
Chains
Chains into
Chained from
Exports
- PDF — full report with verdict, coverage chart, line-item table, and gap detail.
- XLSX — raw data, one tab per section.
- CSV — flat gap list.
Troubleshooting
Check that the spec you uploaded is actually the spec — if you uploaded a scope-of-work narrative vs a detailed spec section, the engine sees many spec items and a narrative that covers only the headlines.
The vendor phrased them differently from the spec. Use the chat to ask: "Item X from vendor is the same as spec item Y — re-evaluate."
Spec or bid exceeded 100K characters. Split by section and run each separately.
Read the reasons-not-to-bid list. The engine errs on the side of flagging risks; human judgment still rules. The verdict is an input to your decision, not the decision.