Marketing Foundation
Compact two-skill starter: clarify positioning and choose a lead magnet. Use Marketing Launch for the broader eight-skill go-to-market workflow.
The tunnel uses the same cards as the catalogue. Browse only as deep as needed — or load a broad bundle immediately.
SEO, Sales, Agents or another broad area → one bundle call → work.
Read-only access to published skills. Default 8, maximum 10 skills / 120,000 characters.
Compact two-skill starter: clarify positioning and choose a lead magnet. Use Marketing Launch for the broader eight-skill go-to-market workflow.
Build an evidence-led marketing plan from ICP and competition through positioning, campaigns, growth and measurement.
Diagnose architecture and context, plan agent-team responsibilities, then organize project context and session handoffs. Memory and cost-runtime reviews remain outside this pack.
Review the journey from landing page and lead capture through registration, first value and transparent upgrades.
Plan a campaign, draft its channel content and review the work against actual brand guidance.
Prioritize an editorial roadmap and plan how to launch and distribute it across suitable channels.
Understand customer needs, compare competitors and plan a community around real member value.
Choose a relevant lead magnet, then draft a permission-based nurture journey with entry, suppression and exit rules.
Define the API contract, then plan how to observe its latency, failures and retries. Guidance and checklist; no production changes.
Profile a dataset, choose and interpret statistical methods, then validate calculations and conclusions before sharing.
Map bid requirements to evidence, gaps and win themes before a bid decision.
--- name: rfp-responder description: "Use when an RFP, RFI, RFQ, security questionnaire, vendor questionnaire, or proposal request arrives and the team needs a structured response — parsing multi-section buyer-dictated requirements (MANDATORY vs WEIGHTED vs NICE-TO-HAVE), building a Shipley-method proof-point matrix mapping each requirement to a verifiable proof point, articulating 3-5 win-themes that ladder up across requirements, and producing a Shipley-derived winrate estimate that informs a bid / no-bid / partner-bid recommendation. For Bid Managers, Proposal Leads, Directors of Sales, and Sales Engineers at the response-strategy moment. Surfaces GAP requirements explicitly — never invents claims. NOT free-form proposal narrative authoring, NOT contract redline, NOT marketing collateral." context: fork version: 2.8.0 author: claude-code-skills license: MIT tags: [commercial, rfp, rfi, rfq, shipley, win-theme, proof-points, structured-response, bid-management] compatible_tools: [claude-code, codex-cli, cursor, antigravity, opencode, gemini-cli] --- # rfp-responder ## Purpose Help Bid Managers, Proposal Leads, and Directors of Sales answer five questions at the response-strategy moment: 1. **What is this RFP actually asking?** (parse sections, tag every requirement MANDATORY / WEIGHTED / NICE-TO-HAVE, extract scoring criteria, surface deadlines and format constraints) 2. **What is our true fit?** (proof-point matrix per requirement: STRONG / PARTIAL / GAP, each backed by a verifiable source — case study, certification, customer quote, technical attestation, benchmark) 3. **What is our win-theme strategy?** (Shipley method: 3-5 themes that ladder up across requirements, not generic value-prop bullets) 4. **What is our realistic winrate?** (Shipley-derived factor model: fit, incumbent, relationship strength, decision-criteria alignment, late-entry, competitor count, deal size — produces estimate + confidence band) 5. **Should we bid?** (deterministic verdict: BID / PARTNER-BID / NO-BID with named factors driving the call) The skill surfaces GAPs explicitly. Leadership decides whether to close them, partner around them, or no-bid. **It never invents claims.** ## When to use - A 30+ page RFP / RFI / RFQ has landed with a 7-14 day response deadline - A security questionnaire (SIG, CAIQ, custom-buyer) needs structured Q&A — not prose - The team is preparing a bid / no-bid review and needs a defensible winrate estimate - Sales Engineering has a proof-point library but no system to map proofs to requirements - Leadership wants to see fit % (STRONG / PARTIAL / GAP) before committing pursuit budget - A late-entry opportunity needs honest assessment of the relationship deficit **Do not use for:** - Free-form proposal narrative authoring → `business-growth/contract-and-proposal-writer` - Contract redline AFTER award → `c-level-advisor/general-counsel-advisor` - Marketing collateral / category content → `marketing-skill/*` - Discount approval on the awarded deal → `commercial/deal-desk` - Pricing-model design for a new product → `commercial/pricing-strategist` ## Workflow ### Step 1 — Parse the RFP Drop the RFP markdown / text into `scripts/rfp_parser.py`. Output: structured JSON listing every requirement, tagged MANDATORY / WEIGHTED / NICE-TO-HAVE based on cue words (must / shall = MANDATORY; should / weighted scoring numbers = WEIGHTED; may / preferred / desired = NICE-TO-HAVE). Captures section structure, scoring criteria if disclosed, deadline, submission format constraints. ```bash python scripts/rfp_parser.py --input rfp.md --output json > parsed.json ``` ### Step 2 — Score fit per requirement Fill `assets/rfp_intake_template.md` with your proof-point library (each proof tagged with type + verifiable source + which requirement-tags it covers) and proposed win-themes. Feed parsed RFP + intake into `scripts/response_drafter.py`. Output: proof-point matrix per requirement with STRONG / PARTIAL / GAP, win-theme injection, GAP audit. ```bash python scripts/response_drafter.py --input draft_input.json --output markdown > matrix.md ``` **Hard rule:** GAP requirements are surfaced, never invented around. Leadership reads the GAP audit and decides: close the gap, partner-bid, or no-bid. ### Step 3 — Apply win-theme strategy Shipley method: 3-5 themes that span requirements. Each theme answers "why us over the incumbent / competitor on the criteria the buyer named." `response_drafter.py` shows which themes thread through which requirements — a theme appearing in <2 requirements is decorative, not strategic, and gets flagged. ### Step 4 — Estimate winrate Feed deal context (fit %, incumbent strength, relationship, decision-criteria alignment, late-entry, competitor count, deal size vs. average) into `scripts/winrate_predictor.py`. Output: Shipley-derived estimate 0-100% + confidence band + factor breakdown + BID / PARTNER-BID / NO-BID verdict. ```bash python scripts/winrate_predictor.py --input deal_context.json --profile enterprise-software --output markdown ``` **No-bid threshold:** estimate < 20% triggers automatic no-bid recommendation. ### Step 5 — Decide Take parsed RFP + proof-point matrix + GAP audit + winrate estimate into the go / no-go review. Skill does not commit pursuit budget — leadership does. ## Scripts - `scripts/rfp_parser.py` — section + requirement extractor (regex + cue-word heuristics, stdlib only) - `scripts/response_drafter.py` — proof-point matrix + win-theme injection + GAP audit - `scripts/winrate_predictor.py` — Shipley-derived factor model + bid/no-bid verdict, industry-profile-tuned All scripts: stdlib only (argparse, json, sys, pathlib, re, collections, statistics). `--help` and `--sample` work on all three. ## References - `references/shipley_method_canon.md` — Shipley Proposal Guide v6, Shipley Capture Guide, APMP BoK, Tom Sant, Tom Searcy + Henry DeVries, Strategic Proposals research, Larry Newman - `references/rfp_strategy_canon.md` — FAR, GSA, Forrester, Gartner, Bain, McKinsey, B2B International on RFP win-rates and buyer behavior - `references/rfp_anti_patterns.md` — Shipley failure modes, APMP cases, Strategic Proposals research, federal loss reviews, MIT Sloan, Bain commercial-discipline, Gartner ## Assumptions - **The RFP is the ground truth.** If the buyer asked it, answer it — in the order they asked, in the format they specified. Re-organizing for narrative flow is for proposals, not RFPs. - **Proof points must be verifiable.** A claim is only as strong as the case study, certification, customer reference, or technical attestation backing it. Unsourced claims become GAPs. - **Win-themes are buyer-side, not seller-side.** "We're the leader in X" is a marketing claim; "Your operations team reduces incident MTTR by 60% with the same headcount" is a win-theme. Shipley canon, not optional. - **Winrate estimates are directional.** The model is a discipline tool to force honest pursuit-qualification — not an oracle. Confidence band always wider than the point estimate suggests. - **Industry profiles tune base rates** — government RFPs reward compliance discipline; enterprise SaaS rewards reference accounts; healthcare rewards regulatory + security depth. - **Late entry is a structural disadvantage.** Entering after the RFP issued, with no relationship history, drops base rate ~15%. The skill names this, doesn't hide it. ## Anti-patterns - **Inventing a proof point to fill a GAP.** Hard rule violation. GAPs surface for leadership decision, not for prose-laundering. See `references/rfp_anti_patterns.md`. - **Responding to every RFP.** Without a qualified bid / no-bid gate, the team burns capacity on <20% winrate pursuits and loses the 50%+ pursuits to lack of focus. Bain commercial-discipline research. - **Generic response with no win-theme.** A proposal that could be sent verbatim by any competitor is decorative. Shipley failure mode #1. - **Missing a mandatory disqualifier late.** FedRAMP / HIPAA / ISO 27001 / SOC 2 / on-shore data residency caught on Day 12 of a 14-day response = wasted pursuit. Parser surfaces these on Day 1. - **Answering the question YOU wanted asked.** RFP responder discipline: answer what they asked, in their words, in their order. Re-framing belongs in cover letters, not in the compliance matrix. - **No compliance matrix.** Every requirement should map to a response section + page number. Evaluators score on a matrix; respondents who don't provide one self-disqualify on traceability. - **Late-entry without acknowledging the relationship deficit.** Entering cold against an incumbent with a 3-year relationship and no champion = sub-20% winrate. Pretending otherwise wastes Sales Engineering capacity. - **Treating WEIGHTED requirements like MANDATORY.** Score-weighted requirements reward depth on the high-weight items, not uniform mediocrity across all. Shipley capture method. ## Distinct from - **`business-growth/contract-and-proposal-writer`** — free-form narrative proposals where YOU set the structure (executive briefs, capability statements, unsolicited proposals). RFP-responder handles **buyer-dictated structured Q&A** where the buyer set the questions, sections, scoring criteria, and format. Different artifact, different decision logic. - **`c-level-advisor/general-counsel-advisor`** — contract redline and IP/risk review AFTER award. RFP-responder operates BEFORE award, on the response strategy. - **`marketing-skill/*`** — external marketing assets (web copy, content, ASO, SEO, brand voice) for many-to-many audiences. RFP-responder produces a **single-buyer artifact** with deterministic compliance requirements. - **`commercial/deal-desk`** — per-deal discount routing on a closing opportunity. RFP-responder is pursuit-stage; deal-desk is close-stage. - **`commercial/pricing-strategist`** — pricing-model design for a new product. RFP-responder consumes existing pricing as input to the commercial-terms section. ## Forcing-question library (Matt Pocock grill discipline) Walked one at a time before any script runs. Recommended answer + canon citation per question. Never bundled. 1. **"What's your STRONG / PARTIAL / GAP split on the MANDATORY requirements?"** Recommended: STRONG ≥ 70% on MANDATORY before bidding. PARTIAL/GAP on any MANDATORY = either close the gap pre-submission or no-bid. Canon: Shipley *Proposal Guide v6* — capture-management discipline, "Pgw (probability of win) is bounded by your weakest MANDATORY." 2. **"Is there an incumbent, and how strong is their position?"** Recommended: strong incumbent (3+ years, no displacement event) drops base winrate ~30%. Don't bid without a named displacement trigger. Canon: Forrester B2B-RFP research — incumbents win 70-80% of renewal RFPs absent a named failure event. 3. **"Did you enter the conversation before or after the RFP issued?"** Recommended: late-entry (after RFP issued, no prior engagement) drops winrate ~15% and signals the RFP was scoped to someone else's strengths. Canon: Tom Searcy + Henry DeVries *How to Win Big Business* — "If you didn't help write the RFP, you're column fodder." 4. **"What are your 3-5 win-themes, and does each thread through ≥2 requirements?"** Recommended: themes that appear in only one requirement are decorative. Themes must ladder up across MANDATORY + WEIGHTED sections. Canon: Shipley *Capture Guide* — win-themes are the buyer-side answer to "why us" across the evaluation criteria, not seller-side feature lists. 5. **"For every claim in the response, can you name the verifiable source?"** Recommended: every claim → case study / certification / customer reference / technical attestation / benchmark. Unsourced claims = GAPs. Canon: APMP BoK — "Substantiation: every assertion in a proposal must be backed by evidence the evaluator can independently verify." 6. **"What's the bid / no-bid threshold you committed to BEFORE seeing this RFP?"** Recommended: pre-committed threshold (e.g., winrate ≥ 25%, STRONG ≥ 70% on MANDATORY, named champion). Post-hoc rationalization is how teams end up bidding 5% pursuits. Canon: Bain RFP-win-rate studies — disciplined bid/no-bid gates lift win-rate from ~15% to ~35%. 7. **"What does the buyer's evaluation team actually score on?"** Recommended: if the RFP discloses scoring criteria, weight your response effort proportionally. If undisclosed, ask. If you can't ask, that itself is a relationship-deficit signal. Canon: Strategic Proposals proposal-management research — evaluators score on the rubric they were given, not on your narrative. Walk depth-first. Lock 1-3 before opening 4-7. After all 7 are answered, invoke `rfp_parser.py` → `response_drafter.py` → `winrate_predictor.py` in sequence. If question 6 lands on "we don't have a threshold," set one now or no-bid.
Map bid requirements to evidence, gaps and win themes before a bid decision.
The complete original guidance with attributed source and declared limitations.
Clarify the task and evidence, then apply relevant source instructions within authorized scope.
Buyer requirements, verified capabilities, proof points and delivery constraints.
Brief source danger screening: full-text pattern triage and review of flagged passages, not a comprehensive audit or functional test. Never invent proof points or submit a bid automatically. A model win-rate score is a heuristic, not a calibrated success probability. Referenced scripts, templates, integrations and sibling skills are not supplied or installed unless explicitly listed as included. External calls, account changes, messages and file writes require the actual user task and authorization.
Use RFP Bid Response Planning for [TASK]. Ask for missing inputs: Buyer requirements, verified capabilities, proof points and delivery constraints. Identify assumptions and missing tools before execution; do not claim results or approvals without evidence.
Claiming runtime installation, certified safety, verified numerical outputs or permission for external actions merely from loading this source.
German routing, task scope and source limitations. Original author attribution: claude-code-skills. Brief source danger screening: full-text pattern triage and review of flagged passages, not a comprehensive audit or functional test. Never invent proof points or submit a bid automatically. A model win-rate score is a heuristic, not a calibrated success probability. Referenced scripts, templates, integrations and sibling skills are not supplied or installed unless explicitly listed as included. External calls, account changes, messages and file writes require the actual user task and authorization.
MIT License Copyright (c) 2025 Alireza Rezvani Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
Copy the text below, then paste it into your chat.