agentleFS
danielkinneyspearsdanielkinneyspears/federal-proposal-skills/skills/responding-to-rfis/SKILL.md

responding-to-rfis

Skill5 starsChanged 6 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Drafts pre-RFP shaping responses for US Federal opportunities. Use when the user needs to respond to a sources-sought notice, a request for information (RFI), or a draft RFP, or to draft a capability statement, a white paper, or a draft-RFP comment matrix. Produces responses that demonstrate capability, inform the government's market research and set-aside decision, and legitimately shape the requirement and the evaluation before the RFP releases.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 4

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use this skill during the capture phase, whenever the government issues a pre-RFP instrument that invites an industry response: a …

    line 17
  2. Very specific:

    Read ../../shared/glossary.md and ../../shared/pursuit-workspace.md if not already read this session.

    line 39
  3. Distinctive:

    Ask these as a numbered list.

    line 46
  4. Very specific:

    Step 1: Read: Read the government instrument and the procurement-integrity limits in references/shaping-response-types.md.

    line 74
  5. Distinctive:

    Step 4: Legitimacy and value check: Verify the response (a) stays within the procurement-integrity limits — no request for …

    line 95
  6. Very specific:

    Step 5: Write: Write 06-shaping-response-<type>.md (e.g., 06-shaping-response-rfi.md) using templates/shaping-response.md.

    line 101
  7. Very specific:

    Stay inside the integrity limits: Follow the rules in references/shaping-response-types.md.

    line 120

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Responding to RFIs

Draft the pre-RFP shaping responses — sources-sought responses, RFI responses, draft-RFP comments, capability statements, white papers. This is real capture work, not paperwork. A sources-sought response can influence whether an acquisition is set aside; a draft-RFP comment can change Section L or Section M; a white paper can teach the customer what to ask for. The package's capture skills name these vehicles — this skill actually writes them.

When to use this skill

Use this skill during the capture phase, whenever the government issues a pre-RFP instrument that invites an industry response: a sources-sought notice, a request for information, an industry-day request for input, or a draft RFP released for comment. Also use it to produce capability statements and white papers offered to the customer as shaping vehicles.

It does not respond to the actual RFP — that is the proposal-development skills. This skill operates before the RFP exists.

Inputs

Required: the government instrument being responded to — the sources-sought notice, RFI, draft RFP, or industry-day announcement — and its response instructions (what the government asks for, the format, the deadline).

Preferred upstream artifacts:

  • 02-capture-plan.md: the customer knowledge, hot buttons, and shaping objectives the response should advance.
  • 00-opportunity-profile.md: the opportunity facts.
  • 05-win-strategy.md, 03-competitive-assessment.md — where they exist, to align the response with the emerging win approach.

Read ../../shared/glossary.md and ../../shared/pursuit-workspace.md if not already read this session. The procurement-integrity limits in references/shaping-response-types.md govern this skill — read them before drafting anything.

Intake

Ask these as a numbered list. Skip what the instrument answers.

  1. The instrument. What is it — a sources-sought notice, an RFI, a draft RFP, an industry-day request, or an offered white paper/capability statement? What exactly does the government ask for, in what format, by when?
  2. The shaping objective. What does the team want this response to achieve — demonstrate capability, influence the set-aside decision, shape the scope, shape Section L or M, build customer awareness? (From 02-capture-plan.md if available.)
  3. Capability facts. What true capability, past performance, and qualifications can the response draw on?
  4. The set-aside angle. For a sources-sought notice: is the team a small business or in a socioeconomic category, and does the response need to support a set-aside the team would benefit from?
  5. Draft-RFP specifics. For a draft RFP: which parts (scope, Section L, Section M) does the team want to comment on, and what change does it want?

Workflow

Shaping Response:
- [ ] Step 1: Read the instrument and the shaping limits; complete intake
- [ ] Step 2: Identify the response type and the shaping objective
- [ ] Step 3: Draft the response for that type
- [ ] Step 4: Run the legitimacy and value check
- [ ] Step 5: Write the artifact (06-shaping-response-<type>.md)

Step 1: Read. Read the government instrument and the procurement-integrity limits in references/shaping-response-types.md. Confirm the response stays inside the rules.

Step 2: Type and objective. Identify the response type and the single shaping objective it serves. Use references/shaping-response-types.md. A response with no shaping objective is a wasted opportunity to influence.

Step 3: Draft. Draft the response using the type-specific guidance in shaping-response-types.md:

  • Sources-sought response: demonstrate capability and relevant experience concisely, address the qualifications the notice asks about, and (where the team would benefit) substantiate the basis for a set-aside.
  • RFI response: answer the government's questions substantively and, where the RFI invites it, offer informed input on approach and feasibility.
  • Draft-RFP comments: a comment matrix: the section, the issue, the recommended change, and the rationale framed as making the eventual competition clearer and fairer.
  • White paper / capability statement: educate the customer on what is possible and what good looks like; substance over salesmanship.

Step 4: Legitimacy and value check. Verify the response (a) stays within the procurement-integrity limits — no request for source-selection-sensitive information, no improper advantage, truthful capability claims; and (b) actually advances the shaping objective. A draft-RFP comment that only helps the team by secretly disadvantaging competitors is a risk, not shaping — cut it.

Step 5: Write. Write 06-shaping-response-<type>.md (e.g., 06-shaping-response-rfi.md) using templates/shaping-response.md. If the team responds to several instruments over a capture, each gets its own file.

Output

One artifact per response: 06-shaping-response-<type>.md in the pursuit workspace.

Present the user with: the drafted response, the shaping objective it advances, and confirmation it stays within the procurement-integrity limits.

References

  • references/shaping-response-types.md: the procurement-integrity limits, and sources-sought, RFI, draft-RFP comments, white papers, and capability statements: what each is for and how to write each, including the set-aside angle.
  • templates/shaping-response.md: the shaping response artifact template.

Guardrails

  • Stay inside the integrity limits. Follow the rules in references/shaping-response-types.md. Never seek source-selection-sensitive information, never seek an improper advantage, never misrepresent capability.
  • Truthful capability only. Sources-sought and RFI responses inform real government decisions. Overstating capability is both an integrity problem and a credibility loss when the RFP arrives.
  • Shape by educating. Legitimate shaping makes the customer's requirement better. A "shaping" idea that works only by disadvantaging competitors or relying on private information is not shaping — drop it.
  • Mind the deadline. Pre-RFP instruments have response deadlines; a late shaping response forfeits the influence.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.