Install
$ agentstack add skill-danielkinneyspears-federal-proposal-skills-responding-to-rfis ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
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.
- 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?
- 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.)
- Capability facts. What true capability, past performance, and
qualifications can the response draw on?
- 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?
- 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-.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-.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-.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.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: danielkinneyspears
- Source: danielkinneyspears/federal-proposal-skills
- License: Apache-2.0
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.