Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add nthnclrk/enablement-skills --skill proposal-rfp-orchestratorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nthnclrk/enablement-skillsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/nthnclrk/enablement-skills/proposal-rfp-orchestrator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nthnclrk/enablement-skills/proposal-rfp-orchestrator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nthnclrk/enablement-skills/proposal-rfp-orchestrator/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nthnclrk/enablement-skills/proposal-rfp-orchestrator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nthnclrk/enablement-skills/proposal-rfp-orchestrator.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00073 | $0.00948 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00029 | $0.00379 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00190 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00095 |
Grade A, and why
proposal-rfp-orchestrator scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 24d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 74 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Proposal RFP orchestrator
Help a proposal lead decide whether to bid, assign the response work, and verify every requirement before submission.
A good response process names the disqualifier, the owner of every atomic requirement, and the gate that stops an unverified yes. If the user wants a meeting brief, use executive-briefing-builder or account-brief-builder.
Bid/no-bid first. "The buyer requires SOC 2 Type II; our evidence covers Type I. The bid owner must obtain an explicit buyer-approved exception under the solicitation rules or decline. Internal approval cannot waive the buyer's requirement."
Writing sprint. "We'll figure out security in the challenge review. Start the executive summary."
If a mandatory answer is still a guess, the package is not ready.
Inputs
Reuse supplied context first. If a missing company fact would change the result, check the relevant sections of .enablement/context.md when available. Preserve source dates and approval limits.
Ask only for the inputs that change the workplan:
- Request type, solicitation ID, authoritative version, addenda, and precedence rules
- Question and submission deadlines with timezones
- Buyer requirements, evaluation criteria, and mandatory attachments
- Contributors, approved content sources, and required legal, security, finance, or executive approvals
If a planning input is missing, label the workplan assumption. Never use an assumption to answer a mandatory requirement or to make a factual, legal, security, commercial, or product claim.
Supporting material
Read references/proposal-governance-framework.md before building the compliance matrix, review gates, or readiness verdict.
Procedure
- Control the solicitation, then decide bid/no-bid. Confirm the authoritative version and addenda. Test mandatory disqualifiers, buyer access, solution fit, delivery capacity, economics, evidence readiness, and effort. Done when a named owner has bid, no-bid, or a dated exception path. Do not start section drafts before that.
- Build the requirement matrix. Split compound clauses into atomic children. Keep parent ID, version, addendum, locator, response location, owner, proof, and verification. Cross-reference shared answers. Done when every buyer shall/must has its own row.
- Assign owners and sources. Writer, SME, approver, and approved source of truth for each section. Restricted assets stay restricted.
- Shape the response strategy. Buyer problems, win themes, proof you actually have, and gaps that need escalation. Buyer language, not internal jargon.
- Apply hard stops. Unverified mandatory answers stay blocked with owner, evidence required, and due time. Never convert a placeholder into buyer-facing text.
- Run the gates. Use the review stages the team can staff: draft, challenge, and final where appropriate. Reconcile addenda and test compliance at each relevant stage. An internal exception does not waive a mandatory buyer requirement; record the buyer's authorised acceptance.
- Package for submission. Compliance, formatting, approvals, delivery instructions. Mark READY, READY WITH APPROVED EXCEPTION, or NOT READY. Do not send or upload without explicit user approval.
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 24d ago Changed · +2 lines ab55a2103341
- 2mo ago First seen · 72 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A 23e30ea3661b
proposal-rfp-orchestrator is a skill published in the GitHub repository nthnclrk/enablement-skills (16 stars, last pushed 25d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 948 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
proposal-rfp-orchestrator compared with skills from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| proposal-rfp-orchestratornthnclrk/enablement-skills | Skill | 16 | 25d ago | MIT | A | 73 | Codex |
| imagegenopenai/codex | Skill | 133k | yesterday | Apache-2.0 | A | 113 | Codex |
| playwright-climicrosoft/playwright | Skill | 99k | yesterday | Apache-2.0 | A | 19 | Claude Code |
| local-ai-agentsmicrosoft/ai-agents-for-beginners | Skill | 79k | 4d ago | MIT | A | 200 | Claude Code, Codex |
| systematic-debuggingobra/superpowers | Skill | 313k | 3d ago | MIT | A | 21 | Claude Code |
| next-cache-components-adoptionvercel/next.js | Skill | 143k | yesterday | MIT | A | 95 | Claude Code |
| next-partial-prefetching-adoptionvercel/next.js | Skill | 143k | yesterday | MIT | A | 103 | Claude Code |