Evaluate tabulated subcontractor bids against specs and drawings — scope gap analysis, exclusion risk scoring, award recommendation. Triggers: 'evaluate bids', 'bid evaluation', 'lowest responsible bidder'.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.
Evaluate tabulated subcontractor bids against construction documents. This skill does NOT make the award decision — it builds the analytical foundation so the PE/PM can decide quickly and confidently.
/bid-tabulator → THIS SKILL → user confirms → /subcontract-writer
This skill requires tabulated bids as input. If the user has raw bid PDFs that haven't been tabulated yet, stop and ask them to run /construction:bid-tabulator first; it is user-invoked only, so you cannot start it from here. It produces the per-bidder JSON files and comparison Excel that this skill consumes.
/construction:bid-tabulator (data capture), then /construction:bid-evaluator/construction:bid-tabulator firstOptional: bid form/ITB, schedule, owner requirements, budget estimate, past experience with bidders.
Complete before analyzing any bids.
Read .construction/project.yaml at the project root: present and readable means AgentCM mode (note its contract_version), absent means flat-file mode. A listing that shows the file does not decide it: read it.
.construction/specs/<section>.txt (09 65 13 is 09-65-13.txt; each line starts with its page), listed in .construction/INDEX.md: it is the section's text, and a section's pages are never extracted again from the PDF. Never run pdf_text.py or rasterize_page.py on a section's pages: not to check them, and not inside a page range (--pages 1,2 where page 2 is a section is one). A read manual's pages in no section (INDEX.md lists them) are read in the PDF, those pages only (--pages). Only for a manual INDEX.md lists under "Spec manuals not read", read spec-splitter's .construction/skills/spec_text/ instead. Use sheet index from .construction/index/sheet_index.yaml for drawing identification. Follow ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/agentcm-mode.md: which source wins, what a missing file or an empty search means, which file answers what, drawings through crop.sh, sheet ids, and how to record a correction of AgentCM's data.CLAUDE.md paths or directory search (Specifications/, Specification Sections/). Read drawing sheets directly from PDF.Extract from each spec section: work included (Parts 1-3), work by others (GC/NIC/Owner), related section cross-references, performance requirements, coordination and temporary requirements.
This step is never skipped. The spec sections are the baseline that SILENT is measured against; a scope sheet lists sections, not their requirements, and "no drawing review" does not mean "no spec review". In flat-file mode dump each section's text (TEXT pages in the dump are read as text; rasterize VISION pages):
"${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/bin/construction-python" "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/pdf/pdf_text.py" "{section.pdf}"
Take the output directly, or, to search a dump more than once, save it with
--output ".construction/skills/bid-evaluator/text/<section>.txt", never in
/tmp or any other folder outside the project.
Load references/drawing-review.md for guidance on what to look for
per drawing type. Vision-read key sheets to identify scope items,
conditions, and quantities not apparent from specs. Track drawing-
derived items separately — they differentiate thorough bidders.
Offload reference after completing drawing review.
Ask targeted questions to fill gaps documents can't answer. Do not dump a questionnaire — ask conversationally, skip what you already know.
Always ask: package definition (which specs/drawings), GC-provided items, bid count and format, drawing confirmation if provided.
Ask when relevant: multi-trade splits, alternates/allowances, qualification requirements, budget reference, schedule constraints.
Confirm assembled scope with user before proceeding.
Produce internal baseline document: items in sub scope (with source), drawing-identified scope, GC/owner exclusions, allowances, alternates, qualifications, schedule constraints.
Load references/buyout-domain.md for domain knowledge on bid
language interpretation, common scope splits, red flags, trade-
specific evaluation notes, and non-price factors. Keep loaded
through Steps 2a-2d, then offload.
Adjusted Base = Submitted Base
+ Excluded spec-required items
- Included GC-provided items
+ Accepted alternates ± Allowance adjustments
Valuation order: other bidder's line item → budget estimate → professional judgment (flagged) → qualitative risk if unknown. Document every adjustment. No silent price changes. Flag unit price outliers (>2x median). Calculate exposure ranges.
Map each bidder against every scope baseline item using five statuses:
| Status | Meaning |
|---|---|
| INCLUDED | Explicitly includes |
| EXCLUDED | Explicitly excludes |
| SILENT | Not addressed — most dangerous |
| PARTIAL | Includes with limitations |
| DIFFERENT | Offers substitution |
Flag all SILENT items on spec-required scope. Drawing-derived SILENT items suggest incomplete document review by that bidder.
| Level | Criteria |
|---|---|
| CRITICAL | Spec-required, uncarried, >1% bid or >$5K |
| SIGNIFICANT | Implied by spec/practice, $2K-$5K |
| MINOR | Common GC-provided, <$2K |
| INFO | Clarification only, no cost impact |
Assess per bidder: bonding, insurance, licensing, experience, capacity, DBE/MBE, bid completeness. Bust detection: >20-30% below field + scope gaps + incomplete submission. Flag for verification, never call it a bust.
recommendation.conditions (written addenda
acknowledgment with no price change; a clean copy of the illegible line;
a validity extension; a bond commitment). Name the next fully responsive
bidder as the fallback and state the spread.Build JSON per schema in scripts/sample_input.json with the Write tool
(not a shell heredoc, which fails here on an apostrophe, and not a helper
script) as .construction/skills/bid-evaluator/bid_evaluation.json: it is
working data, never in the project root. Then run:
"${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/bin/construction-python" "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/export_bid_evaluation.py" .construction/skills/bid-evaluator/bid_evaluation.json "Bid_Evaluation_{package}.xlsx"
Run it from the project folder: the workbook is the deliverable and goes in the project root (or the folder the PE names), never under .construction/, which macOS and Linux hide.
The script produces 5 sheets: Bid Comparison, Price Summary, Exclusion Detail, Qualification Summary, Recommendation.
Do NOT proceed to a subcontract without user confirmation. subcontract-writer is user-invoked only; once the user has confirmed the selected bidder, tell them the next step is /construction:subcontract-writer and stop.
Record the evaluation as a finding in .construction/skills/bid-evaluator/findings/ (both modes):
"${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/bin/construction-python" "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/graph/write_finding.py" \
--skill "bid-evaluator" --type "bid_evaluation_complete" \
--title "Bid evaluation: {scope} — {N} bidders, recommended {company}" \
--output-file "Bid_Evaluation_{package}.xlsx" \
--data '{"scope": "...", "bidder_count": N, "recommended": "...", "adjusted_amount": ..., "pe_attention_items": [...]}'
| Step | Resource | Load Trigger | Offload After |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1b | references/drawing-review.md | Drawing sheets provided | Step 1b complete |
| 2 | references/buyout-domain.md | Entering bid analysis | Step 2d complete |
| 3 | scripts/sample_input.json | Building output JSON | Step 3 complete |
| 5 | ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/graph/write_finding.py | Step 5 | Step 5 complete |
cat > file <<'EOF' failed with "unexpected EOF while looking for matching '" whenever the content held an apostrophe (3 of 15 runs, 2026-10-04), costing a turn each time.python -c, even to assemble your own JSON or to read a PDF; the allowlisted scripts are the toolkit, and the exporters do the arithmetic checks. If the toolkit lacks something you need, say so in the handoff instead (bid-tabulator and subcontract-writer each wrote a helper script in their 2026-10-04 runs; the eval guard blocked both).Never overwrite an existing bid evaluation. The export script uses safe_output_path() which appends _v2, _v3, etc. automatically.
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/bin/construction-python${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/pdf/pdf_text.py — spec section and bid text (Step 1a)${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/pdf/rasterize_page.py — drawing sheets and VISION pages${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/export_bid_evaluation.py${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/graph/write_finding.py${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/corrections_append.py — AgentCM mode: record a correction of AgentCM's data (reference/agentcm-mode.md)No other code: no python -c, no helper script. If the toolkit lacks something
you need, say so in the handoff.
No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.
No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.
No comments yet. Be the first to write one.
Extract data from subcontractor bid PDFs and produce a comparison spreadsheet. Feeds into /bid-evaluator. Triggers: 'tabulate bids', 'bid comparison', 'compare bids', 'buyout analysis', 'bid tab'.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Researches which building codes, accessibility standards and authority requirements (health department, fire marshal, state agency) apply to a scope or spec section, and which the project documents miss. Use for 'what codes apply', 'code check', 'ADA requirements', 'egress', 'health department'. Not for reading what the drawings or specs say (construction-guide).
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Operating guide for construction project documents — load before reading drawings, specs, schedules, RFIs, submittals or bids. Data-access rules (never read PDFs directly; rasterize first), AgentCM graph-guided vision, drawing and cross-reference conventions, document precedence. Triggers: 'construction project', 'drawings', 'specs', 'sheet', 'RFI', 'submittal'.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Checks construction drawings and specs for what's missing, cross-trade coordination conflicts and scope gaps, with PE judgment. Use for 'what's missing', 'check coordination', 'scope gap', or researching an RFI before answering it. Not for drafting RFIs (rfi-drafter), code research (code-researcher) or reviewing a submittal package (the user runs /construction:submittal-review).
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Set up a construction project — inventories files, classifies drawings/specs/schedules/registers and appends construction context to CLAUDE.md; in an AgentCM project, prints AgentCM's orientation instead. Triggers: 'set up project', 'construction setup', 'classify documents'.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Draft RFIs and manage the ambient issue registry. Reviews issues surfaced by other skills, escalates to formal RFIs. Triggers: 'draft RFI', 'write RFI', 'drawing conflict', 'review issues', 'issue queue'.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.