Bid Evaluator

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.

Pipeline & Disambiguation

/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.

User has bid PDFs → ask them to run /construction:bid-tabulator (data capture), then /construction:bid-evaluator
User has tabulated bids and wants analysis → this skill directly
User says "compare bids" or "buyout" → check if bids are already tabulated; if not, ask them to run /construction:bid-tabulator first

Tier System

RIGID: Output schema, scoring tables, file naming
GUIDED: Dialogue sequencing, scope assembly, scoring thresholds
FLEXIBLE: Bid interpretation, scope coverage, risk assessment

Required Inputs

Tabulated bids (from /bid-tabulator or equivalent)
Relevant specification sections
Relevant drawing sheets (Claude reviews via vision)
Scope context (from user dialogue)

Optional: bid form/ITB, schedule, owner requirements, budget estimate, past experience with bidders.

Step 1: Scope Assembly

Complete before analyzing any bids.

Mode Detection

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.

AgentCM mode: Read each spec section from .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.
Flat File mode: Discover spec PDFs via CLAUDE.md paths or directory search (Specifications/, Specification Sections/). Read drawing sheets directly from PDF.

1a. Spec Review

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.

1b. Drawing Review

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.

1c. User Dialogue

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.

1d. Build Scope Baseline

Produce internal baseline document: items in sub scope (with source), drawing-identified scope, GC/owner exclusions, allowances, alternates, qualifications, schedule constraints.

Step 2: Bid Analysis

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.

2a. Normalize Pricing

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.

2b. Scope Coverage Mapping

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.

2c. Exclusion Risk Scoring

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

2d. Qualification & Responsibility

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.

2e. Responsiveness and the Recommendation

A curable defect (addenda not acknowledged; an illegible or missing line that reconciles to the stated total; validity shorter than required; bond not mentioned where one is required) keeps the bid in the ranking at its stated price.
Recommend the apparent low bidder conditionally: each cure is a named award condition in 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.
A figure derived for an illegible line is allowed only when it reconciles exactly to the stated total, and it is always labelled "derived, confirm", never presented as read.
A non-curable defect (budgetary-only pricing; a stale drawing basis the bidder has not re-confirmed; SILENT spec-required scope the bidder will not carry) makes the bid "not awardable as submitted"; it is ranked but never recommended.

Step 3: Output

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.

Step 4: Handoff

Lead with the recommendation — don't make them hunt for it
Highlight items needing PE attention
Ask for explicit confirmation: selected bidder, scope adjustments, alternates, special conditions

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.

Step 5: Write a Finding

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": [...]}'

Context Needs Chart

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

Gotchas (measured in eval runs)

Write JSON and YAML with the Write tool. 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.
Do not write helper scripts or inline 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).

Error Handling

Uneven formats: note difficulty, don't penalize lump-sum bids
<3 bids: note limited field, suggest re-bid if appropriate
Budget mixed with hard bids: segregate with caveat
Math errors: flag discrepancy, don't correct
Scope too complex: focus on highest cost-impact items

What This Skill Does NOT Do

Contact subs, execute awards, or negotiate pricing
Replace PE judgment on responsibility
Produce subcontracts (use /subcontract-writer)
Perform quantity takeoffs from drawings

File Safety

Never overwrite an existing bid evaluation. The export script uses safe_output_path() which appends _v2, _v3, etc. automatically.

Allowed Scripts

${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.

bid-evaluator

SKILL.mdskills/bid-evaluator/SKILL.md