Prepare the source pack
Choose the proposal kind and supply the buyer brief, approved evidence, delivery assumptions and commercial terms. For RFP work, retain the issued requirements and separate known answers from missing evidence.
Proposal & RFP analyzer for Gixo Arc
Paste your proposal draft — and optionally the RFP it answers — and get a 0–100 readiness score in seconds: which expected sections are missing, which RFP requirements your draft actually addresses, and the mechanical failures (undefined acronyms, broken cross-references, leftover placeholders) that make evaluators stop reading.
No signup. No AI judgment. Run the same deterministic checks used by the Arc proposal workflow.
How to use this tool
Who it is for
Proposal and bid teams checking an existing draft before submission.
Input
A proposal draft, the matching proposal type, and optionally the source RFP. Paste only documents you are authorized to process.
How it works
Deterministic rules compare headings with the selected proposal-type model, run the fixed readiness checklist, and combine local concept and token matching for up to 60 surfaced RFP obligation candidates.
What the output means
The report shows a readiness band, section and checklist gaps, and—when an RFP is supplied—Addressed, Partially Addressed, or Not Addressed rows. These are mechanical coverage signals.
Limitation
Local concept and token matches are not legal compliance review or proof of complete requirement discovery. The tool does not judge response quality, certify RFP compliance, rewrite the proposal, or predict a win.
Data-handling boundary
The public analysis runs on submitted text without creating an account or calling an AI model. Review the Privacy Policy for request and service-data handling, and do not submit material you lack authority to process.
Illustrative input
Illustrative: a consulting-proposal draft plus an RFP containing delivery, timeline, pricing, and reporting obligations.
Illustrative output
Illustrative: the matrix can mark the delivery language as Addressed, timeline as Partially Addressed, and reporting as Not Addressed while also flagging a missing validity period. This is not a real customer result.
Ask next: Which Not Addressed rows need substantive writing, who owns final compliance review, and which win themes or pricing choices require human judgment?
A proposal analyzer is a free, deterministic tool that scores a proposal draft 0–100 for submission readiness — checking section coverage against 21 proposal-type templates, extracting up to 60 RFP requirements to see which ones the draft actually addresses, and running a fixed 9-point readiness checklist (pricing section, signature block, validity period, and more). It runs on rule-based checks, not AI judgment, so the same draft always produces the same score. Readiness bands run Not Ready, Emerging, Close, and Ready.
Arc · real output
From a supplied scope to a proposal you can inspect.
Read a real exported proposal alongside the brief Arc received. The example keeps supplied scope, commercial assumptions and reviewer responsibility visible.
Consulting proposal: repairs satisfaction measurement, Harbourside Housing Association
A ten-week advisory engagement for an invented housing association: situation, approach and phases, a requirement-by-requirement compliance matrix, deliverables, timeline, team, terms, and a fee built phase by phase from the bidder's day rates, with the days of each role shown.
Inspect the source brief or data
Propose a ten-week advisory engagement for Harbourside Housing Association, on behalf of Larkfield Analytics Ltd, that answers the association's brief: review the current repairs survey, recommend how to measure repairs satisfaction by contractor, and leave a reporting approach for the repairs team and the board. Build the fee for each phase from the standard rates in the evidence file (the days of each role times the day rate) and show those days. Add nothing the evidence file does not state. Put a notice on the cover page that the buyer and the bidder are fictional and the proposal is a worked example. Inputs: the buyer's document (brief-harbourside-housing.md); the bidder's evidence file (larkfield-evidence.md); commercial terms: value 46,000 to 52,000 GBP, valid for 60 days, payment terms 'Invoiced monthly in arrears, payable within 30 days.'; deal context: The buyer and the bidder in this proposal are fictional, and this proposal is a worked example. The engagement lead presents to the buyer's board in the ninth week.
Read the sample review notes
A separate reviewer agent read its 177 claims against the bidder's evidence file, the buyer's brief and the deal terms: 115 are supported, 58 add design detail or an inference, 4 are in no input (it calls the fee fixed) and none contradicts one. Every price line recomputes. It is not a person's review.
Review the proposed response
Inspect scope, exclusions, requirements and price assumptions. Use reviewable edits and saved comparisons; an unresolved buyer question needs an owner or an explicit qualification.
Package the reviewed version
Inspect the actual PDF, Word or HTML output. Tracked delivery activity and a recorded deal outcome answer different questions; verify the recipient, permissions and current approval state before sharing.
Buyer requirements and response ownership
Keep buyer RFP files separate from bidder evidence and approved reusable answers. Inspect extraction coverage, requirement source locations, questionnaire previews and submission limits. Response work can carry an SME owner, due date, escalation owner and required reviewer decisions. Compare an addendum with the source before changing a response.
Commercial schedules and recurring totals
Review each line's quantity, rate, unit, optional status and one-off, monthly or annual recurrence. Inspect recurrence totals and the estimated first-year total separately. Currency, supplied tax input and commercial assumptions need review. When importing Business metrics, select and review the source values before applying them to the schedule.
Buyer edition and submission package
Choose the current saved response or an approved edition. Inspect retained attachments, filled questionnaires, the compliance matrix and the package preview. A release manifest identifies stored delivery bytes. For tracked links, review recipient access, expiry, password and permissions separately from delivery activity and the recorded opportunity outcome.
A draft or readiness check is not approval of pricing, legal terms or a delivery commitment. Arc proposal drafting does not imply CRM, CPQ or tax-calculation automation.
A real analyzer run: readiness score and band, section coverage for the selected proposal type, and the RFP compliance matrix — produced in seconds, no account.
What does a proposal analyzer check, exactly?
No black box. These are the actual rule sets the analyzer runs — the same ones Gixo Arc uses internally.
Section coverage by proposal type
Pick from 21 proposal types — sales, RFP response, consulting, grant, renewal, government, and more. The analyzer maps your headings against that type's required and recommended sections and scores coverage 70% on required, 30% on recommended. A consulting proposal without a methodology section gets caught here.
RFP requirement coverage matrix
Paste the RFP and the analyzer extracts up to 60 requirement statements by obligation language — "shall", "must", "required to", "will provide", "will deliver", "responsible for", "should" — then compares local concepts and tokens in your draft. Addressed, Partially Addressed and Not Addressed are coverage signals; inspect the matched passage and excluded echo or denial text.
The 9-point readiness checklist
Pricing or investment section present. Acceptance / signature block. Validity period. Terms & conditions. Call to action or next steps. Table of contents. Case studies or social proof. No leftover placeholders like [Client Name]. Length appropriate for the proposal type. This checklist alone carries 45% of the composite score when no RFP is supplied, and 35% when one is.
Undefined acronyms
Flags acronyms used two or more times but never defined on first use — the silent credibility killer in technical and government responses. A common-knowledge allowlist (RFP, SLA, API, GDPR, and ~80 others) keeps the noise out.
Broken cross-references
Finds references to a Section, Clause, Article, Appendix, Exhibit, Schedule, Attachment, or Annex that doesn't exist in your draft — the artifact of stitching proposals together from old ones, and one of the first things a careful evaluator notices.
A composite score you can re-run
With an RFP: 40% section coverage + 35% readiness checklist + 25% requirement coverage. Without one: 55% sections + 45% readiness. Bands: Not Ready (0–39), Emerging (40–59), Close (60–79), Ready (80–100). Because it's deterministic, the score is a real progress meter — revise and re-run.
What does the free proposal analyzer check?
| Check | What it measures | Threshold / detail |
|---|---|---|
| Section coverage | Draft headings vs. the expected-section model for the selected proposal type (21 types) | 70% weight on required sections, 30% on recommended |
| RFP requirement coverage | Local concept and token matching between the draft and up to 60 surfaced obligation candidates | Coverage labels with available matched excerpts; echo and denial handling; token-only fallback |
| 9-point readiness checklist | Pricing/investment section, acceptance/signature block, validity period, terms & conditions, CTA/next steps, table of contents, case studies/social proof, no leftover placeholders, appropriate length | Pass/fail per item |
| Undefined acronyms | Acronyms used 2+ times but never defined on first use | ~80-term common-knowledge allowlist (RFP, SLA, API, GDPR, etc.) excluded |
| Broken cross-references | References to a Section, Clause, Article, Appendix, Exhibit, Schedule, Attachment, or Annex not present in the draft | Flagged individually |
| Composite readiness score | With RFP: 40% sections + 35% checklist + 25% requirement coverage. Without RFP: 55% sections + 45% checklist | Bands: Not Ready 0–39, Emerging 40–59, Close 60–79, Ready 80–100 |
A coverage matrix of the surfaced obligation candidates and draft-match signals. Review omitted requirements and each answer yourself.
What can a deterministic proposal check tell you — and what can't it?
This analyzer is honest about what it is. Current requirement coverage combines local concept and token matching, excludes echo-only and denial passages, and offers a token-only fallback. These are bounded signals, not proof that the answer is good or compliant. It extracts at most 60 requirements per RFP, and it doesn't rewrite anything. Inside Arc, the same deterministic checks become a proposal workflow: gaps become sections to draft, review, and export.
Use it the way proposal teams use a compliance pass: as the mechanical gate before the persuasion work. Every "Not Addressed" row is a section you write before submission. Every undefined acronym and broken cross-reference is a 30-second fix that would otherwise read as carelessness. The judgment calls — pricing strategy, win themes, tone — stay yours.
When the gaps need new writing, Arc can draft from your RFP and source files and list the files supplied for the draft, then support editing and human review before PDF, DOCX, or HTML export. A 14-day Arc trial is available without a credit card.
Proposal analyzer or generator — which do you need?
| You have | Use | Cost |
|---|---|---|
| A draft you wrote (or inherited) and a deadline | Arc analyzer — find the mechanical gaps before the evaluator does | Product-owned workflow |
| An RFP and source documents, but no draft yet | Gixo Arc — generate a structured first draft grounded in your files | 14-day free trial, then a paid plan |
| A draft that scored "Close" with three sections missing | Both — generate the missing sections, paste back, re-run the analyzer | Arc trial and paid workflow |
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the proposal analyzer really free?
Yes — the public analyzer is available without an account or email. It runs deterministic heading and readiness checks, surfaces bounded obligation candidates and combines local concept and token matching. Inspect each available match; request-size and rate limits apply. The paid product is proposal generation, not the check.
Does it use AI to judge my proposal?
No. Every check on this page is rule-based and reproducible: the same draft always produces the same score. That's deliberate — a score that changes between runs can't tell you whether your revision helped.
What happens to the text I paste?
The analysis runs on the text you paste and the report comes back in the same response. No account is created, and the analyzer itself does not call an AI model. See the Privacy Policy for how Gixo handles request and service data.
Which proposal types does it understand?
21 types, each with its own expected-section model and target length: sales, RFP response, enterprise, quote/estimate, renewal, expansion, winback, consulting, project, retainer, staffing, partnership, joint venture, sponsorship, internal business case, grant, investment, government, research, creative, and technology implementation.
Can it analyze the RFP alone, before I write anything?
Yes — paste just the RFP and it extracts the requirement statements and obligation language. That gives you the compliance skeleton to write against, which is exactly how strong RFP responses start.
What is a proposal analyzer?
A proposal analyzer is a deterministic tool that scores a proposal draft's submission readiness on a 0–100 scale by checking section coverage against a proposal-type template (21 types supported), measuring how much of the source RFP's extracted requirements the draft addresses, and running a fixed 9-point readiness checklist covering things like pricing sections, signature blocks, and leftover placeholders. It's rule-based, not AI judgment, so re-running the same draft always produces the same score.
How is a proposal analyzer different from an AI proposal writer?
The analyzer only scores and diagnoses an existing draft — section coverage, RFP requirement coverage, and a 9-point checklist — it doesn't write or rewrite anything. Arc can draft proposal sections from your RFP and source files, then export the reviewed proposal to PDF, DOCX, or HTML.
What makes Gixo's free proposal analyzer useful for repeat reviews?
It is free with no account or usage cap, and it runs fixed, reproducible checks: section coverage against 21 proposal-type templates, a 9-point readiness checklist, and — when you paste the RFP — coverage of up to 60 extracted requirement statements. Because it is rule-based rather than AI judgment, the same draft always scores the same, making it useful as a repeatable pre-submission gate rather than a one-off AI opinion.
Reviewed 2026 — checks and weights on this page reflect the current Gixo Arc analyzer.
Updated
More from Gixo