Compose validation
The automatic review that runs after bid or RFP composition finishes drafting.
When bid composition finishes drafting your artifacts, the system doesn't just hand them to you and call it done. It runs the compose validator (the Quality check step) — a separate, automatic review pass that pressure-tests the bid against the RFP and against itself before you ship it.
The validator runs two checks:
- Coverage check — for every requirement and obligation in the RFP, does the bid actually address it somewhere? Misses become coverage gaps.
- Content review — an AI reviewer reads every drafted document in full, together with the tender files. Is each document complete? Does it agree with the tender and with the other documents? What must you still do by hand before submitting?
The result is a structured report you review on the validator screen. You can ignore findings that don't apply, mark some for manual fixing, or apply a revision pass to let the agent try again.
RFP composition gets its own review, which checks the documents against your approved procurement design — see RFP composition review below.
When validation runs
Validation runs automatically when bid composition completes — you don't trigger it. While the validator works, the Draft page shows Reviewing the drafts. Then the run ends one of two ways:
- Awaiting your review — the validator found serious issues: a high-severity content finding, or a critical or major coverage gap. The bid is yours to triage.
- Proposal draft complete — the validator found nothing serious. Less serious findings, such as manual steps or a document the review could not fully read, still show on the Quality check step. Read them before you submit.
Only bid autopilot revises on its own: on serious findings, it runs one automatic revision pass, checks again and finishes. Anything still open stays on the Quality check step. In guided mode a bid with serious findings pauses for your review. RFP composition always pauses for your review, even when nothing is found, and never revises on its own.
Findings you already marked Ignore or I'll fix manually don't count as serious, so they never trigger a revision.
What the validator looks at
Coverage check
The coverage pass treats the RFP as a checklist. For each requirement, obligation, deliverable, or evaluation criterion it can find, it checks whether the drafted bid addresses it — and how completely. Each gap it finds includes:
- The RFP excerpt that wasn't covered
- A severity — Minor, Major, or Critical based on how central the requirement is
- An RFP reference so you can jump to the exact source
- The artifact (if any) where coverage was expected
Only the requirements your bid has to answer are counted: approved requirements in the lots you bid for. Rules for the buyer (Process rule, Buyer must include) and Informational rows are not counted, so they never show up as coverage gaps.
This pass is structural. It doesn't read for tone or polish — it just checks whether the topic was addressed.
Content review
The content review reads every drafted document in full, page by page. It no longer stops partway through long documents: a document counts as reviewed only when all of its text was read. It also spot-checks key values, such as deadlines, quantities, prices and required standards, against the tender files.
If the review could not read a document in full — for example it hit its time limit, or the file could not be opened — that document gets its own Review error finding that names the document and the reason. It never passes silently. Click Run validation again, or review that document yourself.
The kinds of finding it produces:
| Type | What it means |
|---|---|
| Incomplete field | A field, table cell or form control has no value where one is needed, such as a price, registration number, signatory or date. |
| Deferred value | The document promises a value later ("will be provided", "TBD") instead of giving it now. |
| Unresolved placeholder | Placeholder text is left in place of a value you must state, such as [TBD] or <COMPANY NAME>. |
| Contradicts the tender | A promised value contradicts the tender files, for example a shorter warranty, a price above the cap, or a standard the specification excludes. The finding quotes both sides and names the tender file. |
| Claimed attachment missing | A document says a file is attached or enclosed, but no such file is in the bid package. Always high severity. |
| Manual step before submitting | A step only you can do: signing a document, or attaching a file the agent cannot produce (a datasheet, a certificate copy, a reference letter). The draft marks it with a placeholder in ==[...]== that names the step. Always low severity: it is a to-do, not a defect. |
| Cross-document contradiction | Two documents in the package disagree on dates, durations, prices, counts or terms. |
| Unsubstantiated claim | A specific claim with no support in your facts, the package, the tender files or your library. |
| Generic filler | A sentence that could appear in any bid and gives the evaluator nothing to score. |
Each finding includes the exact text that triggered it (evidence), a severity (Low, Medium or High), and where applicable a suggested fix.
What you told the agent counts as fact. The review treats your input as your company's facts: the bid's purpose and notes, your answers to the agent's questions (including replies you type in the clarification panel), and the feedback you saved on earlier findings. A claim that repeats them is not flagged as unsubstantiated. A later answer replaces an earlier one.
Where a buyer form offers alternatives, an option struck through counts as a choice: the review checks the original file, not just its text.
Reviewing validation findings
When validation pauses for review, the validator screen shows two tables — coverage gaps on top, content findings below, grouped by document.
Click a row to open the finding modal
The modal shows the full finding: severity badge, type label, the evidence quote, the RFP reference (for coverage gaps), and a suggested fix (for content findings).
Decide what to do
For each finding you have three options:
- I'll fix manually — you'll fix it yourself, outside Tendergate (see Fixing a document yourself). The finding shows User will fix and is left out of the revision pass.
- Ignore — the finding doesn't apply (false positive, already fine, scope decision). It shows Ignored and is left out of the revision pass.
- Save feedback — type a note in the feedback box describing how you want this fixed, then click Save feedback. The note is bundled into the next revision pass and given to the composition agent.
You can mix all three across different findings.
Ignore and I'll fix manually carry over to later passes. When the validator runs again, after a revision or Run validation again, it does not report the same issue again unless the quoted text changed in substance. If it does repeat it word for word, your earlier choice is kept.
Apply changes, re-validate, or finalize
When you've triaged the findings, the footer gives you three actions:
- Apply N changes — runs one revision pass on the bid. The composition agent re-opens, reads your feedback notes (and the unaddressed findings), and re-drafts the affected artifacts. Applying changes starts the next bid version: the re-drafted documents go into it, and the earlier version keeps its files and checks. The validator runs again afterward. You can apply all queued feedback at once, or tick specific findings and use Apply selected changes to apply only those. The live Apply N changes count updates as you triage so you always know how many changes are queued. Capped at one revision round per bid.
- Run validation again — re-checks the current package without a feedback-driven revision. Useful after you've added facts to the bid's notes or attached a file a finding said was missing, and just want a fresh check, with no re-drafting.
- Finalize bid — accepts the bid as-is and marks the run completed. Use this when you've manually fixed what you wanted to fix and the rest of the findings don't matter.
Fixing a document yourself
Documents drafted in this flow have no text editor. To fix something by hand, download the document, correct it in your own office app, and upload the corrected file to your bid as a new version (see Your bid). Then click I'll fix manually on the finding. Documents drafted in the AI Assistant can be edited there directly.
The validator reviews the documents the agent drafted, so it does not re-check a file you corrected yourself. To check the corrected version against the tender, use Check your bid on Your bid.
Revision rounds
The validator allows up to one revision round per bid. The reasoning: the agent can usually nail it in one re-pass; multiple re-passes start producing diminishing returns and burning credits without much improvement.
If after the revision round there are still findings you don't agree with or that are wrong, mark them Ignore or I'll fix manually (and fix them yourself), then click Finalize bid.
Status states you'll see
While validation is running and being reviewed, the Draft page shows these states:
| Status | What's happening |
|---|---|
| Reviewing the drafts | Validator is running. You can't apply feedback yet. |
| Awaiting your review | Validator finished, findings are visible, you can triage. The Draft step shows Needs review. |
| Applying revisions | A revision pass is running (you clicked Apply N changes, or autopilot is revising). Buttons are disabled. |
| Proposal draft complete | Done, either via Finalize or because the validator found nothing serious. The Draft step shows Ready. |
RFP composition review
When RFP composition finishes drafting, the review runs on the Validate draft step. It differs from the bid review:
- What it checks — each document is reviewed against the approved procurement design, the package terms, and the instructions you gave, including your original brief when available. It does not verify source material it can't see, and it is not a legal sign-off.
- It always pauses — composition waits for you even when nothing is found. The Draft step shows Validation complete — review needed; click Open review. A clean result reads No issues found in the RFP review.
Review coverage
The Review coverage section at the top of the review says what the review covered.
- Review incomplete — some content couldn't be fully reviewed, for example because its text couldn't be extracted or it exceeds the review capacity. Each affected file is listed with the reason. No findings then does not mean the package passed: inspect those files, or click Run validation again.
- If the files or your instructions changed after the review, the coverage note says the earlier result no longer covers the current package.
Acting on findings
Findings open in the same modal as for bids, with I'll fix manually, Ignore, and Save feedback. The footer offers Apply N changes, Run validation again, and Finalise RFP. Finalising is refused until the current files have been reviewed.
Request document changes
Below the findings, Request document changes lets you send a correction in your own words, even one the review didn't list. The Documents step links to the same form.
- Under Documents to change, pick Entire package or a single document.
- Describe the correction in Requested changes (up to 4,000 characters).
- Click Send changes to the drafting agent.
The agent revises the documents within the approved procurement design — a change of scope needs a new design cycle. When it finishes, the review runs again on the changed package. The form is available once the current review is complete. It is locked while drafting or a review is running, and after the RFP is finalised.
What's not in the validator's job
- Legal review. It doesn't check whether the bid's terms are enforceable, fit local law, or contradict your contract templates.
- Pricing accuracy. It doesn't check the arithmetic in financial offers. It does flag a price above the tender's cap, and prices that differ between documents.
- Strategy. It doesn't tell you whether your win theme is the right one or whether you should bid at all.
Treat the validator as a strong second-pair-of-eyes for technical writing and structure. Strategy and legal sign-off remain on you.
Credit cost
Each validator pass uses credits like other AI steps: the automatic pass and every Run validation again are charged as their own run, separately from drafting, by actual AI usage. The validator runs on a lighter model than the drafting agent, but it reads every page of every document, so a larger package costs more to check. A revision round re-drafts the affected documents and then runs the validator again, so it uses credits for both.
See credits and pricing for the full picture.
Tips
- Read the evidence. Every finding cites the specific text that triggered it. Sometimes the AI is wrong about whether something is filler — the evidence makes that easy to confirm.
- Do the manual steps before you submit. Each Manual step before submitting finding is something only you can do: sign the document or attach the named file.
- Use feedback notes liberally. A short note like "Add a specific project example for healthcare experience" is much more actionable for the next revision pass than just leaving the finding open.
- Triage everything, then apply once. You only get one revision round, so collect feedback on every relevant finding before clicking Apply.
- Don't fight the validator. If it flags filler text in three places and you disagree on one, mark that one Ignore. Fighting every finding is rarely worth the effort.