Government Procurement Document Review Assistant

The problem

Reviewing government procurement documents usually hinges on concrete compliance risks: whether qualification requirements impose regional limits, whether evaluation criteria are quantified, whether SME set-asides and price adjustments are applied, and whether procedural deadlines are valid. Manual clause-by-clause legal checks are time-consuming, while model-only answers can easily cite unverifiable provisions. This skill targets documents governed by China’s Government Procurement Law system, including tender documents, competitive negotiation or consultation documents, inquiry notices, procurement announcements, and contract drafts, with the goal of producing compliance review notes that are sourced, actionable, and easier to re-check.

How it works

• Knowledge-base search first: Before giving legal grounds or revision advice, it prioritizes search_knowledge against the primary library “Government Procurement Practice and Compliance”; for challenge, complaint, or objection handling, it also queries the supplementary library “Government Procurement Complaint AI Knowledge Base”.
• Key context first: It structures follow-up questions around mandatory items such as procuring entity, project type, budget source, procurement method, and budget amount, rather than jumping into broad review when core facts are missing.
• Dimension-by-dimension review: It covers procurement method applicability, qualification conditions, evaluation factors and scoring, discriminatory or exclusive clauses, policy implementation, fair competition, procedural deadlines, and contract terms.
• Structured output: The report is organized into legal applicability, a risk list, regulatory hot-spot checks, prioritized revision suggestions, and open items. Each risk item aims to identify the clause location, legal basis, potential consequences, and a directly reusable revision.

Boundaries

It does not handle non-procurement procurement by state-owned enterprises, pure construction project bidding, bulk complaint decision collection, or replace lawyers in issuing formal legal opinions or making administrative determinations. If the knowledge base does not cover a regulation or policy, or if retrieval fails, the skill should state that the conclusion has not been verified against the library, instead of presenting general rules as validated legal findings.