Documentation Index
Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://mintlify.com/tractorjuice/arc-kit/llms.txt
Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
Vendor Evaluation
Create evaluation frameworks and score vendor proposals against requirements.Command
Description
Generates vendor evaluation frameworks with scoring criteria, or scores specific vendor proposals. Ensures objective, requirements-driven vendor selection with full audit trails.Arguments
- Project ID or category: Project identifier or evaluation category (e.g., ‘001’, ‘CRM platforms’)
When to Use
- Before receiving vendor proposals (create framework)
- After receiving proposals (score vendors)
- For comparing multiple vendors
- To ensure objective vendor selection
- For audit trail requirements
Required Context
- Requirements (ARC--REQ-.md) - MANDATORY
- Architecture Principles (ARC-000-PRIN-*.md) - MANDATORY
- SOW (Statement of Work) - Recommended
- DOS (DOS Requirements) - Recommended
- G-Cloud Search (ARC--GCLD-.md) - Recommended
Task Modes
Mode A: Create Evaluation Framework
Generates evaluation criteria before receiving proposals: Mandatory Qualifications (Pass/Fail):- Required certifications (PCI-DSS, ISO 27001, SOC 2)
- Minimum experience requirements
- Financial stability
- Reference requirements
- Technical Approach (35 points): Solution design, architecture alignment
- Project Approach (20 points): Methodology, risk management, QA
- Team Qualifications (25 points): Experience, composition, certifications
- Company Experience (10 points): References, industry expertise
- Pricing (10 points): Cost competitiveness, value for money
Mode B: Score a Vendor
Scores a specific vendor proposal:- Validates mandatory qualifications
- Scores each category with justification
- References specific requirement IDs
- Documents strengths and weaknesses
- Provides recommendation
Mode C: Compare Multiple Vendors
Compares all evaluated vendors:- Side-by-side scoring comparison
- Strengths/weaknesses matrix
- Risk comparison
- Cost comparison
- Final recommendation with rationale
Output
Evaluation Framework:projects/{project}/ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-EVAL-v1.0.md
Vendor Scoring:
projects/{project}/vendors/{vendor}/evaluation.md
Vendor Comparison:
projects/{project}/ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-VEND-v1.0.md
Example Usage
Create Framework
- Mandatory quals: PCI-DSS certified, 5+ years experience
- Scoring criteria weighted by requirement priorities
- Evaluation process and timeline
Score Vendor
- Technical: 28/35 (strong PCI-DSS, limited cloud)
- Team: 20/25 (good references)
- Total: 76/100
- Recommendation: APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
Compare Vendors
- Acme (76), BestPay (82), CloudPayments (71)
- Recommendation: BestPay - highest score, best cloud experience
Scoring Requirements
Objective Scoring
- All scores require specific justification
- No arbitrary numbers
- Reference requirement IDs (e.g., “Meets NFR-S-001”)
- Document any assumptions
Mandatory Qualifications
- Pass/fail criteria
- Missing any = disqualified
- Security and compliance violations typically blocking
Transparency
- Document conflicts of interest
- Record dissenting views
- Maintain audit trail
- Keep vendor proposals confidential
Related Commands
arckit sow- Generate SOW with evaluation criteriaarckit dos- Create DOS with evaluation approacharckit gcloud-clarify- Analyze G-Cloud service gapsarckit requirements- Source requirements for evaluation
Next Steps
After evaluation:- Review scores with stakeholders
- Validate scoring consistency
- Conduct vendor demos/interviews
- Check references
- Make final selection
- Document decision rationale
- Award contract