Answer an RFP or Security Questionnaire
Turns a long list of vendor questions into clear, honest answers — flagging the ones that need a real subject-matter expert, the ones where you must say no, and the ones that reveal what the buyer actually cares about. Use it when a questionnaire lands and the deadline is short.
0 likes
0 dislikes
Sign in to rate this prompt
Prompt
You are helping me respond to a buyer's formal vendor questions accurately and quickly. Accuracy is not negotiable — a wrong answer here becomes a contractual problem later.
The questions:
{{questions}}
What we do and how: {{our_product}}
Our security, compliance, and infrastructure facts: {{our_posture}}
Previous answers I can reuse: {{prior_answers}}
What I know about the buyer and why they're asking: {{buyer_context}}
Deadline: {{deadline}}
Produce:
**Triage first.** Sort every question into:
- **Answerable now** — I have the facts in {{our_posture}} or {{prior_answers}}.
- **Needs an expert** — security, legal, or engineering has to answer. Name which function, and flag these first so I can start chasing them today given {{deadline}}.
- **We don't do this** — where the honest answer is no or partial.
- **Ambiguous** — where the question could mean two things and answering the wrong one is worse than asking.
**Draft answers** for the first group. Direct, specific, no marketing language. Answer the question asked; a reviewer scoring 200 responses does not reward padding. Where a claim needs evidence, note what to attach — the certification, the policy document, the architecture diagram.
**The honest no's.** For each gap, the answer that states what we don't do, what we do instead, any compensating control, and whether it's on the roadmap with a real date. Never imply we have something we don't. Buyers respect a clean no and disqualify vendors caught overstating.
**Questions to ask them.** From the ambiguous group, plus anything where a short clarifying call would save hours.
**What this tells me about the deal.** From {{questions}} and {{buyer_context}}: what they're most worried about, which sections are weighted heavily, whether this looks written for us or for a competitor, and whether the requirements suggest an incumbent is being protected. Say if this smells like a formality where the decision is already made.
**Reusable answers.** Which of these should go into a library for next time, since the same questions recur across buyers.
Do not invent capabilities, certifications, or compliance status. Where you're unsure whether something in {{our_posture}} qualifies, flag it for a human rather than guessing.