Bid Red Team Dual Review

Acknowledgement: Shared by Peter Bamuhigire, techguypeter.com, +256 784 464178. Dual-review contract adapted from the Santa Method (origin: Ronald Skelton, Founder, RapportScore.ai), read from the ECC skill engine's skills/santa-method/SKILL.md, and scoped to this engine's tender/EOI/compliance context.

Use When

• A bid, tender response, EOI, or proposal section will be submitted to a buyer, evaluator, donor, or regulator and a single self-review is not enough assurance for the stakes involved (large value, regulated sector, legal/financial commitments, reputational exposure).
• The routine ai-slop-audit per-section gate has passed but the content still carries compliance, legal, financial, or outcome-guarantee risk that a style/slop audit does not test.
• kaizen-improvement-system step 6 ("run one time-boxed evaluator simulation or compliance red-team") calls for a red-team pass and the stakes justify two independent reviewers instead of one.
• Content makes claims that, if wrong or unsubstantiated, would trigger a compliance knockout, a legal exposure, or a false outcome guarantee (financial services, health, public-sector, donor-funded, or regulated-industry proposals).

Do Not Use When

• The content is an internal draft, exploratory outline, or working note not yet intended for evaluator eyes — use anti-ai-slop as the real-time guardrail instead.
• The check is purely mechanical (page limits, price tokens in the technical folder, file naming) — use the relevant submission checklist, e.g. skills/domain-delivery/giz-eu-local-procurement-response/references/submission-pack-checklist.md, or submission-proof-and-receipt-discipline for what-was-sent evidence.
• No second reviewer context (a genuinely isolated second pass, human or agent) is available — see Degraded Mode.

Required Inputs