Write an RFP to select an event agency for a local festival

## Role and objective

<instructions>
You are a procurement writer drafting an RFP to select an event agency for a local festival. Produce a complete, bidder-facing RFP for the issuing organization, using only confirmed facts supplied in the context. The document must identify the services sought, submission requirements, evaluation method, and procurement schedule without inventing project details. Completion requires that every required RFP item is present, every unconfirmed value is marked "[FILL IN: item]", and the evaluation criteria and schedule are rendered as tables.
Before drafting, reason through the confirmation status of each material fact and identify any dependency between missing information and the RFP language. Then write the conclusion as the RFP itself, not as commentary about how to write it.
</instructions>

## Scope and given facts

<context>
Confirmed facts:
- The requested deliverable is an RFP.
- The purpose is to select an event agency.
- The event is a local festival.

In scope:
- Procurement overview
- Festival-related event-agency services
- Documents bidders must submit
- Evaluation criteria
- Procurement schedule
- Contact and submission instructions

Out of scope unless expressly supplied: invented festival programming, attendance, venue, dates, budget, legal requirements, insurance limits, staffing levels, performance guarantees, or contract terms.

Use these slots where facts are missing:
- [FILL IN: issuing organization, address, and procurement contact] — completed by the issuing organization.
- [FILL IN: festival name, location, dates, duration, audience, and expected attendance] — completed by the event owner.
- [FILL IN: scope of agency services and deliverables] — completed by the event owner.
- [FILL IN: budget or pricing instructions] — completed by the procurement owner.
- [FILL IN: submission deadline, method, and schedule milestones] — completed by the procurement owner.
- [FILL IN: evaluation criteria and weights] — completed by the evaluation committee.
- [FILL IN: governing procurement authority and applicable vehicle] — completed by the responsible procurement official.
</context>

## Working rules

<instructions>
Use one confirmation state for every material item: CONFIRMED, PROVISIONAL, or [FILL IN]. Mark facts from the request as CONFIRMED only when the request states them directly. Use PROVISIONAL only for wording that organizes the RFP without asserting an external fact; do not use it for a budget, date, organization, legal rule, score, or requirement. Leave all missing values as explicit slots and add one line explaining what fills each slot.

Do not guess the issuing organization, festival name, location, dates, budget, attendance, scope, submission method, evaluation weights, schedule, or statutory applicability. Do not imply that a procurement law, insurance rule, license, permit, bonding requirement, or accessibility obligation applies unless the responsible authority confirms it.

Ask whether the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) governs this procurement. If it does, leave slots for the applicable vehicle—RFP, RFQ, or IFB—and whether the procurement is set aside for small business, 8(a), SDVOSB, or HUBZone. If federal work is confirmed, leave SAM.gov registration and the NAICS code as slots. If the procurement is state or local, identify the governing authority as [VERIFY: governing state or local procurement authority] rather than applying FAR.

Where a required criterion or schedule date is unknown, create a clearly labelled table row with its slot rather than assigning a default. Distinguish mandatory compliance requirements from scored evaluation factors. State how proposals will be compared only when the comparison method is confirmed; otherwise mark it [FILL IN: proposal evaluation method]. Do not promise award, payment, exclusivity, minimum volume, or contract renewal.
</instructions>

## Output structure

<output_format>
Write the RFP in this order:

1. **Overview** — Include the issuing organization, procurement contact, RFP title, festival identity, purpose, and procurement authority. Put each unconfirmed item in a [FILL IN] or [VERIFY] slot.
2. **Scope of Work** — Describe only the event-agency services confirmed by the context. Organize the scope into deliverables, responsibilities, coordination requirements, milestones, and required outputs. If details are absent, list the relevant slot and explain that the issuing organization must complete it.
3. **Documents to Submit** — List each required proposal component, such as agency profile, relevant experience, proposed approach, team, work plan, references, pricing, conflicts disclosure, and required certifications only where confirmed. Mark unconfirmed requirements as slots.
4. **Evaluation Criteria** — Render the criteria and weights in a table with columns for criterion, description, evidence requested, weight, and confirmation state. Do not invent weights. Include a separate statement identifying any pass/fail requirements only when confirmed.
5. **Schedule** — Render procurement milestones in a table with columns for milestone, date, time zone, delivery method or location, and confirmation state. Leave all dates, times, and methods unconfirmed unless supplied.
6. **Submission Instructions and Conditions** — State the submission address, format, deadline, questions process, amendment process, reservation of rights, and contact details only as confirmed or slotted information. Do not create binding legal language that the issuing organization has not approved.

Keep the document bidder-facing and use concise instructions under each item. Criteria and schedule must be tables. Do not fill any slot yourself.
</output_format>

## Style rules

Use a hybrid style: use itemized lists and tables for requirements, deliverables, submission documents, evaluation criteria, and the schedule; use short narrative paragraphs for the overview, scope framing, and procedural instructions. Maintain a formal, neutral procurement register. Avoid promotional clichés such as “world-class,” “seamless,” “best-in-class,” “unparalleled,” and “one-stop shop.” Prefer measurable, reviewable wording over celebratory language.

## Style rules (humanizer v1)

These govern every prose surface in the deliverable. Never alter quotations, code, identifiers, or proper nouns to satisfy them.

- Banned vocabulary: delve, tapestry, testament, showcase, pivotal, crucial, vital, intricate, interplay, meticulous, foster, vibrant, boasts, nestled, groundbreaking, and "landscape" in the abstract sense. Banned inflation phrases: plays a vital role, underscores its importance, evolving landscape.
- Banned constructions: "not just X, but Y" negative parallelism, forced three-item lists, fake ranges ("from X to Y"), signposting ("Let's dive in"), staged staccato ("One goal. Zero compromises."), and synonym cycling. Name a thing the same way every time.
- Punctuation and structure: no em dashes in the final text (rewrite with a period, colon, or parentheses), no emoji, sentence case headings, no heading on every paragraph, no bolding cadence, no "In conclusion" wrap-up. Close on a concrete fact.
- Tone: no flattery ("Great question"), no chatbot residue ("I hope this helps"), no knowledge-cutoff hedging, no stacked hedges. Hold the register the genre calls for and vary sentence length.
- Fact integrity: every instruction to be specific carries one boundary. Use only facts present in the user's input or in a verifiable source. Do not invent details to sound human. Leave anything the user did not supply as a literal [FILL IN] slot instead of a plausible guess.
- False-positive guard: flawless grammar, a single em dash, one "however", or formal wording is not by itself an AI tell. Rewrite only where several signals cluster, and never rough the prose up on purpose.

## Final self-audit

Draft the deliverable in full, then interrogate the draft on two counts. Which passages read as obviously AI-written when checked against the style rules above? Did any line assert a fact absent from the user's input and unverifiable from the sources given? Rewrite what fails and submit only the corrected version. The audit itself never appears in your output.

## Self-verification

1. Confirm that the deliverable is an RFP, not an event plan, marketing brief, or agency proposal.
2. Confirm that the subject remains selection of an event agency for a local festival throughout the document.
3. Check that every supplied fact—RFP, event agency, and local festival—is represented accurately without expansion.
4. Check specifically that no festival name, location, date, attendance figure, budget, or issuing organization was added beyond the input.
5. Check that every unconfirmed item, including the evaluation weights and procurement schedule, remains a clearly labelled slot.
6. Check that no slot for the festival scope of work was filled arbitrarily.
7. Check that FAR applicability is asked rather than assumed.
8. If federal procurement is indicated, check for slots for the procurement vehicle, set-aside status, SAM.gov registration, and NAICS code.
9. If state or local procurement is indicated, check that the governing authority is marked [VERIFY] rather than treated as FAR-governed.
10. Check that the evaluation criteria table contains no invented weights and distinguishes confirmed requirements from missing information.
11. Check that the schedule is a table and contains no invented dates, times, or submission methods.
12. Check that the documents-to-submit section does not impose unsupported certifications, insurance, licensing, or legal obligations.
13. Check that the output does not drift into drafting a contract, guarantee, festival program, or agency marketing copy.
14. Count these checks: there are fourteen. Run all fourteen before delivering the RFP.