Our own software · built and owned by Mind Links
Reading a bid pack before it reads you.
Forty documents and one deadline. The system finds what is missing, what expires before delivery, and where two pages contradict each other.
- Sector
- Contracting, trading, procurement
- Used by
- Whoever signs the bid, and whoever will regret it
- Type
- Document-set review
- First release
- One month
01 — The problem
Nobody reads all forty documents
A tender arrives as a folder: the scope, the conditions, the bill of quantities, the drawings, the annexes, the addenda that changed three of them. Somebody has nine days, and the honest position is that no single person reads it all with full attention.
So bids are submitted with a certificate that expires before delivery, a payment term that contradicts the one in the annexe, or a liability cap accepted because nobody reached clause forty-one.
The expensive mistake is not the bid you lose. It is the one you win on terms you did not read.
02 — The system
Four questions, asked of every pack
What is required and not attached?
The pack states its own checklist, usually across three sections. The system extracts it and marks off what is actually in the folder. Missing items are the single most common reason a compliant bid is disqualified.
What expires too soon?
Every certificate in the pack, read for its date and compared against the delivery period. A commercial registration valid today and lapsed in month four is a finding, not a document.
Where do two documents disagree?
Payment terms in the conditions against payment terms in the annexe. Quantities in the bill against quantities in the scope. A delivery date in the addendum that the covering letter has not caught up with.
What did we accept without noticing?
Liability caps, penalty clauses, retention percentages, warranty periods, and the governing-law line. Pulled out and listed on one screen, against the ranges you told us are normal for you.
Screenshots of Tadqiq, a working prototype we wrote for this page. It runs, every figure in it is invented, and we will click through it in a meeting.
Every finding points at a page
No finding is a summary. Each one opens the document at the paragraph it came from, because a reviewer who cannot verify a flag in five seconds will start ignoring the flags — and a tool that gets ignored is worse than no tool.
The output is not a decision. It is a two-page brief that lets the person who signs spend their nine days on the four things that matter instead of the forty documents.
03 — The Saudi part
The checklist is mostly the same six documents
Which is what makes this economical. A Saudi bid pack asks, nearly every time, for commercial registration, the ZATCA VAT certificate, GOSI, the Saudization certificate, insurance and a bank letter — the same set that gates contractor approval. Build the extractor once and it works on the next tender.
Two local specifics matter more than they look:
- The Nitaqat band is scored, not just checked. On public work, local content and Saudization affect evaluation. A bid that treats the certificate as a tick misses that the band itself is worth points.
- Bilingual packs contradict themselves. Arabic and English versions of the same conditions routinely differ, and one of them is stated to prevail. The system reads both and reports the differences, which is the finding nobody has time to look for.
Built with, and where it runs
- Oracle Cloud · Riyadh
- ZATCA VAT registry lookup
- Arabic and English OCR
- Etimad pack formats
- No document leaves your tenancy
The highlighted regions are live in the Kingdom today. Hosting is settled before the software is, because PDPL and your own client contracts settle it — not us.
04 — What we would build first
One month, on three packs you already lost
Not on a live tender. On three you have already submitted, where you know the outcome. It is the only honest way to find out whether the thing works.
In the first month
- Document checklist extraction and matching against the folder
- Every date in the pack, against the delivery period
- The commercial terms sheet on one screen
- Findings that open at the paragraph
Deliberately not yet
- Contradiction detection across documents
- Arabic and English comparison
- Pricing or bid strategy — not our business
- Anything that submits on your behalf
Dates and completeness are checkable, so trust is quick to earn. Contradictions need judgement and are worth having only after that.
Whose software this is
Ours. Designed, written and owned by Mind Links. No client behind it, no real bid pack in it.
Our engineers have built document-review systems of this kind for large institutions. Those systems, and the review processes inside them, belong to those institutions and none of it is reproduced here. What carries over is knowing that the finding has to open at the paragraph or the tool dies of distrust.