ChooseQAVendor

Proposal red-flag checker

Paste a proposal or tick what you saw; get flagged patterns and what to ask next.

What this does

A polished proposal can hide junior staffing, hourly billing without outcomes, lock-in through a proprietary framework or a missing exit. The pattern library holds 34 red flags drawn from public practice, each with a severity and the question to ask next.

Paste the proposal text to find known phrases, tick any pattern you observed, and download the flagged list with follow-up questions to send the vendor.

See a sample output

Proposal red flags: [Vendor]

ChooseQAVendor framework v1.0. 2 patterns flagged out of 34 in the library. Nothing you enter in the toolkit is sent anywhere.

Text matching finds phrases, not intent. Treat each flag as a question to ask, not a verdict.

SeverityPatternAsk next
highProprietary framework or toolIf we end the contract, can our own engineers run and change every test without a licence from you? Please show us the dependencies and licence terms.
highComplete coverage promisedCoverage of what, and how will you decide which risks are tested first and which are accepted? Please show the risk-based approach in writing.

Proprietary framework or tool (high)

The automation is built on the vendor's own framework, accelerator or platform that the buyer cannot run, maintain or licence without the vendor.

Matched phrases: "our proprietary framework"

Ask next: If we end the contract, can our own engineers run and change every test without a licence from you? Please show us the dependencies and licence terms.

Source: The Technology Code of Practice (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-technology-code-of-practice); The Digital, Data and Technology Playbook (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-digital-data-and-technology-playbook)

Complete coverage promised (high)

The proposal promises 100% test coverage or bug-free releases. Complete testing is not achievable; testing should be scoped by risk.

Matched phrases: "100% coverage"

Ask next: Coverage of what, and how will you decide which risks are tested first and which are accepted? Please show the risk-based approach in writing.

Source: ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119 series overview (https://committee.iso.org/sites/jtc1sc7/home/projects/flagship-standards/isoiecieee-29119-series.html)

Sample files:Sample Markdown 1.8 KBSample CSV 775 B

Check a proposal

Paste all or part of the proposal. Matching runs in your browser on known phrases.

Patterns you observed

Tick anything you saw in the proposal, the pitch or the meetings, even if the text does not say it in these words.

No patterns flagged yet

Proposal red flags: [Vendor]

ChooseQAVendor framework v1.0. 0 patterns flagged out of 34 in the library. Nothing you enter in the toolkit is sent anywhere.

Text matching finds phrases, not intent. Treat each flag as a question to ask, not a verdict.

No patterns flagged. Paste proposal text or tick patterns you observed.

Download your document:

Everything on this page runs in your browser. Nothing you type is sent to us or to anyone else, and nothing is stored after you close the tab.

Framework v1.0 · released 2026-09-24 · changelog

Questions buyers ask

Does a flag mean we should reject the vendor?
No. A flag is a question to ask. Some patterns have good explanations; the vendor's answer to the follow-up question is what you score.
How does the text matching work?
It looks for known phrases in the pasted text, in your browser. It cannot read intent, and a proposal can have a problem without using any of the phrases, so also tick the patterns you observed.
Where do the patterns come from?
From public procurement guidance, standards, regulator findings and public post-mortems of outsourcing, not from any vendor. Each pattern lists its source.
Is the proposal text stored?
No. The text stays in this browser tab and disappears when you close it.