Checks an incoming request for quotation is complete — drawings, quantities, material, tolerances, finishing — and chases what is missing before it reaches an estimator.
An AI agent for request-for-quotation intake handles the completeness problem at the front of the quoting process: it confirms which drawings and revisions have been supplied, checks that quantities, material specification, tolerances, finishing and any required certification are present, chases the buyer for what is missing, and hands the estimator a complete package. Estimators are among the most constrained people in a manufacturing business, and a large share of their time goes on establishing what a request does not contain — then emailing about it, waiting, and picking the job up again three days later.
Completes the package before an estimator opens it.
Confirms which drawings and revisions have been supplied
Checks quantities, including whether prototype and production differ
Verifies material specification and any permitted alternatives
Checks tolerances, finishing and required certification are stated
Chases the buyer for the specific items that are missing
Hands the estimator a complete package with a checklist
Buyers award work partly on how quickly a quote comes back, and the delay is rarely the estimating itself — it is the three days spent waiting for a revision number or a heat treatment specification. Each round of that costs a day and some of the buyer's confidence, and it happens on a large share of requests because nothing checks completeness at the point of submission. There is a quality dimension too. Quotes produced from incomplete information carry assumptions, and assumptions surface later as price changes, which is the most reliable way to damage a new customer relationship in the first order.
A three-step flow before an estimator sees anything.
The agent confirms drawings and revisions, and tests the request against the information your estimating process actually needs.
It asks the buyer for the named missing items rather than resending a general list, which is what makes the second round fast.
The estimator receives a package with everything present and a checklist showing what was supplied and when.
A request for quotation missing heat treatment and a revision.
Scenario: a shop was quoting from whatever buyers sent and averaging four days to return a quote, most of it waiting. A request arrives with three drawings and an annual quantity. The agent checks it against the estimating requirements: two drawings carry revision letters and one does not, the material is specified but the heat treatment is not, and the finishing requirement is stated only as per drawing on a drawing that does not state it. It asks the buyer for exactly those three things in one message. Two come back within the hour and the third the next morning, with the buyer noting that the missing heat treatment was an oversight on their side. The estimator opens a complete package on day two rather than a partial one on day one, and the quote goes back before the point at which it usually would have.
Anybody whose quote turnaround is a competitive factor.
Quote speed wins work and is lost to missing information.
Most of your delay is waiting, not estimating.
Turnaround is measured and largely outside estimating's control.
Incomplete requests are the norm, not the exception.
Buyers compare responsiveness across suppliers directly.
Small per-request delays compound across the queue.
Checks completeness, chases the gap, hands over the package.
Receives requests and attachments and carries the chase.
Stores drawings and specifications against the request.
Holds the completeness checklist and request status.
Records the opportunity with the package attached.
Tells estimating when a package is complete and ready.
Reports which items are most often missing.
The gaps that delay every second quote.
Questions about getting a complete package to estimating.
An AI agent for RFQ intake checks completeness at the front of quoting: it confirms drawings and revisions, verifies quantities, material, tolerances, finishing and certification are present, chases the buyer for missing items, and hands the estimator a complete package.
No. Estimating involves process planning, machine selection and judgment about how a part will actually run, and none of that is a completeness check. Confusing the two would produce confident prices nobody on the floor agreed to.
That is a real answer and should be recorded rather than treated as a failure. Buyers frequently do not know a heat treatment requirement, and knowing that before quoting lets the estimator quote against a stated assumption rather than a hidden one.
From your own estimating checklist, which differs by process and by shop. Building that list is the setup work, and it usually reveals that different estimators have been requiring different things.
Less than a delayed quote does. A single specific message asking for three named items reads as competence; several rounds of vague queries over a week is what buyers actually dislike.
Which items are most often missing, which is usually a small set. That is fixable upstream — by changing what your request form asks for, or by telling regular buyers what your quotes need.
The waiting portion, which in most shops is the larger part. It has no effect on estimating capacity, so a shop whose estimators are genuinely saturated will see the queue rather than the wait become the constraint.
Checks an incoming request for quotation is complete — drawings, quantities, material, tolerances, finishing — and chases what is missing before it reaches an estimator.