For firms that bid a few times a year
Between bids, your answer library goes quietly out of date.
Put in the last two or three responses you submitted. FreshBid counts the answers that have drifted into two versions and the answers whose own evidence has aged out, and gives you one number and the worst three.
Free, no signup, and your documents never leave this browser tab.
- Drifted
- 4
- Aged out
- 5
- Blocks read
- 21
Worst finding
Environmental and social commitments
dated evidence 5 years old
Score your own library
Put in the last two or three responses you actually submitted. The tool reads them in this browser tab, compares every answer block against every other, and reads the dates out of the answers themselves. Nothing is uploaded and there is nothing to sign up for.
Response 1
Response 2
A team that bids weekly pays for curation once. A team that bids four times a year pays for it every time.
That asymmetry is the whole argument on this page, and it is not a claim about anyone's software. Decay is a function of elapsed time. A bid desk that opens the library every week notices a stale answer the week it goes stale and fixes it in passing. A firm that opens it in March and then in September comes back to six months of accumulated drift and pays the full re-grooming cost, in the same fortnight it is trying to write a bid.
Two answers, one question
The same answer, copied forward and edited once, now exists twice with different facts in it. Both were sent to a customer. Nothing in the file says which one is current.
Evidence with a date on it
Certifications, audits, headcounts and insurance figures all carry a year. The year does not update itself, and an answer that was true in 2022 reads exactly like one that is true today.
Nobody owns it
Keeping the library usable is continuous work that was never anybody's job description. It gets done in the week of a bid, by whoever is writing it, under the deadline.
What you get from the tool above
All of it in the same browser tab, in about a minute, with no account.
One number
The share of your answer blocks carrying at least one decay signal. It is a share and not an index, so there are no weights to argue with.
The two signals, counted separately
Drifted answers and aged-out evidence are different problems with different remedies, so they are never added together into one figure.
The worst three, with the text
For a drifted pair, both versions side by side so you can see where they disagree. For aged-out evidence, the block and the year it still claims.
Proof of what we received
A control on the results panel prints the exact object that reached our server, so the promise about your documents is checkable instead of asserted.
How it decides
Written out because a number handed to a stranger is worth exactly what they can check about it.
1. Your file is opened in this tab
A .docx is a zip holding an XML document. The browser opens it, reads the paragraphs, and that is the whole reader. Nothing is sent anywhere to be parsed, and PDF is refused outright rather than guessed at.
2. Answers are compared to each other
Every block is compared with every other block on overlapping runs of three words. Three words in the same order, rather than a bag of words, because two different answers about security share almost all of their vocabulary. Above 60% overlap the pair is flagged as drifted. Byte-identical blocks are counted apart, because two copies of the same words cannot disagree.
3. Dates are read out of the answers
Not out of the file's timestamp, which only records the last time somebody saved it. A year two or more years old inside the answer flags it. A founding year does not: "in business since 2009" is the same sentence next year, so it is excluded rather than counted as seventeen years of decay.
4. The score is the union of the two
The share of blocks carrying at least one of the two signals. A block that is both drifted and aged out is counted once. Blocks stating a figure with no date are reported and deliberately left out, because a score that rises on missing evidence can be pushed up by writing less.
Why we think this is worth building
The capability is occupied. Anchor AI, Inventive.ai and 1up all address the answer library at the capability level, sold through a sales conversation and aimed at mid-market and enterprise bid desks. We are not claiming to have found an empty room.
What we have not found is any of it framed as a scheduled renewal on the firm's own bidding calendar, sold self-serve, to a firm that bids between one and fifteen times a year. RFP.ai does sell self-serve to that volume at a published price, in one-time credit packs for drafting a single bid, which is a different job from maintaining a corpus between bids and can be bought alongside this.
One narrow finding is worth stating precisely because it is narrow. The horizontal tool this segment actually lives in is Google Workspace, and Workspace ships no native scheduled-staleness detection and no re-confirmation workflow. That is a fact about what the bundle includes. It is not a claim that nobody sells the capability, because the three vendors above do.
The paid idea
A renewal pass, on your bidding cadence
You set the cadence at onboarding to match how often you actually bid. On that cadence the product runs the freshness pass itself and sends a re-confirmation request to whoever wrote the answer, before the next bid opens rather than during it. It initiates the request; nobody has to remember to check.
$59/mo
Quarterly pass included, extra passes billable. Nothing here is buyable today.
What people actually said
These are not our customers and not testimonials. They are public reviews and posts about other companies' products, which is why they are worth reading: nobody said any of it to us.
"we are still working on standardizing and organizing our templates to fully realize this capability"
Our summary of a Reddit post, not a quotation
A proposal and RFP process owner at a mid-sized firm described the library accumulating near-duplicate and out-of-date entries until choosing an answer stopped being reliable, and keeping it usable being continuous work nobody was hired to do.
r/AIToolBench, 22 July 2026. Written in our words on purpose: we could not reproduce the sentence exactly, and a tidied paraphrase inside quotation marks reads as verbatim when it is not.
Our summary of a G2 review, not a quotation
A buyer of the same product noted how much backend setup and data feeding it needs, and that the owners never prioritised doing it.
G2, 30 June 2026. Same reason as the panel beside it.
A competitor's own marketing copy, labelled as such
getanchor.ai published, on 27 May 2026: "Most proposal teams are now spending more time maintaining the library than responding to bids".
That is a vendor selling a product, not a buyer describing their week, and we are not presenting it as one. It is here because a competitor choosing to lead with the maintenance burden is worth knowing about, and for no stronger reason than that.
Who is behind this
Dario Verghi, LeanAI Studio, Cesano Maderno, Italy. I build small software products one at a time and test each one in public before building it.
I have not run a bid desk and I am not going to pretend otherwise. What is on this page came from reading public reviews and posts by people who do, and the tool above is the smallest honest thing I could build out of what they described: it counts two specific defects and refuses to guess at anything else.
The way I work is that the free tool is finished first and the paid product is not started until enough people have used the free one to say it is worth building. That is what this page is doing right now. If nobody uses it, nothing gets built, and I would rather find that out this month.
You can reach me at dario@leanaistudio.com. Replies come from me.
Straight answers
- Can I buy this today?
- No. The scoring tool above is finished, free and yours to use as often as you like. The quarterly renewal pass does not exist yet. If it gets built it will be $59 a month, and the form below is how you tell us it should.
- Where do my documents go?
- Nowhere. They are opened and scored inside this browser tab. What reaches our server is a summary of counts, years and similarity figures, plus short one-way hashes that cannot be turned back into text. No file name, no heading, no sentence of yours. The results panel has a control that prints the exact object we received, so you can check this rather than believe it.
- Why do you record anything at all?
- Because this page is a test, and the thing being tested is whether anyone completes the score. If we recorded nothing we would have no way to tell nobody used it from nobody being able to. Adding ?qa=1 to the URL marks a run as ours so our own checks never count.
- Does this tell me my answers are wrong?
- No, and it deliberately cannot. It does not read your answers for quality and it makes no judgement about how they are written. It counts two structural things: the same answer existing in two versions, and an answer carrying evidence with an old date on it. Whether either matters is your call and needs a person who knows the bid.
- What does it not catch?
- An answer that is out of date and says nothing about when it was written. An answer that has silently become wrong because the world moved rather than because a date passed. Two answers that contradict each other in different words. Two one-line answers that have drifted apart, because a handful of words cannot be told from an unrelated sentence and lowering the bar to catch them would flag half your questionnaire. PDFs. A score of zero means those two signals did not fire, and nothing more.
- Is this an alternative to the tool we already use?
- Not today, and the tool above replaces nothing. Anchor AI, Inventive.ai and 1up all work on the answer library and are sold through a sales conversation to bid desks larger than this page is written for. RFP.ai sells credit packs self-serve at a published price for drafting a single bid. If the renewal pass gets built it is a maintenance subscription and would sit alongside any of them rather than replace one.
- Will I be added to a mailing list?
- Only if you fill in the form below yourself. Running the score adds you to nothing, because running the score does not tell us who you are.