Required elements
Identifies whether required narrative components, attachments, eligibility statements, budget narratives, and biosketches appear in the draft.
A compliance pass before the human review.
Compare a draft grant proposal against a funder solicitation, section by section. The tool flags missing and non-compliant items, with the requirement behind each finding.
Architecture and scope are grounded in a single 6-proposal preprint
(arXiv 2603.08281, not peer-reviewed). It checks completeness and
compliance only. It does not judge clarity, argument quality, or your odds.
Rules and limits
Flags page, word, format, budget, and eligibility requirements that appear missing or non-compliant.
Cited findings
Every finding includes the solicitation requirement behind the flag, so a reviewer can confirm the issue before revising.
Argument strength
The tool does not decide whether the case for funding is strong. A reviewer must read for logic, evidence, and fit.
Clarity
The underlying research found that clarity flaws were largely missed by all tested systems. Read the draft yourself.
Persuasiveness
The tool does not evaluate proposal quality, estimate likelihood of funding, or make a submission recommendation.