A tender document that lets vendors interpret the requirement however suits their product line will get bids that are impossible to compare fairly. A good security RFP removes that ambiguity.
The requirement section should describe the operational and risk requirement, not a product — “identification-grade coverage of all vehicle entry points” rather than “PTZ cameras at each gate”. This keeps the RFP technology-neutral and lets vendors propose the best-fit solution rather than the one they already sell.
A comparable RFP needs a fixed structure for responses: technical compliance against each requirement, a bill of materials, an implementation schedule, a support and maintenance offer, and a total cost of ownership over a stated period — not just capital cost.
Reference and warranty terms are often the weakest part of a self-written RFP. Specifying minimum response times, spare-parts availability and escalation paths up front avoids discovering the real service level only after a fault occurs.