Open with the problem you are solving, not your preferred technology. Which people will use the system, how often, and how is the job done today? An estimator who knows what you are trying to achieve often proposes a cheaper route to it; someone handed only a feature list can only price the list as written.
Define what is included as user stories or scenarios: a walk through each important path. Equally important, write down what you are not building. A written out-of-scope list removes more argument during acceptance than the rest of the brief combined. Mark too which parts are firm and smm services for startups which are still open — the difference changes the price, and software development company in moscow hiding it helps nobody.
List the constraints. The list covers the platforms and application support services involved, the data you already hold and its condition, security and compliance rules, expected load, supported browsers or best node.js development company devices and infrastructure that is already decided. If there is a hard date, say what depends on it: a team can often cut the right scope to hit it, but not if the date is a secret.
Write down what done means for each item. Testable acceptance criteria need not use special syntax: a short list stating what a user should be able to do is sufficient. That one addition reduces the sign-off process dramatically and closes off most late-stage disagreement.
To close, ask for a specific format. Ask for a task-level breakdown, the assumptions used, the main risks and an optimistic and a pessimistic figure. Treat a wide range as useful information rather than evasion: it normally identifies exactly which requirement is unclear. Then clarify that area and request a revised number — the second estimate will be far closer to reality.
