Begin with the problem you are solving, not a list of screens. Which people will use the system, livewire or react with what frequency, and what happens today? An estimator who knows what you are trying to achieve will suggest a simpler way to reach it; a team that receives only a list of screens will price the list as written.
Set out the scope as concrete flows: what the user does and what the system does in house vs outsourcing software development response. Just as important, state explicitly what you are not building. An explicit list of exclusions removes more disagreement later than any other single page. Also mark which parts are firm and which are still open — honest teams price those differently, and hiding it only hurts you.
List the constraints. These include the platforms and services involved, the data you already hold and its condition, compliance requirements, user volumes, which devices matter and infrastructure that is already decided. Where a date is genuinely fixed, say why: a team will often rearrange the plan to protect it, but only if they know it exists.
Define what done means for ai software development company each item. Clear acceptance criteria do not need formal language: a short paragraph setting out what a user should be able to do is sufficient. This one section reduces the review at the end considerably and eliminates the usual argument at handover.
One last thing, ask for a specific format. Ask for a task-level breakdown, a written list of assumptions, the main risks and an optimistic and a pessimistic figure. Treat a wide range as useful information rather than evasion: it tells you where your description is thin. Then tighten that section and ask again — the revised figure is much more reliable.