Open with the reason this software should exist, not a feature list. What kind of user will use the system, how many times a day, and what does the process look like without it? An experienced team who knows what you are trying to achieve can propose a simpler way to reach it; someone handed only a feature list prices the list as written.
Set out the scope as short scenarios: who does what, next js vs laravel and what happens next. Equally important, list what is out of scope. A written out-of-scope list removes more friction during acceptance than any other single page. Mark too which items are decided and which may still change — the difference changes the price, and hiding it only hurts you.
Set out your constraints. The list covers systems you must integrate with, the data you have and where it lives, compliance requirements, traffic expectations, target platforms and infrastructure that is already decided. If there is a hard date, say what depends on it: a good team is usually able to cut the right scope to meet it, but not if the date is a secret.
Write down what completion means for each item. Acceptance criteria do not require special syntax: hire ngrx developers a short paragraph setting out what must be true when the feature works will do. This single habit reduces acceptance testing dramatically and removes most late-stage disagreement.
Finally, state what you want in the response. Request a task-level breakdown, outsource angular development the assumptions behind each number, whatever the team considers risky and a low number and hire senior node.js programmer a high number. Take a broad range as information, not evasion: it usually points to the part of the brief that needs work. At that point tighten that section and ask for a new estimate — the second estimate tends to be the one worth planning around.