Begin with the reason this education software development company should exist, not a list of screens. What kind of user will use it day to day, how many times a day, and how does livewire work is the job done today? An estimator who grasps the purpose often proposes an alternative that costs less; a team that receives only the requirements as given will price your assumptions along with the work.
Set out the scope as short scenarios: what the user does and what the system does in response. Every bit as useful, write down what you are not building. An explicit list of exclusions saves more friction later than any other single page. Indicate as well which items are decided and which are still under discussion — estimators price uncertainty, and concealing the open questions only hurts you.
Write down the hard constraints. These include systems you must integrate with, the data you already hold and its condition, regulatory obligations, user volumes, target platforms and infrastructure that is already decided. Where a date is genuinely fixed price contract software development, say why: a team will often rearrange the plan to meet it, provided they hear about it early.
Say what the word done means for each item. Acceptance criteria do not require special syntax: a short paragraph describing what must be true when the feature works will do. This single habit reduces the review at the end considerably and removes the most common source of disputes.
Finally, state what you want in the response. Request a breakdown by feature or module, the assumptions used, the main risks and a range rather than a single figure. Take a broad range as useful information rather than evasion: it usually points to the part of the brief that needs work. From there clarify that area and ask for a new estimate — the revised figure will be the one worth planning around.