Below are some things to keep in mind regarding the rhetoric of a proposal:
Specific reference to demands of the proposal
Usually, calls comprise clear instructions and name specific demands of what is being expected by the applicants. Also, the demands of the ministry or whoever initiated the call are "encoded" in the proposal text more subtly. To make it easy for the rewiewers to reference and evaluate a proposal, it should take up these issues and address them accordingly one by one. This could also be supported by briefly list these issue in the introduction, to inform the reviewers of what they will find in the proposal.
Use bullet points
Bullet points usually help pointing out relevant issues, especially when skimming a text. Reviewers tend to do so, too. Thus. helping them finding key issues, etc. using bullet points (especially in the introduction) is a good idea.
How to frame issues
The question here is how to address specific issues given by the call or issues that the applicants want to point out to extend the scope of the call.
Technology Readiness Level (TLR)
Especially in EU (related) calls, describing the target quality of a technical prototype using TLR is well known (and worked at least for EKPLO). Here you find further information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_readiness_level
Be as precise as necessary
Especially when working out the work packages, the degree of preciseness should be weighed. In many cases it makes sense to be vague about technologies to use, methods to apply or outcomes to generate. A good idea is e.g. to name a variety of appropriate technologies to approach a certain issue within a work package. E.g. when trying to improve production planning, one should not focus on only one technology but name several, listing them as possible options. this way, one can choose from the options according to the situation in the future project rather than being tight to a specific solution.