13 bullets, validator PASS, compiles to exactly 2 pages, rendered PDF
inspected clean - no clipping, orphans, header wrapping or bad breaks.
Built at the user's direction with the working-model question still
open. That block stands: if the Zurich seat is 5-day onsite, this
package does not get submitted. Recorded in the session file rather than
quietly dropped.
Three Phase 2 decisions the user left open, taken and marked reversible.
VZ-1 is in - it is the only canonical evidence pairing C++ with a
distributed backend and this JD names both, hedged verb preserved. A
Personal Project section carries PP-1, labelled three separate ways and
with no performance figure of any kind; PP-2 appears as supporting
coursework, never as a credential. Generali is kept against the Phase 1
"omit" recommendation, because dropping it opened an unexplained
May 2015 to Jun 2017 employment gap that costs more than the weak bullet.
Cadence sits at 7/12 (58%), above the section 7a guide of ~50%, down
from 75% after reshaping two bullets. The rest are legitimate technology
enumerations - "Oracle, Kafka, Python and Teradata", "Elasticsearch,
Logstash, Kibana and Kafka". The checker added yesterday cannot tell a
rhetorical rule-of-three from a list of tools actually used, which is a
real limitation of the pattern rather than a defect in this document.
Cutting them would delete accurate ATS-relevant names, which section 7a
itself forbids. Left deliberately.
Also walked into the trap the SBB .tex header warns about: the first
draft named the excluded non-canonical tools in a comment explaining why
they were excluded, and the validator errored on all three because it
scans raw file text. Comment rewritten without naming them.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01MHtzyTKBcg6BWhD5qFegtK
