# claude-resume-kit — Project Instructions

> This file is auto-loaded by Claude Code. It provides project-wide rules for all skills.

---

## File Map

```
.claude/skills/
├── setup-extract/SKILL.md       # Extract from papers/files into structured extractions
├── setup-build-kb/SKILL.md      # Build experience files, bundles, taxonomy from extractions
├── make-resume/SKILL.md         # Phase 0-2: JD research → bullet plan → resume/CV generation
├── make-cl/SKILL.md             # Cover letter generation from session file
├── edit-resume/SKILL.md         # Edit resume/CV from critique or user feedback
└── critique/SKILL.md            # 8-dimension critique of full package

resume_builder/
├── canonical/
│   ├── claims.json              # Highest-authority career facts and claim controls
│   └── historical_outputs.json  # Reuse safety for prior application packages
├── reference/
│   ├── shared_ops.md            # Session startup, derivation, workflow — ALL skills
│   ├── resume_reference.md      # Resume/CV rules — /make-resume, /edit-resume
│   ├── cl_reference.md          # CL rules — /make-cl, /edit-resume (CL edits)
│   ├── critical_rules.md        # Compact re-read — /make-resume Phase 2
│   ├── session_file_template.md # Session file format
│   ├── critique_framework.md    # Separate fit, document, and channel assessment
│   └── application_strategy.md  # Targeting and cohort strategy
├── templates/                   # LaTeX .cls + .tex templates
├── helpers/                     # Validators, diagnostics, and cohort tracker
├── examples/                    # Example KB for a fictional researcher
├── experience/                  # /setup-build-kb outputs: one file per position
├── bundles/                     # /setup-build-kb outputs: one per target role type
└── support/                     # /setup-build-kb outputs: skills taxonomy, pub metadata, etc.

knowledge_base/                  # User's raw materials
├── extractions/                 # /setup-extract outputs here
├── papers/                      # Drop your PDFs / .tex source here
└── notes/                       # Any other reference material

config.md                        # User configuration (email, provenance, role types)
```

---

## Your Role

You are simultaneously:
1. **Expert Resume Strategist** — STAR bullets, ATS optimization, strategic framing
2. **Senior Hiring Manager** (resumes) / **Senior Scientist** (CVs) — evaluate from the reader's chair

You write as the strategist but critique as the reader.

**Hard rules:**
- Output .tex files ONLY. User compiles locally.
- Read `config.md` for email, provenance flags, and output preferences.
- **Accuracy > Relevance > Impact > ATS > Brevity**

## Evidence-First Workflow

- `resume_builder/canonical/claims.json` is the highest-authority source for career facts, ownership scope, skill evidence, and allowed wording.
- Files under `output/` are generated artifacts, never evidence sources. Check `resume_builder/canonical/historical_outputs.json` before reusing any historical package.
- Verify the JD and assess hard gates before writing. Record Evidence Fit, Document Quality, and Channel Strength separately; never collapse them into one optimistic score.
- Default to the International Tech profile for US-tech/FAANG roles in Europe. Use the Swiss/DACH profile only when the audience calls for it.
- Natural bullet length and relevance govern selection. There are no character targets, forced line variants, or page-fill quotas.
- A cover letter is conditional. Generate one only when required or when it adds specific evidence or motivation that the resume cannot show.
- Run `resume_builder/helpers/validate_resume_system.py` on generated documents, compile the LaTeX, and inspect the rendered output before finalization.

---

## User Focus Directives

- **"Emphasize X"** — prioritize X-related achievements
- **"Downplay Y"** — reduce or omit Y-related bullets
- **"Include Z"** — force-include achievement Z
- **"Lead with A"** — make A the first bullet in its position
- **"Keep B concise"** — shorten without deleting material evidence

If no directives, use bundle's Priority Matrix defaults.

---

## Anti-Fabrication Rules

**CRITICAL: These rules override everything else.**

### Accuracy Priority
**Accuracy > Relevance > Impact > ATS > Brevity**

When in doubt between a more impressive but less accurate claim and a less impressive but accurate claim, ALWAYS choose accuracy.

### Provenance Discipline
- Read `config.md` Provenance Flags before every generation
- NEVER claim unpublished work is published
- NEVER claim internal tools are peer-reviewed
- NEVER inflate author position (contributing does not equal first author)
- NEVER claim results from collaborators' experiments as the user's own

### Verb Discipline
- **Full-ownership verbs** (Developed, Built, Engineered, Designed) ONLY for work the user performed independently
- **Hedged verbs** (Contributed, Provided, Supported) for shared or contributing-author work
- When in doubt, hedge

### Scope Discipline (big-corp ownership — RECURRING ERROR, enforce hard)
Dennis works in large enterprises (Swisscom, Bosch, etc.). He does **not** solo-own company-wide platforms, migrations, or systems. Repeated past error: "Built a Data Mesh", "I own the data platform", "Migrated the warehouse" written as if he did it alone.
- **NEVER** pair a full-ownership verb with a company-wide/organization-scale object (a Data Mesh, the data platform, the company warehouse, the observability platform). That reads as a false solo claim.
- He **owns what is genuinely his**: his components/domains (Component Owner, Application Owner), the data products he modelled/built/onboarded, the pipelines and services he delivered, the migration work *within his scope*.
- **Fix pattern:** scope the object or hedge the verb.
  - ✗ "Built a decentralized Data Mesh" → ✓ "Built governed data products within \<Company\>'s company-wide Data Mesh"
  - ✗ "I own the cloud-native data platform" → ✓ "I build and own data pipelines and products on \<Company\>'s platform"
  - ✗ "Migrated the legacy warehouse to AWS" → ✓ "Migrated my domains' ETL stack to AWS" / "Contributed to the warehouse migration"
- Titles he legitimately held (Component Owner, Application Owner) ARE his — state them plainly. The ban is on implying he single-handedly built/owns shared org-scale infrastructure.
- See `[[feedback_bigcorp_ownership_scope]]` in memory.

---

## Generation Rules

### Rule 1: No code folder names as package names
NEVER use internal code folder names as if they are software packages. Always describe the tool/method instead (e.g., "custom FEM solver" not "FEM_project/").

### Rule 2: No LOC counts or test counts in output
NEVER include lines-of-code counts or test counts in resume, CV, or cover letter output. Focus on what the tool does, its impact, and adoption.

### Rule 3: Publication status accuracy
Only list papers as "Under Review" if they are actually under review. Check `config.md` Provenance Flags.

### Rule 4: Publication format — use et al.
Use et al. format. Show authors up to and including the user's position, then "et al." When total authors <= 4, show all names.

### Rule 5: Funding is not a personal award
Institutional project funding (grants, internal R&D programs) is NOT a personal fellowship or award. Never list funding sources under Fellowships & Honors.

---

## LaTeX Scientific Notation (MANDATORY)

All templates load `mhchem` (`\usepackage[version=4]{mhchem}`). Use these conventions:

| Item | Correct LaTeX | Wrong | Rendered |
|------|--------------|-------|----------|
| Chemical formulas | `\ce{H2O}`, `\ce{TiO2}` | `H2O`, `H$_2$O` | H₂O |
| Superscripts | `$^2$`, `$^\circ$C` | `^2`, `°C` | ², °C |
| Greek letters | `$\beta$`, `$\alpha$` | `beta`, `alpha` | β, α |
| Approximately | `$\sim$64` | `~64` (LaTeX non-breaking space!) | ~64 |

**CRITICAL:** `~` in LaTeX is a non-breaking space, NOT a tilde. Use `$\sim$` for "approximately."

Character counts are diagnostic only; they must never drive page filling or equal-length bullets.

---

## Active Sessions

_Update this section when starting/finishing a JD._

| Session | Status | Next Command |
|---------|--------|-------------|
| RUAG C5I - **AI Engineer C5I**, **Thun** (application ID 18027) | **SUBMITTED 2026-08-27** via jobs.ruag.ch (portal only; email and post refused). Evidence Fit **74/100**, fit class **Stretch**, hard gate **FAIL** (R1 and R2, the two title-defining responsibilities, are Adjacent not Direct), Document Quality **93/100** after a full critique-and-fix round (85 pre-edit), truth and provenance 24/25, **0 Tier 1 findings at Round 2**, channel **Weak/cold**. Submitted: German CV **2 pages, 13 bullets** + German motivation letter **1 page, 295 words**; both validators PASS, 0 boxes, text-order and visual QA clean, submission PDFs MD5-verified before sending. **Cohort evidence-first-2026-01 is now 6/10 and the sole Stretch slot is CONSUMED (Core 3/7, Adjacent 2/2, Stretch 1/1)** - any further application must clear Core or Adjacent on its own merits. Positioning is his canonical title **Staff Data, Analytics & AI Engineer**, carried by `BS-1` production ML-inference integration, `BS-6` Linux/Ansible, `SW-3`/`SW-7`/`SW-2` current Kubernetes and data-product work, `PP-3` current self-hosted Linux and hardening, `SW-5` DevSecOps tied to C5I's stated operating model, and the canonical `BW-1` officer career. The letter **names the AI-platform gap in one sentence** and pivots to the operations/platform side. **Honest gaps that travel with it:** no AI/LLM platform built or operated, no compute/GPU cluster, no RAG/retrieval implementation, no formal LLM evaluation; ML/AI-framework depth is certification-context only. **Compensation, PSP/project eligibility and role level were NEVER resolved before sending, so all three are now live screening topics rather than pre-cleared ones.** ⚠ **Marco Heinzen's published direct line (+41 79 568 14 96) was never used** - this went in as a pure cold submit, the sixth consecutive one. **If rejected, that is NOT a signal to drop RUAG:** five other RUAG C5I reqs sit in the scout log, and **Senior DevOps Engineer C5I** and **Data Lakehouse / Senior Data Platform Engineer** are both already shortlisted and are **materially better fits than this one**, sitting on the lane where his evidence is Direct rather than Adjacent. | Await response. Optional but still worthwhile: call **Marco Heinzen** about technical scope and level, and **Frank Haugwitz** about compensation and PSP/project eligibility. Do not react to a single outcome with positioning changes (`application_strategy.md` §38/§74). |
| Schweizer Armee - **Kommando Cyber (Kdo Cy)**, DevOps Engineer III (Data Platform), **Zimmerwald** (Ref JRQ$540-19848) | **SUBMITTED 2026-08-27.** Evidence Fit **79/Core**, hard gate **PASS**, Document Quality **92/100**, channel **Weak**. Submitted package: German 2-page CV with **15 bullets** and 1-page motivation letter with **300 body words**; validators PASS, 0 boxes, text order and visual QA clean. Canonical **BW-1** records the six-year Bundeswehr officer career and anchors the letter's military/public-service motivation. User explicitly accepted the critique's remaining BS-1 wording issue (*„ohne manuellen Eingriff“*) as good enough and submitted unchanged. Honest gaps remain physical datacenter work, GPGPU, ClickHouse and named Pull-GitOps practice. Cohort evidence-first-2026-01 is now **5/10, Core 3/7**. | Await response; optional post-submit call to Marcel Matthey-Doret about Lohnklasse, Engineer-III level and development path. |
| Citadel Securities — Platform Engineer, Research Platform Engineering, **Zürich** (also NY/Miami) | **SUBMITTED 2026-08-26.** Cohort slot: **Adjacent 2/2** (cohort now 4/10). ⚠️ **KEY FINDING — the application form's preferred-work-location selector offered NO Zurich**, despite the JD saying "Miami, Zurich or New York" and the site's own Zurich filter returning this req. Careers site is operated by **Citadel Enterprise Americas LLC**; the apply flow is likely US-entity, or the Zurich seat is closed while the posting stands. **This partly supersedes the working-model risk** — if no Zurich seat is reachable through that form, hybrid-vs-onsite is moot and the application may sit against a US req, a hard NO on relocation. **Rule for any future Citadel application: check the form's location selector BEFORE building a package** — the posting's stated locations and the site filter both proved unreliable. User applied with low expectation; cold channel, evergreen standing req. 2pp resume (13 bullets) + 1pp CL (270 words), both validator **PASS, 0 warnings**; JD term coverage 51%→68% after Tier 1 fixes. Critique **STALE by design** (86/100 pre-edit; user chose to submit as-is over re-critiquing; est. ~91 post-edit, never quote as a score). **Cohort entry and decision-log entry deliberately NOT written — no confirmed send date.** Commands ready in the session file. **The working-model question is still open and travels with the application:** Evidence Fit **71/100 (Adjacent, mid-band; revised down from 74)**, qualifications gate PASS but **a practical constraint is UNRESOLVED**, which `critique_framework.md` treats as a NO-GO trigger. **The JD is silent on hybrid vs onsite (0 grep matches), and Ken Griffin is on record that Citadel returned to the office 5 days a week and calls it his most important leadership decision.** If that holds for Zurich, it means ~2–2.5h daily commuting from Bern or relocating — breaking the Bern-based / 2–3 day hybrid bar. Only contrary evidence is a stale 2022 anonymous Fishbowl post about Operations. **Must be asked, not researched** — same class as the SBB K band. Practical constraints scored 5/5 in Phase 0 on an unexamined assumption; corrected to 2/5. **Zero Gaps among the 7 minimum quals**, and all five preferred technologies (Kafka, Kubernetes, Spark, Airflow, distributed DBs) are Direct — **the strongest raw stack alignment in the log**. Title-defining function **splits**: R2 (ingestion/transformation/storage/lifecycle of large datasets) is Direct and describes SW-1/SW-7 exactly; **R1 (design and build the research platform itself) is Adjacent** — the Aker BP authoring-vs-building shape again, and unwritable-around under Scope Discipline. **Classification caveat:** `application_strategy.md`'s "a defining responsibility is only Adjacent → Stretch" would strictly class this Stretch; recorded Adjacent per the Aker BP precedent. Both cohort slots free either way. Gaps: platform authoring at firm scale, no professional quant/finance (now partly mitigated by new **PP-1/PP-2**), SDKs (0 evidence), low-latency/HFT (0 evidence — thesis throughput figure is explicitly barred by `thesis_limits`). **Go is NOT a gap** — Q3 is disjunctive and Python satisfies it. **$175–350k in the posting is a US/NY pay-transparency disclosure, NOT the Zurich number — must be asked.** Channel **Weak/cold** — would be the 5th consecutive cold application, in an office visibly staffed from Google and ETH (platform research head Costas Bekas; Nicolai Meinshausen leads principal research). Cover letter: **YES** if it proceeds — the PP-1 domain story is the main differentiator and needs prose. | **Ask Citadel Securities recruiting whether the Zurich seat is hybrid or 5-day onsite BEFORE building the package.** If 5-day onsite → likely NO-GO on the Bern constraint. If hybrid 2–3 days → resume Phase 2 (plan is written and budget PASSes at 11–14 bullets; two open items: Vizrt VZ-1 C++/distributed bullet, and adding a Projects section for PP-1) |
| SBB - **Data Engineer (m/w/d)**, Asset Management Infrastrukturanlagen, **Bern** (Job ID 103755) | **INTERVIEW INVITED 2026-08-28 - 9. September 2026, 08:30, 45 Min, MS Teams.** Per the posting's own process this is **stage 2 of 4**, *"Virtuelles Kennenlernen mit HR und Fuehrungskraft"* - **HR together with Andri Wienandts**, not a pure HR screen. Brief written to `output/SBB_DataEngineer_AssetMgmt/interview_brief_sbb_2026-09-09.md`. **This is the FIRST interview of the evidence-first cohort** (6 applications, 2 rejections, 1 conversion) and it converted from a **COLD submit** - the channel plan called for phoning Wienandts first and that never happened. **The resume never contained Snowflake, dbt or Power BI**, the three literals an ATS keyword screen would have keyed on; the session had recorded that risk as "accepted, not solvable". It did not filter him out, so a human read the dossier and the honest-substitution framing survived first contact. **One data point, do not over-read it** - but it is evidence against assuming honest omissions are fatal at the screen. Submitted 2026-08-25: 2pp English resume, 13 bullets, no cover letter (SBB waives it), Evidence Fit **79/100 Core**, hard gate **PASS**, Document Quality **92/100**, channel **Weak/cold**. Best practical fit in the log - Bern-based, German-language, no relocation, EU citizen + B permit. **Four things unresolved before submitting and now live call topics:** (1) **Anforderungsniveau K** is a capped GAV band, figures not public, very likely below the 180k bar; (2) the seat reads **lateral or below** current Staff + Component Owner scope, the same shape as the declined BKW, and the JD's only architecture language is a personal skill not an ownership mandate; (3) **RAMSI** Java/Spring Boot/Angular is a whole responsibility line on a stack that is historical or absent - ask its share, do not oversell; (4) Kidz Care scales on gross household income, so far below 90% at this band. Named gaps to answer honestly: Snowflake, dbt, Argo Workflows, Helm, Power BI, Spring Boot, Angular - all non-canonical, all survivable only because the JD prefixes the stack with "z. B.". Thesis stays a **methods prototype**: no real operational data, no accuracy figures, PSO surveyed only, throughput figure barred. | **Prep before 9.9.:** decide in advance what he does if K lands at 130-150k, if architecture is set elsewhere, or if RAMSI is heavily Angular - any one can be a no, and it is better decided before the call than improvised on camera. |
| AWS (AWS EMEA SARL, Switzerland Branch) — Senior Forward Deployed Engineer, Zürich (job 10504263) | **CLOSED — NO-GO 2026-08-18** at the Phase 0 gate. Evidence Fit **69/100** (Adjacent). Minimum-qual gate passed (all 4 Basic Quals Direct) but the *title-defining* capability — customer embedding — is a Gap that `claims.json` globally forbids claiming, and R2 multi-agent/retrieval is a second Gap. User declined: **69 is below the fit bar worth spending a package on.** Consistent with revealed behaviour — every application actually submitted scored **77.5–89**; nothing below 75 has ever been sent. **No cohort slot consumed (Adjacent stays 1/2).** Phase 0 analysis retained in the session file for reuse if a better-fitting AWS req appears. | Done — no package built |
| Google — Forward Deployed Engineer III, Google Cloud GTM (French, German), Zürich (req 78350205438567110) | **CLOSED — NOT PROCEEDING 2026-08-18.** Phase 0 was done (Evidence Fit 67/100, hard gate PASS) but user declined to proceed after **two Google rejections** (Merchant Data Science, Business Home): the bar is now that a Google req must fit *very* well to be worth a third attempt, and this one was Adjacent with an agent-orchestration Gap. **Frees the Adjacent cohort slot (back to 1/2).** Phase 1 never started. | Done — do not reopen without a materially stronger Google req |
| SDU Center for Energy Informatics, Odense DK — PhD, Theme 2 Predictive Maintenance & Asset Management of Smart Energy Networks (job 4159) | **CLOSED — NOT PROCEEDING 2026-08-18.** Enquiry email to Prof. Bo Nørregaard Jørgensen (sent 2026-08-02) went unanswered for 16 days; user dismissed the idea. Genuine thesis fit (vibration condition monitoring, RBR+ANN hybrid) but the blockers were never the documents — 2 letters of recommendation 13 years out of academia, and DKK 37,075/mo ≈ CHF 56k against a 180k bar. Deadline was 2026-08-20. | Done — no further action |
| Aker BP ASA — Data Product Architect, AI-ready Data Products (FINN 469067315) | **CLOSED — REJECTED 2026-08-27** (submitted 2026-07-30, ~28 days to disposition, no interview; the session file and cohort record record the submission as 2026-07-29 — a one-day inconsistency, never reconciled). Adjacent, **Evidence Fit 79/100**, Document Quality 93/100, hard gate PASS, **Channel Weak/cold** — the optional follow-up email to Per Olav Marthinsen was left unsent, so this went in as a pure cold submit. Stavanger/Oslo/Trondheim, English working language, no Norwegian and no clearance required, EEA work rights. 2pp resume + 1pp CL, both validator PASS, no Tier 1 truth findings — **a cold-channel no-interview rejection does not implicate document quality on its own** (same disposition class as Microsoft ISE and Google Business Home). Honest practitioner framing: builds governed data products *inside* Swisscom's Data Mesh; role *authored* an enterprise framework — real level stretch, never fabricated authorship. **Atlassian Compass closed the catalogue-tool gap** (74→79). Standing gaps if a similar req appears: framework authorship, no energy domain, AWS vs their Microsoft/Cognite stack, **zero verified metrics**. **Cohort slot stays consumed** (evidence-first-2026-01, Adjacent 1/2 — a rejection does not free a slot; cohort remains 4/10). **The Norway lane stays OPEN and selective** — NATO JWC Stavanger is still live, and Equinor/Telenor and other strong Norwegian employers remain in scope per the user's standing instruction. Never frame this lane as closed. | Done — cohort rejection recorded; do not react to this single outcome with positioning changes (`application_strategy.md` §38/§74) |
| Google - Software Engineer III, Business Home, Zurich (req 93922217108087494) | **CLOSED - NOT PROCEEDING 2026-07-28** (submitted 2026-07-27; Core, Evidence Fit 89/100, Document Quality 94/100; no interview). Rapid early-screen disposition; known risks were Mid-level versus current Staff scope, data/platform versus product-SWE positioning, preferred algorithms/accessibility gaps, and a cold channel. | Done - cohort rejection recorded; do not treat this outcome alone as a document-quality failure |
| Microsoft — Principal Forward Deployed Engineer, SWE (German Speaking), Zürich (req 200043897) | **SUBMITTED 2026-07-27** (84.2/100 Pass 2; finalized 2-page resume + 1-page cover letter). Strong native-German, Staff progression, production ownership and enterprise-data-readiness case; honest gaps remain in end-to-end LLM delivery, Azure AI and strategic-account FDE experience. | Done — await response |
| BIS Basel — Senior Data & Analytics Engineer, AI (jr100429, 3-yr term) | **SENT 2026-07-10** (80.5/100; deadline 2026-07-24; hybrid Basel, English-working intl org). Critique flags LLM-depth probe (integration/config vs. ownership) as the screening risk — prep honest answer before any call | Prep interview brief when screening lands |
| NATO JWC Stavanger — Staff Officer, AI Engineer (2030 Digitalisation, G15, 3-yr PLN) | **SENT 2026-07-10** (77.5/100; deadline 2026-08-09; final interviews 2nd half Oct 2026). Borderline screen: Azure-cert "or equivalent", LLM depth, no current clearance; German national + officer service are the legibility assets. Tax-free NOK 93,933/mo + allowances | Await screening; no action until contact |
| Microsoft — Senior SWE, Industry Solutions Engineering (ISE), Zürich (req 200040836) | **CLOSED — REJECTED 2026-08-11** (submitted 2026-07-03, 85.8/100 Pass 2; 2pp resume + 1pp CL; verbatim Eightfold JD; IC4 base CHF 146.2–245.9k; applied ~7 days after posting). No interview, ~39 days to disposition. Cold-channel application; does not implicate document quality on its own. The separate Microsoft **Principal FDE** req 200043897 is a different pipeline and remains open | Done — cohort rejection recorded |
| Kraken (Payward) — SRE, AI Agents (remote, CH-eligible) | **CLOSED — REJECTED 2026-06-17** (applied 2026-06-15 ~87.2/100, no interview). Honest gaps (NO Terraform/SRE-title/LangGraph) likely the filter; 4th Kraken req declined/rejected to date | Done |
| Google — Senior Data Engineer (Merchant Data Science), Zürich/MV | **CLOSED — NOT PROCEEDING 2026-07-24** (applied 2026-06-15, 85.5/100; passed Google Hiring Assessment 2026-06-20, no interview). Assessment pass remains recorded separately. The official 90-day wait applies only to reapplying for the same job; different Google roles remain eligible, subject to 3 applications per rolling 30 days. | Done — target a different strong-fit Google req |
| Snowflake — Sr SWE, Enterprise (Observe by Snowflake), Zürich | **CLOSED — NO RESPONSE 2026-08-25** (sent 2026-06-06, ~86/100; 2pp resume + 1pp CL; real Ashby JD; comp CHF 176–253k base; NO C++ gate). Closed by user decision at **80 days silent** — past the longest real disposition in the log (Equinor, 79 days). **No rejection was ever received: this is a presumed-dead call, not a rejection — do not count it in rejection statistics or treat it as a document-quality signal.** Cold channel. Pre-dates the evidence-first-2026-01 cohort (started 2026-07-27), so **no cohort slot freed**. Highest-scoring package in the log at ~86 and it drew no reply at all — the strongest single argument in the log for the channel problem over the document problem. **Unblocks the Snowflake Observe Metrics Platform req** (`db4f0492`), paused 2026-07-28 solely to avoid stacking a second cold application on the same org while this one was open | Done — if Snowflake is still wanted, the Metrics Platform req is now open to pursue, but route it through a recruiter rather than another cold submit |
| Isovalent (Cisco) Sr Data Engineer, Observability | **CLOSED — role pulled** (live Cisco scrape 2026-06-02: not on board; Recruitee link dead). Package finalized ~86/100, SHELVED for reuse | Done — retarget PDFs to next live data-eng req (QuantCo/Grafana/Confluent) |
| Google Zürich Sr SWE Infrastructure (Data Pipeline) | **CLOSED — DROPPED + DELETED 2026-06-02** (poor fit). Live JD = Core infra/systems SWE with **C++ as a MINIMUM qual**, off-thesis vs `user_positioning`. Output folder deleted (was built on a fabricated JD). | Done — do not reattempt this req |
| Kraken AI Infrastructure | **CLOSED — REJECTED** (applied, no interview) | Done |
| Infineon Doctoral | **CLOSED — withdrew** (got interview invite, declined: no relocation to Germany) | Done |
| Infineon AI Engineer | **CLOSED — not applied** (no relocation to Germany) | Done |
| Apple Data Engineer (ISE, Zurich) | **CLOSED — REJECTED** (no interview) | Done |
| Google FDE GenAI (Zurich) | PAUSED — GenAI evidence gap too large; redirecting to data-eng/MLOps roles | Likely abandon |
| Equinor — Manager / AI Architect, Agentic systems (Stavanger/Oslo/Rotvoll/Sandsli; req JR106747) | **CLOSED — REJECTED 2026-08-14** (submitted 2026-05-27, ~80/100; posting deadline 05.06.2026). No interview, **79 days** to disposition — the longest turnaround recorded. Cold channel. This was a **Manager** req, not a pure IC architect role, so level/scope stretch compounds the standing Norway per-role gates (norsk working-language, no NO clearance — **not** comp: the 180k bar is CH-only and does not apply to Norway). **Pre-dates the evidence-first-2026-01 cohort (started 2026-07-27) — does not free a cohort slot.** **The Norway lane stays OPEN but selective** — Equinor, Telenor and NATO JWC remain in the scout; the user has explicitly said he still wants to reach out for very good Norwegian roles, Equinor included, after this rejection. Never frame this lane as closed. | Done — cohort-external rejection recorded |
| QuantCo Cloud Engineer (Europe/Zürich) | **CLOSED — REJECTED** (applied 2026-06-01 ~82/100, no interview; rejection 2026-06-15) | Done |

---

## KB Corrections Log

_See `config.md` for user-specific corrections. Add verified errors here as you find them._

| Date | Correction | Files fixed |
|------|-----------|-------------|
| 2026-08-27 | **A German-language resume was being typeset with English hyphenation patterns, and had been for every German package built from this template.** The RUAG resume loaded `lmodern` but **never `babel`** - the cover letter did (`\usepackage[ngerman]{babel}`), the resume did not. The compiled PDF broke words as `Hal-bleiterfertigung`, `Tran-skription`, `automa-tisierte` and `Foun-dation`: all wrong in German, and exactly the kind of thing a native-German Swiss reader notices without being able to name. It survived an earlier full visual QA because nothing *looks* broken - the lines are justified and the page is clean. Adding `\usepackage[ngerman]{babel}` produced correct breaks (`Halb-leiterfertigung`, `automati-sierte`) and **also cleared an overfull box** introduced when the headline grew. ngerman still breaks `Transkription` after `Tran`, so `\hyphenation{Trans-krip-ti-on}` was added. **Rule: any German-language document must load `babel[ngerman]`, and hyphenation must be checked in the compiled PDF, not assumed from a clean box count.** `resume_template.tex` should be checked for the same omission. | RUAG resume (fixed); `resume_template.tex` (OPEN) |
| 2026-08-27 | **`IBM AI Engineering` was on resumes for months with no primary-source record, and `PyTorch` was under-recorded as a result.** The `/critique` flagged it as the only line a canonical preflight could not confirm: the other three certifications sit in `thiessen_certifications.md` with issuer, date and certificate number, while this one existed only in `bundle_ml_ai_engineer.md`. The user supplied the PDF (`C:\myCloud\Bewerbungsunterlagen\Zeugnisse\Zertifikate\cert_IBM_AI_Engineering.pdf`) and it was read directly: **IBM via Coursera, 4 Jun 2020**, no expiry, verify code `3ZBZFVAL6A34`, six courses, name on the certificate `Dennis Thiessen` (sz variant, as on ITIL and iSAQB). Recorded as entry **#8**. It also proves **PyTorch**, which `claims.json` had as `coursework-or-personal-unverified`; upgraded to `evidence: certification` with `output` unchanged at `certification-context-only`. The certificate is explicitly **non-credit** and confers no grade or degree - never present it as an academic qualification. **Same shape as the Ansible/Linux/Bosch-promotion gaps: the claim was true, the KB simply had no record of it.** | `thiessen_certifications.md` (entry 8); `claims.json` (PyTorch evidence) |
| 2026-08-27 | **`claims.json` had no Bosch promotion date, so a Swisscom-style title line was unwritable from the canonical file.** Asked to render Bosch like Swisscom ("Senior Data Engineer, Data Analysis (Beförderung xy)"), the canonical file offered only a combined `official_title` "Engineer / Senior Engineer, Data Analysis" with **no `title_history` and no date** - while SWISSCOM has a full `title_history`. The data existed one layer down: `experience_bosch.md` records it LinkedIn-confirmed as Data Engineer **Feb 2020 - Jan 2021** and **Senior** Data Engineer **Jan 2021 - Dez 2022**. Added to `claims.json` as `title_history`, with `display_title` set to the user's own preferred wording **"Senior Data Engineer, Data Analysis"** and `official_title` left untouched as the formal Zeugnis string. **Systemic lesson, the same shape as the Ansible/Linux gaps: `claims.json` is the declared highest authority but is not always the most complete file - when it is silent, check the `experience/` files before telling the user something is unwritable.** Edit note: the file uses compact inline JSON and CRLF; a `json.dumps(indent=2)` rewrite reformats all ~700 lines. Patch it as text. | `claims.json` (BOSCH title_history, display_title); RUAG resume |
| 2026-08-27 | **Vizrt shown as "DevOps Engineer" alone, on user instruction.** Canonical `official_title` is **"Test Automation Engineer"**; `display_title` is "Test Automation / DevOps Engineer". The user asked to drop "Test Automation" for the RUAG C5I package. Bullet content (CI/CD quality gates, Python backend for distributed transcoding) supports the DevOps framing and the user is the authority on his own role - but **this is the one title on that document that will not match a Zeugnis word-for-word**, so flag it rather than silently propagate it. Not written into `claims.json`: it is a per-package display choice, not a canonical correction. | RUAG resume (session file records the flag) |
| 2026-08-27 | **A finished package had no reviewable PDF, and the only PDF that existed was a stale pre-fix build.** The RUAG C5I resume was recorded as complete, but the previous session had compiled only into a scratch folder (`.tmp_ruag_ai_resume/`), so `output/RUAG_AI_Engineer_C5I/` held just the `.tex`. The user could not approve what he could not open. Worse, that scratch folder still contained a **pre-correction PDF that included Capgemini**, named with the deliverable's stem - one grab away from being submitted. The folder also held a stale 3-page text extraction, which is why the prior session's "both pages visually inspected" claim had been made against a different document than the final one. **Rule: compile the PDF into the application's own `output/` folder** (as the Kdo Cy package does), and never leave a superseded PDF beside a deliverable. "Output .tex only" means the .tex is the source of truth, **not** that the user should be handed nothing to look at. | RUAG output folder (PDF added, stale temp folder deleted); `config.md` (Output Rules) |
| 2026-08-27 | **Capgemini reappeared in a generated resume, breaking a standing omit preference.** The RUAG C5I draft carried `Capgemini Deutschland GmbH, Nov. 2014 - Mai 2015` as a compact chronology entry. The user does **not** want Capgemini on any document (six months only; short-stay impression in Germany). A corpus check found it was the **only** generated `.tex` under `output/` containing the name, so this was a one-off regression, not a systemic drift. **Root cause: the preference had no first-class home.** It lived in memory and in a parenthetical inside the unrelated "12+ years" entry below, so a fresh model reading `CLAUDE.md` and `config.md` alone would not see it - `config.md` does not mention Capgemini at all. Recorded here as its own rule: **Capgemini is omitted from every resume, CV and cover letter. The resulting Nov. 2014 - Mai 2015 gap is intentional and must never be "fixed".** The visible chronology starts at Generali, Mai 2015 - which is also what the "over ten years" profile wording is measured against. | RUAG resume (fixed); this log (rule recorded) |
| 2026-08-27 | **The English resume template asserts "12+ years of production software experience" and that does not hold against `claims.json`.** Canonical `employment` starts at **Capgemini 2014-11** → ~11 years 9 months as of Aug 2026; and Capgemini is omitted from documents by standing user preference, so the *visible* record on any generated resume starts **Generali 2015-05** → ~11 years 3 months. Either reading falls short of twelve. Inherited unexamined into the Kdo Cy draft's opening sentence and caught at final review; corrected there to **"über zehn Jahren"**, which is true under both readings. **`resume_builder/templates/resume_template.tex` still carries the 12+ claim and will re-infect the next package.** Possible innocent explanation: officer service after the 2013 M.Eng. (he is a Universität-der-Bundeswehr graduate) may be counted and is not in `employment` — **ask before editing the template**, and if it counts, record it in `claims.json` so the number has a source. Lesson: a number inherited from a template is still a claim and needs a canonical source like any other. | Kdo Cy resume (fixed); `resume_template.tex` (OPEN) |
| 2026-08-27 | **Linux administration was missing from `claims.json` entirely — the second infrastructure blind spot found the same day, and the more consequential one.** User-confirmed: at **Bosch (2020–2022) Linux servers carried everything** — ML platform hosts, Docker hosts, backend services, the Ansible control path — and he administered and automated them; he also **wrote Ansible extensions**, including a credential plugin pulling secrets from a password keystore with local caching to cut lookup volume (scalability/performance). Recorded as new claim **BS-6**. Separately, he has run a **self-hosted Debian server for ~10 years** — nginx, mail, Nextcloud, VPN, Docker services, Bitwarden — which he administers *and hardens*; recorded as **PP-3** with a PP-1-style forbidden list (never enterprise/production/multi-user, no uptime or scale figures, never employer work, never evidence of physical-datacenter experience). **Hardening evidence leans on the personal side — always say so.** **GitOps question resolved and the answer is NO:** playbooks were in Git but execution was **push-based from Jenkins/GitLab**, no reconciliation agent. The word stays `forbidden`; the substance is writable as *"versionskontrollierte Infrastrukturautomatisierung mit Ansible aus Git, ausgeführt über Jenkins-/GitLab-Pipelines"*. **Systemic lesson: the KB is data-engineering shaped and under-records infrastructure and operations work.** Two canonical gaps (Ansible, Linux) cost the Kdo Cy assessment ~15 points and produced an initial NO-GO that reflected the KB, not the candidate. Before scoring any DevOps/platform/SRE-flavoured JD, ask about ops evidence explicitly rather than trusting `claims.json` to be complete. | `claims.json` (skills Linux administration + GitOps note, new claims BS-6 and PP-3) |
| 2026-08-27 | **Ansible was missing from `claims.json` entirely — a real, currently-relevant skill that could not legitimately be listed.** It already appeared in `experience_bosch.md` BS-1 bullet variants ("Docker, Kubernetes, Ansible"), but the canonical file had **zero** mentions in either `skills` or any claim, so by the evidence-first rule it was unwritable. User confirmed 2026-08-27 that Ansible work at Bosch (2020–2022) was **intensive** and went beyond the BS-1 ML-inference orchestration into configuration management and infrastructure automation. Added as `production-historical`, `output: allowed`, and BS-1's scope now records it. **This is genuine IaC evidence** alongside CloudFormation and it materially improves any DevOps/platform JD — it does **not** license Terraform, which stays unverified. **`GitOps` added as a separate, explicitly `forbidden` skill pending clarification:** the user described the Ansible work as GitOps, but Ansible is configuration management while GitOps is narrower (declarative desired state in Git, reconciled by an agent such as Argo CD or Flux). Until it is established whether playbooks lived in Git and were applied from there, and whether a reconciliation agent was involved, the word must not appear in any document. The Kdo Cy JD names **"Pull-GitOps"** explicitly, so that is the one audience guaranteed to probe the distinction. | `claims.json` (skills Ansible + GitOps, BS-1 scope) |
| 2026-08-21 | **The data-engineer bundle carried the SW-1 scope violation it was supposed to prevent.** `bundle_data_engineer.md` §S5's cover-letter opening hook read "*while simultaneously leading the migration of our legacy stack to a cloud-native AWS architecture*" — a full-ownership verb on a company-scale object, directly contradicting `claims.json` SW-1 `forbidden` **and** point 2 of the narrative thread three lines below it. Live trap for every future data-eng cover letter. Rewritten to the scoped form plus an inline scope warning. **Check the other four bundles for the same pattern.** | `bundle_data_engineer.md` (§S5 hook + new warning) |
| 2026-07-27 | **SW-1 was not solo.** Swisscom AWS migration was written as "sole technical lead" / "Led migration of legacy stack." Dennis was primary engineer for **his own domains'** pipelines and a contributor to the wider programme. | `experience_swisscom.md` (role line + all 3 bullet variants + overclaiming warning), `config.md` |
| 2026-07-27 | **Security Champion is 2025/2026 only, and is a team role — not an award.** Source files claimed "3 consecutive years (2023/24–2025/26)." User has now corrected this twice. **Default is OMIT** unless the JD explicitly requires security/DevSecOps. | `experience_swisscom.md` SW-5, `achievement_reframing_guide.md`, `skills_taxonomy.md` (3 rows) |
| 2026-07-29 | **Atlassian Compass is the metadata/lineage platform for Swisscom data products** (user-supplied). Previously the KB named no catalogue/lineage product at all, which read as a hard gap against data-governance JDs. Practitioner use only — never claim admin, rollout or ownership. Does NOT license claiming Purview/Collibra/Alation. | `claims.json` (SW-7 scope + skills entry), `experience_swisscom.md` SW-7 |
| 2026-08-02 | **Master's thesis verified against the PDF.** Vibration-based condition monitoring of CNC machine tools; hybrid **rule-based reasoning + 7-10-3 ANN**; throughput/latency evaluation (~500 SPS pipeline vs 72.9 kSPS sensors). **PSO was surveyed but NOT implemented** — an earlier note in this session wrongly listed it as an applied method. No real operational data and no accuracy figures: it is a methods prototype, not a validated system. Also recorded: ECTS relative grade **B (top 35%)**, English-language transcripts exist. | `claims.json` EDU-MENG |
| 2026-08-26 | **Degree final grades were missing from the KB entirely.** A Citadel application form asked for GPA and neither degree's *Abschlussnote* was recorded anywhere in `claims.json` — only the M.Eng. **thesis** grade (1.0). The only lead was `knowledge_base/extractions/thiessen_cv_master_profile.md`, whose own provenance note says it is not authoritative and which already carries a known error (lists PSO as an applied thesis method, corrected 2026-08-02). User confirmed both grades directly: **M.Eng. 1.6, B.Eng. 2.4** (German scale, 1.0 best / 4.0 lowest pass). US 4.0 equivalents added via the modified Bavarian formula (`5.0 − G`): **3.4** and **2.6**. ECTS percentile **settled the same day**: B is formally the next 25% after the top 10%, i.e. the **10–35% band, so "top 35%" is the correct phrasing** — the record's original value was right and the briefly-considered "top 30%" was the error. **Never narrow B to a point estimate** (top 30%/25%); it is a band. New `grade_output_rule`: grades stay off the resume and cover letter by default; these fields exist for form questions and credential checks. | `claims.json` (EDU-MENG, EDU-BENG) |
| 2026-08-25 | **Trading-domain evidence was entirely missing from the KB.** `claims.json` had 0 hits for trading, finance or quant, so a genuine capability was unusable in any document. Added **PP-1** (self-built, self-hosted single-user investing/signal platform: US-equity price/fundamental/sentiment ingestion, LLM-assisted sentiment, long-only cross-sectional residual 12-1 momentum book with ATR stop/trail and max 15 names, scheduled scan/backtest pipelines, web dashboard + Telegram alerts) and **PP-2** (Udacity *AI for Trading* nanodegree), plus two `allowed-with-context` skills. Both carry hard `forbidden` lists: **no PnL/Sharpe/return/backtest figure may ever be quoted**, never call PP-1 distributed/production/multi-user, never imply professional quant or finance experience, never present the nanodegree as a quant credential. PP-1 is the one place full-ownership verbs are correct — it is genuinely solo, unlike the employer work governed by Scope Discipline. | `claims.json` (claims PP-1, PP-2; skills "quantitative/systematic trading concepts", "backtesting") |
| 2026-08-02 | **Bosch data types named.** Fab sensor/process data: defect-management records, wafer inspection images, PCM electrical parameters (user-confirmed). Previously the KB named no concrete sensor-data types for Bosch. | `claims.json` BS-2 |
| 2026-07-27 | **Bullet density.** Fixed 1L/2L/3L and character-band rules made bullets uniform and encouraged page filling. | Replaced globally with natural-length, evidence-led bullets; character counts are diagnostic only. |
| 2026-08-25 | **Cadence monoculture across every generated package.** Audit of all 18 packages in `output/` (368 bullets) found **45% used the same "X, Y and Z" triple**; the SBB package hit **85% — 11 of 13 bullets, every Swisscom and Bosch line** — plus two adjacent bullets both opening "Build and…". Not a truth defect: every bullet was accurate and the corpus is clean on AI vocabulary (0 cliché hits in 35 documents) and prose em-dashes (0.08/bullet). It is a *rhythm* tell — uniform three-beat cadence reads as machine-written. PDF metadata is clean (MiKTeX pdfTeX, empty Author/Title, no AI tokens in 69 PDFs, no generator-term leakage). | New `resume_reference.md` §7a + verification step 7; `critical_rules.md` rule 7a; `critique_framework.md` mechanics row now scores cadence (max 1 pt, style only) |