dennisthiessenandClaude Opus 5
34299bce54
Second-pass review of this session's work by another agent. It corrected several
real mistakes of mine and finished F06 gaps I had left open. Reviewed, verified
and committed as-is.
THE MISS THAT MATTERS
`job_scout/state/applications.json` — the authoritative application registry
introduced by F02 — was never actually tracked. `job_scout/state/*` in
.gitignore silently excluded it, so my checkpoint commit afdef7e claimed to add
it and did not. Only `application_cohort.json`, the GENERATED projection, was
version-controlled; the source of truth and the migration history backup were
not. .gitignore now carries explicit negations for both.
MY ERRORS, CORRECTED
- "kastellaun" was in CH_LOCATION_KEYWORDS. Kastellaun is in Rhineland-Palatinate.
I took it from a Bundeswehr reserve listing and filed it under Switzerland -
precisely the class of bug F12 existed to fix.
- The F12 fix only widened the keyword list; SmartRecruiters still discarded the
structured country, which was the concrete case the review named
(city=Baar, country=CH). The adapter now preserves it, and a COUNTRY_NAMES
mapping gives country precedence over a bare town name.
- F15 was applied to Taleo and Prospective only. Greenhouse still wrote
`updated_at` into `posted`; it now uses `published_at` and carries provenance.
- My negation guard `\b(no|not|...)\b[^.;]{0,60}$` was too loose - an unrelated
"not" within 60 characters could mask a real claim. Tightened to require the
negation to govern the term.
- F18's retirement of the macro-count rule missed "Four to six compact skills
lines" in the workflow; removed now.
F06 GAPS I LEFT OPEN, NOW CLOSED
Date-format validation on education/employment periods (the 2035-99 case named
in the review), evidence-structure validation, referential integrity on evidence
source files, and the missing-identity KeyError.
F10 TAKEN FURTHER, AND RIGHTLY
I demoted the US-GPA fields to *_orientation_only. They are now removed
entirely, with grade_output_rule saying what to do instead: use the German grade
and scale, and if a recipient requires a US GPA, use THEIR method and record it.
Keeping a number derived by a non-recognised method invites its use.
Also: the Capgemini omit-preference now sits in experience_capgemini.md itself,
alongside the instruction not to fill or explain the intentional gap.
BIS BASEL - REJECTED 2026-09-11
jr100429, applied 2026-07-10, no interview, no reason given. Recorded in the
registry with a dated event and in the decision log; the "prep interview brief
when screening lands" next action is cleared. This also settles the 2026-09-04
observation that the req had vanished from the BIS board - it was a real
rejection, not just a closed posting.
VERIFICATION I RAN MYSELF BEFORE COMMITTING
49/49 tests. Validator PASS with 0 advisory warnings. Package manifest and
registry views current. All 12 F12 location cases still correct, including
Kastellaun now rejecting. The F05 counter-proof still catches all 9 violations.
SBB, NVIDIA, RUAG and Kdo Cy resumes still scan clean. Diffs are net-additive
across every reference file - the deletions are replacements, not losses.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Qej5SBvhcbGXHwLqNWiskM
44 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
44 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
<!-- Shared workflow version: 2026-09-11 -->
|
|
|
|
# Decide and Generate a Cover Letter
|
|
|
|
## Startup
|
|
|
|
1. Read `shared_ops.md`, `resume_builder/canonical/claims.json`, `cl_reference.md`, the session, real JD and finished resume.
|
|
2. Run the validator on the resume.
|
|
3. Confirm that the session has a completed resume and a recorded Cover Letter Decision.
|
|
|
|
## Decision Gate
|
|
|
|
If the session says NO, explain the recorded reason and stop unless the user explicitly asks to override it. If no decision exists, apply `cl_reference.md` before writing and record YES/NO.
|
|
|
|
Do not generate a letter merely because an upload field exists or because older workflow expected a three-page package.
|
|
|
|
## Plan
|
|
|
|
State in one sentence what the letter adds beyond the resume. Select at most two evidence themes. Verify any named company/product/programme hook from a current primary source and save its URL in the session.
|
|
|
|
If the only possible content repeats resume bullets or paraphrases company news, change the decision to NO and explain why.
|
|
|
|
## Generate
|
|
|
|
- Use the selected audience profile and employer-requested language.
|
|
- International Tech/industry: normally 200--300 words in two or three paragraphs.
|
|
- Swiss/DACH: one A4 page, appropriate formality.
|
|
- Denmark/Norway: normally one page with specific employer and country motivation; follow `cl_reference.md` when deciding whether to write one.
|
|
- Employer-specific: follow the requested format or portal limit.
|
|
- Lead with candidate-role connection.
|
|
- Add motivation, decision context or a genuine connection.
|
|
- Use only claims already present in both the canonical registry and resume.
|
|
- Never introduce a new tool, metric, customer, ownership claim or result.
|
|
|
|
## Verify
|
|
|
|
Run:
|
|
|
|
```powershell
|
|
python resume_builder/helpers/validate_resume_system.py --document <resume.tex> --document <cover_letter.tex>
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Compile and inspect the letter. Confirm it is readable, within the employer's limit, and materially different from the resume. Update the session and present the letter for approval. Point to `/critique` next.
|