SBB Data Engineer (Job ID 103755): invited 2026-08-28 for Wednesday 9 September 2026, 08:30, 45 min on Teams. Per the posting's own process this is stage 2 of 4 - "Virtuelles Kennenlernen mit HR und Fuehrungskraft" - so HR together with Andri Wienandts, not a pure HR screen. 45 minutes shared between two people, which is the practical constraint the brief is built around. Two facts worth recording: - This is the FIRST conversion of the evidence-first cohort (6 applications, 2 rejections), and it came from a COLD submit. The channel plan called for phoning Wienandts before applying; that never happened, so the published warm contact went unused. - The resume never contained Snowflake, dbt or Power BI - the three literals an ATS keyword screen would have keyed on, and a risk the session had explicitly recorded 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; not enough to revise strategy on, but it is evidence against assuming honest omissions are fatal at the screen. Brief covers the four questions that must not go unasked (Anforderungs- niveau K band, design/architecture scope vs current Staff + Component Owner level, RAMSI's Java/Spring Boot/Angular share, Kidz Care rate), the substitution answers for each named-but-non-canonical tool, the swissTAMP/RIS/MUD context, and the thesis boundary - methods prototype, no operational data, no accuracy figures, PSO surveyed only. It also asks him to decide three things before the call rather than on camera: what he does if K lands at 130-150k, if architecture is set elsewhere, or if RAMSI turns out to be heavily Angular. Any one can be a no, and the level question is the same shape as the declined BKW. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JMcHCsTKWvVzqyLChF5ckk
Evidence-first resume kit
This repository turns verified career evidence into role-specific LaTeX resumes and, when useful, cover letters. It is designed to prevent a common failure mode of AI-assisted applications: making a document sound closer to the job description by silently overstating skills, scope, titles, or outcomes.
The workflow separates three questions that should never be confused:
- Evidence Fit: does the candidate actually meet the role, including hard gates?
- Document Quality: does the resume communicate the supported evidence clearly?
- Channel Strength: is the application cold, referred, or supported by a warm contact?
A polished resume cannot repair a failed qualification gate. A strong fit can still be hidden by a weak document. The system records both.
Source hierarchy
source documents
-> structured extractions
-> canonical claims registry
-> experience records and role bundles
-> session plan
-> generated resume / optional cover letter
resume_builder/canonical/claims.json is the highest-authority career source. Generated files under output/ are never treated as evidence. historical_outputs.json records whether an older package is safe to consult, must be revalidated, or must not be reused.
Default application strategy
- Target Staff/Senior Data Engineering first.
- Use ML Platform/MLOps, data platform, analytics, and semiconductor profiles only where direct evidence covers the actual requirements.
- Treat direct LLM engineering, formal model evaluation, Terraform-heavy SRE, and similar missing required experience as gates rather than keyword opportunities.
- Build application cohorts with roughly 70% core, 20% adjacent, and 10% deliberate stretch roles.
- Add a warm-channel action for core applications.
The default document is a two-page International Tech resume for US-tech/FAANG-style roles in Europe. A Swiss/DACH policy overlay is available for employers that expect local conventions. Cover letters are conditional, not automatic.
Workflow
Add evidence
- Put employment records, project material, papers, or notes under
knowledge_base/. - Run
setup-extractto create a source-grounded extraction. - Review it, then run
setup-build-kbto update canonical claims, experience files, bundles, and support data.
Apply to a role
- Run
make-resumewith the real JD. - Review the requirement table and fit gate before approving content generation.
- Generate and validate the LaTeX resume.
- Run
make-clonly when the session records a justifiedYESdecision. - Run
critiquefor separate Evidence Fit, Document Quality, and Channel Strength findings. - Run
edit-resumefor approved repairs.
The skills live in .agents/skills/. Each application receives a session file under output/<Role>/ that preserves the JD, fit decision, claim IDs, content plan, validation results, and application status.
Validation
Validate the knowledge system:
python resume_builder/helpers/validate_resume_system.py
Validate a generated document:
python resume_builder/helpers/validate_resume_system.py --document output/Role/resume.tex
Track the active 7/2/1 cohort:
python resume_builder/helpers/cohort_tracker.py summary
Character counts are available only as readability diagnostics. There are no fixed character bands, equal-length bullet rules, or page-fill quotas.
Output and prerequisites
The system writes .tex source only. Compile locally with a LaTeX distribution such as MiKTeX, TeX Live, or MacTeX. Generated resumes should also be checked through PDF rendering and text extraction before submission.
See DOCS.md for the architecture and policy reference.
License
MIT; see LICENSE.