career-ops-vbleroy/modes/oferta.md

Mode: job — Full A-G Evaluation

When the candidate pastes a job (text or URL), ALWAYS deliver the 7 blocks (A-F evaluation + G legitimacy):

Liveness gate (URL inputs)

When the candidate pastes a URL (not JD text), confirm the posting is still live before doing any evaluation. A dead link must never reach Block A — a 404/expired page wastes a full A-G evaluation, report, and PDF on phantom content.

1. Get the page content: if you arrived here from auto-pipeline (its Step 0.5 already navigated and cleared the link), reuse that snapshot — do not navigate again. On a direct URL entry, navigate with Playwright (browser_navigate + browser_snapshot) and read the title, URL, and visible content.
2. Classify the posting:
   • active posting evidence: title/role + a real job description or an application/apply path
   • closed posting evidence: expired/closed/"no longer accepting applications", missing JD with only nav/footer, hard redirect to a generic careers/search page, or 404/410
3. If the posting appears closed, stop before Block A: tell the candidate the link is dead, and if the entry came from data/pipeline.md, mark it - [x] ~~Company | Role~~ — oferta nieaktywna. Do not generate an evaluation, report, or CV.
4. If the candidate pasted JD text (no URL), liveness cannot be verified — note that and proceed; there is no link to check.

Do not continue to Block A until this gate is resolved. The snapshot captured here is reused by Block G's freshness signals.

Bounded Research Budget

Company, compensation, and hiring-signal research must be a single-pass lookup, not an open-ended investigation. This mode is an evaluation workflow, not deep company research.

Hard limits for Blocks D and G combined:

• hard cap: 5 total WebSearch queries
• Prefer targeted queries that answer more than one question; stop early when enough evidence exists.
• Do not invoke deep-research, deep, or any other research skill.
• Do not spawn subagents or delegate research to another agent.
• Do not continue researching after the query cap is reached; summarize the evidence found and explicitly mark missing data as unavailable.

If deeper company research is useful, recommend running /career-ops deep separately after the evaluation.

Step 0 — Archetype Detection

Classify the job into one of the 6 archetypes (see _shared.md). If it is a hybrid, indicate the 2 closest ones. This determines:

• Which proof points to prioritize in block B
• How to rewrite the summary in block E
• Which STAR stories to prepare in block F

Block A — Role Summary

Table with:

• Archetype detected
• Domain (platform/agentic/LLMOps/ML/enterprise)
• Function (build/consult/manage/deploy)
• Seniority
• Remote (full/hybrid/onsite)
• Team size (if mentioned)
• TL;DR in 1 sentence

Geo-mismatch check

After filling the Remote row, cross-check the posting's structured location field (the location/remote designation shown on the posting page or in ATS metadata — not the Remote row you just wrote) against the JD body:

• Contradiction = the location field says remote, but the JD body states a binding attendance requirement: "hybrid", "X days per week/month" in office, "in-office", "onsite"/"on-site", mandatory office attendance, or a relocation requirement.
• Not a contradiction: negations ("no onsite requirement"), optional or occasional in-person events ("quarterly offsites", "optional co-working space"), or generic benefits boilerplate.
• If the JD body says nothing about location or attendance, emit no flag — silence is absence of signal, not agreement.
• If the input has no structured location field (pasted JD text only), skip this check.

On contradiction, add exactly one flag line at the top of Block B in the report, quoting the evidence verbatim (never paraphrase):

⚠️ **Geo-mismatch:** location field says remote, but JD body says "{verbatim JD line}"

The flag is an additive line only — Block B's existing content stays unchanged below it, and no flag line appears when there is no contradiction.

Block B — Match with CV

Read cv.md. Create a table with each JD requirement mapped to exact lines in the CV.

Adapted to the archetype:

• If FDE → prioritize delivery speed and client-facing proof points
• If SA → prioritize system design and integrations
• If PM → prioritize product discovery and metrics
• If LLMOps → prioritize evals, observability, pipelines
• If Agentic → prioritize multi-agent, HITL, orchestration
• If Transformation → prioritize change management, adoption, scaling

Gaps section with mitigation strategy for each. For each gap:

1. Is it a hard blocker or a nice-to-have?
2. Can the candidate demonstrate adjacent experience?
3. Is there a portfolio project that covers this gap?
4. Concrete mitigation plan (phrase for cover letter, quick project, etc.)

Block C — Level and Strategy

1. Level detected in the JD vs candidate's natural level for that archetype
2. "Sell senior without lying" plan: specific phrases adapted to the archetype, concrete achievements to highlight, how to position founder experience as an advantage
3. "If they downlevel me" plan: accept if compensation is fair, negotiate 6-month review, clear promotion criteria

Block D — Comp and Demand

Use the bounded research budget above for:

• Current salaries for the role (Glassdoor, Levels.fyi, Blind)
• Company's compensation reputation
• Demand trend for the role

Table with data and cited sources. If there is no data, state it instead of inventing.

Block E — Customization Plan

#	Section	Current status	Proposed change	Why
1	Summary	...	...	...
...	...	...	...	...

Top 5 changes to CV + Top 5 changes to LinkedIn to maximize match.

Block F — Interview Plan

6-10 STAR+R stories mapped to JD requirements (STAR + Reflection):

#	JD Requirement	STAR+R Story	S	T	A	R	Reflection

The Reflection column captures what was learned or what would be done differently. This signals seniority — junior candidates describe what happened, senior candidates extract lessons.

Story Bank: If interview-prep/story-bank.md exists, check if any of these stories are already there. If not, append new ones. Over time this builds a reusable bank of 5-10 master stories that can be adapted to any interview question.

Selected and framed according to the archetype:

• FDE → emphasize delivery speed and client-facing
• SA → emphasize architectural decisions
• PM → emphasize discovery and trade-offs
• LLMOps → emphasize metrics, evals, production hardening
• Agentic → emphasize orchestration, error handling, HITL
• Transformation → emphasize adoption, organizational change

Also include:

• 1 recommended case study (which of their projects to present and how)
• Red-flag questions and how to answer them (e.g., "why did you sell your company?", "do you have a team of reports?")

Block G — Posting Legitimacy

Analyze the job posting for signals that indicate whether this is a real, active opening. This helps the user prioritize their effort on opportunities most likely to result in a hiring process.

Ethical framing: Present observations, not accusations. Every signal has legitimate explanations. The user decides how to weigh them.

Signals to analyze (in order):

1. Posting Freshness (from the Playwright snapshot captured during the liveness gate, or in auto-pipeline Step 0; unavailable if only JD text was pasted):

• Date posted or "X days ago" -- extract from page
• Apply button state (active / closed / missing / redirects to generic page)
• If URL redirected to generic careers page, note it

2. Description Quality (from JD text):

• Does it name specific technologies, frameworks, tools?
• Does it mention team size, reporting structure, or org context?
• Are requirements realistic? (years of experience vs technology age)
• Is there a clear scope for the first 6-12 months?
• Is salary/compensation mentioned?
• What ratio of the JD is role-specific vs generic boilerplate?
• Any internal contradictions? (entry-level title + staff requirements, etc.)

3. Company Hiring Signals (use remaining queries from the bounded research budget, combine with Block D research):

• Search: "{company}" layoffs {year} -- note date, scale, departments
• Search: "{company}" hiring freeze {year} -- note any announcements
• If layoffs found: are they in the same department as this role?

4. Reposting Detection (from scan-history.tsv):

• Check if company + similar role title appeared before with a different URL
• Note how many times and over what period

5. Role Market Context (qualitative, no additional queries):

• Is this a common role that typically fills in 4-6 weeks?
• Does the role make sense for this company's business?
• Is the seniority level one that legitimately takes longer to fill?

Output format:

Assessment: One of three tiers:

• High Confidence -- Multiple signals suggest a real, active opening
• Proceed with Caution -- Mixed signals worth noting
• Suspicious -- Multiple ghost job indicators, investigate before investing time

Signals table: Each signal observed with its finding and weight (Positive / Neutral / Concerning).

Context Notes: Any caveats (niche role, government job, evergreen position, etc.) that explain potentially concerning signals.

Edge case handling:

• Government/academic postings: Longer timelines are standard. Adjust thresholds (60-90 days is normal).
• Evergreen/continuous hire postings: If the JD explicitly says "ongoing" or "rolling," note it as context -- this is not a ghost job, it is a pipeline role.
• Niche/executive roles: Staff+, VP, Director, or highly specialized roles legitimately stay open for months. Adjust age thresholds accordingly.
• Startup / pre-revenue: Early-stage companies may have vague JDs because the role is genuinely undefined. Weight description vagueness less heavily.
• No date available: If posting age cannot be determined and no other signals are concerning, default to "Proceed with Caution" with a note that limited data was available. NEVER default to "Suspicious" without evidence.
• Recruiter-sourced (no public posting): Freshness signals unavailable. Note that active recruiter contact is itself a positive legitimacy signal.

---

Cover Letter Draft (auto-generated after Block G)

After saving the report and recording in the tracker, append a cover letter draft to the report file under ## Cover Letter Draft. This is a starting point — not the final letter. The user completes it via /career-ops cover {slug}.

How to generate the draft:

1. Read cv.md — select 4 achievement bullets most relevant to the JD's top requirements (exact wording, real metrics only)
2. Read config/profile.yml — extract candidate name, current role, years of experience
3. Write a 2-sentence opening based on the role title and JD mission language
4. Write a 1-paragraph profile intro from the cv.md summary, adapted to the JD domain
5. Leave the "Problems / Why this company / Approach" section as a placeholder — this requires user input
6. Detect and flag any gaps (domain mismatch, language requirement, start date urgency) so the user sees them immediately

Draft format to append to the report:

## Cover Letter Draft

> Draft generated at evaluation time. Complete via `/career-ops cover {slug}` to fill in angles, confirm research, and generate the PDF.
> Gaps flagged below — address them during the cover flow.

---

**Opening** *(placeholder — refine with your "why this role" angle)*
{2-sentence opening based on JD role title and mission language}

**Profile introduction**
{1 paragraph from cv.md summary, adapted to JD domain and required competencies}

**Key achievements** *(selected from cv.md — exact wording preserved)*
- **{lead from cv.md},** {impact sentence with metric}.
- **{lead from cv.md},** {impact sentence with metric}.
- **{lead from cv.md},** {impact sentence with metric}.
- **{lead from cv.md},** {impact sentence with metric}.

**Problems I will solve** *(placeholder — requires company research + your input)*
> To be completed: what challenges does {company} face that you'd address? How would you approach them?

**Closing**
I am happy to discuss further at your convenience.

---

**Gaps flagged:**
{List any detected gaps — domain mismatch, language requirement, start date urgency, title mismatch. If none, write "None detected."}

**JD keywords to mirror** *(extracted for ATS + human read)*
{8-10 exact phrases from the JD}

---
*Run `/career-ops cover {slug}` to complete angles, confirm company research, and generate the PDF.*

Apply all language rules from _shared.md Professional Writing section to the draft content. No em dashes, no buzzwords, active voice, concrete claims only.

---

Post-evaluation

ALWAYS after generating blocks A-G:

1. Save report .md

Save full evaluation in reports/{###}-{company-slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md.

• {###} = next sequential number (3 digits, zero-padded). To allocate it atomically and prevent race conditions, you MUST run node reserve-report-num.mjs to claim the number (stdout returns {###}), write the report, and then run node reserve-report-num.mjs --release {###} to release the sentinel.
• {company-slug} = company name in lowercase, without spaces (use hyphens)
• {YYYY-MM-DD} = current date

Report format:

# Evaluation: {Company} — {Role}

**Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD}
**URL:**
**Archetype:** {detected}
**Score:** {X/5}
**Legitimacy:** {High Confidence | Proceed with Caution | Suspicious}
**PDF:** {path or pending}

---

## A) Role Summary
(full content of block A)

## B) Match with CV
(full content of block B)

## C) Level and Strategy
(full content of block C)

## D) Comp and Demand
(full content of block D)

## E) Customization Plan
(full content of block E)

## F) Interview Plan
(full content of block F)

## G) Posting Legitimacy
(full content of block G)

## H) Draft Application Answers
(only if score >= 4.5 — draft answers for the application form)

---

## Keywords extracted
(list of 15-20 keywords from the JD for ATS optimization)

2. Record in tracker

ALWAYS record in data/applications.md:

• Next sequential number
• Current date
• Company
• Role
• Score: match average (1-5)
• Status: Evaluated
• PDF: ❌ (or ✅ if auto-pipeline generated PDF)
• Report: root-relative link [001](reports/001-company-2026-01-01.md) (when merged via merge-tracker.mjs it is normalized to be relative to the tracker's own dir, e.g. ../reports/...; see #760)

Tracker format:

| # | Date | Company | Role | Score | Status | PDF | Report |