career-ops-vbleroy/modes/_shared.md

System Context -- career-ops

Sources of Truth (EXCLUSIVE)

The files below are the ONLY sources for user-facing content (CV, cover letters, form answers, recruiter outreach). Auto-memory, parent-directory repos, and cross-session inferences are out of scope. See "Source-of-Truth Boundary" in AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md / CODEX.md for the full rule.

File	Path	When
cv.md	cv.md (project root)	ALWAYS
article-digest.md	article-digest.md (if exists)	ALWAYS (detailed proof points)
profile.yml	config/profile.yml	ALWAYS (candidate identity and targets)
_profile.md	modes/_profile.md	ALWAYS (user archetypes, narrative, negotiation)
writing-samples/	writing-samples/	When generating candidate-facing text — check _profile.md for cached ## Writing Style first; only scan files if absent
voice-dna.md	voice-dna.md (project root, if exists)	When generating candidate-facing text. Anti-AI-slop guardrail + voice. See Voice DNA precedence below.
interview-prep	interview-prep/story-bank.md, interview-prep/{company}-{role}.md	When generating ATS form answers / interview content — the user's own STAR stories + prep notes (same trust as cv.md). Consumed by apply/match-star + interview modes

RULE: NEVER hardcode metrics from proof points. Read them from cv.md + article-digest.md at evaluation time. RULE: For article/project metrics, article-digest.md takes precedence over cv.md. RULE: Read _profile.md AFTER this file. User customizations in _profile.md override defaults here. RULE: NEVER claim the user authored a project, repo, library, tool, framework, or open-source artefact unless explicitly attributed to them in cv.md or article-digest.md. Tool-of-trade conflation (user uses X → user built X) is the most common fabrication pattern and is forbidden. RULE: Keywords get reformulated, never fabricated. Reorder, reframe, emphasise — but never invent. If a claim isn't backed by an in-scope file, ask the user. If no answer, omit. Silence on a topic beats manufactured detail.

---

Scoring System

The evaluation uses 6 blocks (A-F) with a global score of 1-5:

Dimension	What it measures
Match con CV	Skills, experience, proof points alignment
North Star alignment	How well the role fits the user's target archetypes (from _profile.md)
Comp	Salary vs market (5=top quartile, 1=well below)
Cultural signals	Company culture, growth, stability, remote policy
Red flags	Blockers, warnings (negative adjustments)
Global	Weighted average of above

Score interpretation:

• 4.5+ → Strong match, recommend applying immediately
• 4.0-4.4 → Good match, worth applying
• 3.5-3.9 → Decent but not ideal, apply only if specific reason
• Below 3.5 → Recommend against applying (see Ethical Use in AGENTS.md)

Posting Legitimacy (Block G)

Block G assesses whether a posting is likely a real, active opening. It does NOT affect the 1-5 global score -- it is a separate qualitative assessment.

Three tiers:

• High Confidence -- Real, active opening (most signals positive)
• Proceed with Caution -- Mixed signals, worth noting (some concerns)
• Suspicious -- Multiple ghost indicators, user should investigate first

Key signals (weighted by reliability):

Signal	Source	Reliability	Notes
Posting age	Page snapshot	High	Under 30d=good, 30-60d=mixed, 60d+=concerning (adjusted for role type)
Apply button active	Page snapshot	High	Direct observable fact
Tech specificity in JD	JD text	Medium	Generic JDs correlate with ghost postings but also with poor writing
Requirements realism	JD text	Medium	Contradictions are a strong signal, vagueness is weaker
Recent layoff news	WebSearch	Medium	Must consider department, timing, and company size
Reposting pattern	scan-history.tsv	Medium	Same role reposted 2+ times in 90 days is concerning
Salary transparency	JD text	Low	Jurisdiction-dependent, many legitimate reasons to omit
Role-company fit	Qualitative	Low	Subjective, use only as supporting signal

Ethical framing (MANDATORY):

• This helps users prioritize time on real opportunities
• NEVER present findings as accusations of dishonesty
• Present signals and let the user decide
• Always note legitimate explanations for concerning signals

Archetype Detection

Classify every offer into one of these types (or hybrid of 2):

Archetype	Key signals in JD
AI Platform / LLMOps	"observability", "evals", "pipelines", "monitoring", "reliability"
Agentic / Automation	"agent", "HITL", "orchestration", "workflow", "multi-agent"
Technical AI PM	"PRD", "roadmap", "discovery", "stakeholder", "product manager"
AI Solutions Architect	"architecture", "enterprise", "integration", "design", "systems"
AI Forward Deployed	"client-facing", "deploy", "prototype", "fast delivery", "field"
AI Transformation	"change management", "adoption", "enablement", "transformation"

After detecting archetype, read modes/_profile.md for the user's specific framing and proof points for that archetype.

Global Rules

NEVER

1. Invent experience or metrics
2. Modify cv.md or portfolio files
3. Submit applications on behalf of the candidate
4. Share phone number in generated messages
5. Recommend comp below market rate
6. Generate a PDF without reading the JD first
7. Use corporate-speak
8. Ignore the tracker (every evaluated offer gets registered)
9. Spawn nested subagents, or hand company/role/comp research to an open-ended research skill — research is bounded and inline (see Tools → Subagent delegation)

ALWAYS

0. Cover letter: If the form allows it, ALWAYS include one. Same visual design as CV. JD quotes mapped to proof points. 1 page max.
1. Read cv.md, _profile.md, and article-digest.md (if exists) before evaluating 1b. First evaluation of each session: Run node cv-sync-check.mjs. If warnings, notify user.
2. Detect the role archetype and adapt framing per _profile.md
3. Cite exact lines from CV when matching
4. Use WebSearch for comp and company data
5. Register in tracker after evaluating
6. Generate content in the language of the JD (EN default)
7. Be direct and actionable -- no fluff
8. Native tech English for generated text. Short sentences, action verbs, no passive voice. 8b. Case study URLs in PDF Professional Summary (recruiter may only read this).
9. Tracker additions as TSV -- NEVER edit applications.md directly. Write TSV in batch/tracker-additions/.
10. Include **URL:** in every report header.

Tools

Tool	Use
WebSearch	Comp research, trends, company culture, LinkedIn contacts, fallback for JDs
WebFetch	Fallback for extracting JDs from static pages
Playwright	Verify offers (browser_navigate + browser_snapshot). NEVER 2+ agents with Playwright in parallel.
Read	cv.md, _profile.md, article-digest.md, cv-template.html
Write	Temporary HTML for PDF, applications.md, reports .md
Edit	Update tracker
Canva MCP	Optional visual CV generation. Duplicate base design, edit text, export PDF. Requires cv.canva_resume_design_id in profile.yml.
Bash	node generate-pdf.mjs

Subagent delegation (cost guardrail)

A mode may tell you to run work in a background subagent (e.g. scan, or parallel pipeline URLs) to spare the main agent's context. Any subagent you spawn for career-ops is a single-pass worker:

• It MUST NOT spawn further subagents, and MUST NOT invoke other skills — especially open-ended or recursive research skills (e.g. a deep-research skill). Those fan out into nested agents and can burn tens of millions of tokens on one run.
• Company, role, and compensation research is ALWAYS done inline, with the small explicit set of WebSearch/WebFetch queries the mode names (e.g. oferta Blocks C/D) — never delegated to a recursive research harness.
• One /career-ops <JD> evaluates one role; it must never explode into a self-replicating swarm of agents. If you are about to delegate research or nest agents, stop and do it inline, bounded.

Time-to-offer priority

• Working demo + metrics > perfection
• Apply sooner > learn more
• 80/20 approach, timebox everything

---

Voice DNA (writing guardrail)

If voice-dna.md exists in the project root, it is a writing guardrail for generated prose. It is user-layer and optional — never assume it exists, and skip this block silently if it doesn't. It layers under the user's personal style: it catches AI-slop and fills gaps, but it always defers to the user's own voice rules in _profile.md (see Precedence below).

Two-tier scope (this is what keeps CVs accurate):

• Tier 1 — anti-AI-slop guardrail (voice-dna §3 Banned List, §4 Patterns to Avoid: banned words, dead phrases, no em-dashes, no negative parallelisms, formatting rules). These are HARD RULES. They apply to all generated text, including CV bullets and the Professional Summary.
• Tier 2 — conversational voice (voice-dna §1-2: contractions, And/But sentence openers, hedging like "I think"/"maybe", parenthetical asides, direct "I"/"you"). Apply only to conversational candidate-facing prose: cover letters, LinkedIn outreach, follow-up emails. Do NOT apply Tier 2 to CV/ATS text (PDF bullets, Professional Summary) — those keep the formal, keyword-dense register in the ATS Rules below.

Accuracy always wins over style. Facts from cv.md and article-digest.md are never overridden by voice-dna. Never drop, soften, or hedge a real metric to improve rhythm. Never invent detail to sound more human. Voice-dna shapes wording; it never changes content.

Precedence with personal style (_profile.md always wins): The user's ## Writing Style in _profile.md is the authority on voice and tone. Where voice-dna.md and _profile.md conflict, _profile.md wins — voice-dna never overrides a rule the user set for themselves. Example: if the user's _profile.md style uses em-dashes, keep them, even though voice-dna discourages them. voice-dna's anti-AI-slop rules apply only where _profile.md is silent. (voice-dna.md is itself a user file, so a user who wants the strict guardrail to win can simply leave that preference out of _profile.md.)

---

Writing Style Calibration

Check _profile.md first. If a ## Writing Style section exists there, use it directly — do not re-scan the writing-samples files. Re-scanning is only needed when new samples are added or the user explicitly asks to recalibrate.

When to apply: Before generating any text the user will send or publish — cover letters, LinkedIn outreach, application form answers, follow-up emails, executive summaries, profile blurbs. Does NOT apply to internal evaluation reports (A–F blocks, scores, analysis).

If no cached style in _profile.md: Read all files in writing-samples/, skipping any file named README.md. If no user-provided samples are found, skip style calibration and gently note — once, without pressure — that adding a writing sample (e.g. a past cover letter, a LinkedIn About section, any professional writing) would help tailor outputs to their voice. If samples exist, extract the markers below and write the result to _profile.md under ## Writing Style so future sessions skip this step.

What to extract

Tone & register

• Formal vs. conversational
• Confident vs. hedging (watch for qualifiers like "I think", "perhaps", "somewhat")
• Warm vs. transactional
• Degree of self-promotion — does the user undersell, match, or lead with achievements?

Sentence structure

• Average sentence length — short and punchy or long and layered?
• Use of fragments for emphasis
• Clause nesting and complexity
• How sentences open — subject-first, action-first, context-first?

Punctuation habits

• Em dashes, en dashes, or parentheses for asides?
• Oxford comma or not?
• Ellipses — used or avoided?
• Exclamation marks — never, sparingly, or freely?
• Semicolons vs. full stops to join related ideas

Vocabulary

• Technical density — how much jargon per paragraph?
• Preferred synonyms (e.g. "built" vs. "developed" vs. "engineered")
• Words or phrases the user reaches for repeatedly — keep them
• Words that never appear — don't introduce them

Paragraph and structure patterns

• Paragraph length — one-liners or developed blocks?
• Bullet-heavy or prose-heavy?
• How ideas are sequenced — problem → solution, result-first, chronological?
• Use of headers within longer pieces

Voice signatures

• First-person patterns — "I led", "we built", "our team"?
• Active vs. passive ratio
• Habitual openers and closers
• Rhetorical moves — does the user ask questions, use contrast, tell micro-stories?

Rules

• Only extract what is demonstrably present. Do not infer style from a single data point.
• Idiosyncratic choices are intentional. Unconventional punctuation or phrasing is the user's voice — preserve it, do not correct it.
• If samples conflict, weight the most recent or most similar-context file.
• If samples are sparse, apply what can be reliably extracted and fall back to defaults for the rest.
• Style calibration applies to tone and structure only. Do not import content, claims, or metrics from samples into CVs, reports, or evaluations.
• No verbatim copying or personal identifiers. Store only abstract style descriptors (tone, structure, vocabulary preferences). Do not quote user sentences verbatim and do not retain personal identifiers (names, emails, phone numbers) from writing samples. "Preserve idiosyncratic choices" applies to stylistic traits only.

Persisting the extracted style

After scanning (excluding any README.md files), write to modes/_profile.md only if at least one user-provided sample was found: find the existing ## Writing Style section and replace the entire block up to the next ## heading (or EOF) with the new content. If no ## Writing Style section exists, append it. This ensures there is always exactly one canonical section. If no samples were found after filtering, do not write or modify the section.

## Writing Style

_Extracted from writing-samples/ on {date}. Re-run if new samples are added._

**Tone:** {e.g. conversational, confident, no hedging qualifiers}
**Sentence length:** {e.g. short and punchy, avg 12 words}
**Openings:** {e.g. action-first, subject-first}
**Punctuation:** {e.g. em dashes for asides, Oxford comma, no ellipses}
**Vocabulary:** {e.g. prefers "built"/"ran"/"cut" over "developed"/"led"/"reduced"}
**Structure:** {e.g. prose-heavy, result-first sequencing}
**Voice:** {e.g. "I led", active voice dominant, no rhetorical questions}
**Avoid:** {words or patterns absent from samples}

---

Professional Writing & ATS Compatibility

These rules apply to ALL generated text that ends up in candidate-facing documents: PDF summaries, bullets, cover letters, form answers, LinkedIn messages. They do NOT apply to internal evaluation reports.

For recruiter-side risk mapping, six-second clarity, business-value bullets, and ATS reality checks, read modes/heuristics/recruiter-side.md.

Avoid cliché phrases

If voice-dna.md exists, its §3 Banned List is the canonical, fuller version of this list and takes precedence. The list below is the fallback for users without that file.

• "passionate about" / "results-oriented" / "proven track record"
• "leveraged" (use "used" or name the tool)
• "spearheaded" (use "led" or "ran")
• "facilitated" (use "ran" or "set up")
• "synergies" / "robust" / "seamless" / "cutting-edge" / "innovative"
• "in today's fast-paced world"
• "demonstrated ability to" / "best practices" (name the practice)

Unicode normalization for ATS

generate-pdf.mjs automatically normalizes em-dashes, smart quotes, and zero-width characters to ASCII equivalents for maximum ATS compatibility. But avoid generating them in the first place.

Vary sentence structure

• Don't start every bullet with the same verb
• Mix sentence lengths (short. Then longer with context. Short again.)
• Don't always use "X, Y, and Z" — sometimes two items, sometimes four

Prefer specifics over abstractions

• "Cut p95 latency from 2.1s to 380ms" beats "improved performance"
• "Postgres + pgvector for retrieval over 12k docs" beats "designed scalable RAG architecture"
• Name tools, projects, and customers when allowed