RFC feat(08): application-form fields as a third /apply artifact (#212)

* feat(08): add application-form fields as a third /apply artifact /apply produces a CV and a cover letter. Many applications need a third thing: free-text typed into a portal. Graduate programs, large-employer ATS systems and startup forms ask for self-introductions, structured project entries, motivation questions and pitches under a hard character limit - none of which either document covers, and all of which the interviewer reads alongside the CV. Governing rule: a form field selects from what is already true and arranges it for the question asked. It never introduces a new claim. All accuracy rules from 03 and 05 apply unchanged. Covers three field types (self-introduction, structured project entries, hard character limits), the output format (a plain .txt the candidate pastes from, with counts stated and internal NOTE TO SELF blocks marked as not-for-pasting), and a verification checklist. Two places where form fields are stricter than a CV, because both are easy to get wrong: - Project entries carry a name and a role, so they read as ownership of the whole project in a way a terse CV bullet does not. Contributory work has to be scoped inside the description. - Project dates are the dates of the project, not of the employment. Narrowing them is more accurate where the candidate can say when the project started - but never invent a boundary to improve the ratio. Registers the file in SKILL.md (framework_version 1.0.1 -> 1.1.0) and in the FRAMEWORK_FILES list in tools/check_upstream_updates.py, so it is covered by the update check like every other framework file. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fixup(08,apply): wire as optional /apply offer; align grounding to three-source union - apply.md Step 6: offer the third artifact after CV/cover letter are produced, mirroring the /outcome house pattern for optional capabilities (offer, act only on yes, default output unchanged). - 08-application-forms.md: ground claims against the framework's 01-candidate-profile.md + master CV + CLAUDE.md union (per #185) instead of only 01, in both the governing rule and the checklist. Per MadsLorentzen review on PR #212. Rebase onto merged #210 (the tenure-check reference this file cites) still pending — #210 hasn't landed on upstream/master yet. --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-17 08:36:25 +00:00 · 2026-07-26 16:05:42 +02:00
parent 1969d0ea70
commit 41ddc0c73c
4 changed files with 98 additions and 1 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+---
+framework_version: 1.0.0
+---
+
+# Application Form Fields
+
+`/apply` produces two artifacts: a CV and a cover letter. Many applications need a **third** — free-text fields typed directly into an application portal. Graduate programs, large-employer ATS systems and startup forms routinely ask for things neither document covers, under a character or word limit, in a box with no formatting.
+
+This file governs that third artifact. It is not a document you compile; it is text the candidate pastes.
+
+## When this applies
+
+Trigger it whenever a posting or portal asks for any of:
+
+- A self-introduction / personal statement / "tell us about yourself" paragraph
+- Structured project entries (project name, role, start and end date, description)
+- A short pitch under a hard character limit ("stand out in 140 characters", "why you, in one sentence")
+- Motivation questions ("why this company", "why this program")
+- Competency questions with a word cap ("describe a time you…", 200 words)
+
+## The rule that governs everything here
+
+**Every claim in a form field must already be defensible from the same sources the CV and cover letter are grounded against** — the union of `01-candidate-profile.md`, the master CV (`cv/main_example.tex`), and `CLAUDE.md`'s Candidate Profile section, with a claim grounded if ANY of the three supports it. The interviewer reads the form alongside the CV. A form field is not a place to introduce new claims, inflate scope, or fill space — it is a place to *select* from what is already true and arrange it for the question asked.
+
+All accuracy rules from `05-cv-templates.md` and `03-writing-style.md` apply unchanged.
+
+## Field type: self-introduction paragraph
+
+Usually 100–200 words, one paragraph, no formatting.
+
+**Structure that works:**
+1. Current status — what they are doing or completing now
+2. The single strongest piece of evidence, with its number and scale
+3. One line of trajectory: how they got here, if a pivot or specialisation is genuinely interesting
+4. What they want next, connected to this employer's actual work
+
+**Rules:**
+- **Lead with the strongest evidence, not chronology.** A career history told in order buries the best material when the strongest work is recent.
+- **Write one version per role type, not one for all applications.** The same history framed for a backend role and a data role are different paragraphs. Produce both, label them, and say which goes where.
+- **Tie it to this employer in the final sentence.** Generic self-introductions are the default and read as such.
+- **Count the words and state the count.** Portals truncate silently. Supply a trimmed variant and name which sentence to cut first.
+
+## Field type: structured project entries
+
+Typically **project name, role, start date, end date, description.**
+
+**Project name.** Give the project a descriptive name, not the employer's name — "Warehouse Inventory Forecasting Platform" is a project, "Acme Corp" is an employer. Where a client is more recognisable than the employer, name the client only if the relationship is truthful (placed on-site with, delivered to).
+
+**Role.** The candidate's role *on that project*, which may be narrower than their job title. Do not upgrade it.
+
+**Dates.** The dates they worked on **that project**, which are not automatically the employment dates. If a role spanned two years but the named project occupied the later part, saying so is both more accurate and avoids the low-output reading described in `05-cv-templates.md` ("Check tenure against visible output"). Only narrow the dates when the candidate can say when the project actually started — never invent a boundary to improve the ratio.
+
+**Description.** 100–150 words: what the system did and who used it, then the hardest technical problem and how it was solved, then the outcome with its number. Supply a **~60-word short version** as well; portals vary and the candidate should not have to improvise a cut.
+
+**Scope discipline is stricter here than on a CV.** A CV bullet can be terse enough to be ambiguous about ownership. A project entry with the candidate's name and role attached reads as ownership of the whole thing. Where they contributed rather than owned, say so inside the description.
+
+## Field type: hard character limits
+
+These reward **a specific situation over an adjective**. Most applicants submit adjectives — "passionate", "fast learner", "team player" — so a concrete situation stands out by contrast.
+
+**Method:**
+1. Pick the single most distinctive true thing: usually a number, an unusual combination of backgrounds, or a problem shape that maps onto the employer's own work.
+2. Draft 4–6 candidates at different angles.
+3. **Count characters programmatically. Do not estimate.** Over-limit text is truncated mid-word.
+4. Present all candidates with counts, recommend one, and say why.
+
+Prefer the version that **maps the candidate's problem onto the employer's problem**, where a truthful mapping exists. That is what "stand out" is actually asking for.
+
+## Output format
+
+Save to a plain `.txt` file the candidate can copy from, alongside their other application material for that employer. One file per employer, containing every field that employer asked for.
+
+Include:
+- A header naming the employer and the roles it covers
+- Each field, labelled, with word or character counts stated
+- Short variants where limits may be tighter than expected
+- **`NOTE TO SELF` blocks** for scope reminders and prepared answers to questions the content invites — clearly marked as *not for pasting into the form*
+- A dates quick-reference, so date fields stay consistent without re-deriving them
+
+## Verification before handing it over
+
+- [ ] Every factual claim traces to the union of `01-candidate-profile.md`, the master CV (`cv/main_example.tex`), and `CLAUDE.md`'s Candidate Profile section
+- [ ] No claim contradicts the CV or cover letter submitted for the same role
+- [ ] Ownership scoped correctly on contributory work
+- [ ] Word and character counts measured, not estimated
+- [ ] In-progress qualifications described as in progress
+- [ ] `NOTE TO SELF` blocks clearly marked as internal
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ description: >
  and preparing for interviews. Triggers on keywords like: job posting, job application, CV,
  cover letter, resume, interview prep, job fit, career, application, apply, ansøgning, stilling
 allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, WebFetch, WebSearch, Edit, Write, AskUserQuestion
-framework_version: 1.0.1
+framework_version: 1.1.0
 ---

 # Job Application Assistant
@@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ When the user provides a job posting (URL or text), follow this workflow:
 | `05-cv-templates.md` | LaTeX CV structure and tailoring rules |
 | `06-cover-letter-templates.md` | LaTeX cover letter structure and tailoring rules |
 | `07-interview-prep.md` | STAR examples, tough questions, roleplay guidelines |
+| `08-application-forms.md` | Portal free-text fields: self-introduction, project entries, character-limited pitches |

 ---