/apply drafted two documents and a tracker row from the full posting, then
let the text die with the session. /outcome Step 3.2 tried to recover it by
re-fetching a `source` URL the spec itself expects to be dead, and a posting
pasted from an email or a PDF had no `source` to re-fetch at all.
Step 6b gains item 7: write the posting verbatim to
documents/applications/<company>_<role>/job_posting.md, never a re-fetch or a
reconstruction from memory. The folder is derived by citing /outcome Step 1.4
rather than restating the rule, so the two cannot drift. An existing file is
left alone and named in the report.
Step 0 and the /scrape path (job-application-assistant SKILL.md Step 1) now
retain the full posting text rather than a summary, so item 7 has something
verbatim to write.
Pinned by tests/test_apply_records_application.py.
* fix(workflow): define tracker status enum once in /outcome, normalise readers (#298)
The tracker CSV status column had no single authoritative definition.
Six command files restated it with inconsistent spellings, producing two
concrete bugs:
- /outcome Step 4 wrote
o response and offer declined (spaces).
/html-report normalised only the underscore forms, so those rows matched
no bucket and were silently dropped from the rejection-rate denominator.
- /gmail-sync Step 2 hardcoded the final-status set with space spellings,
so a row written with underscores was never recognised as final and the
sync kept chasing closed applications.
- /html-report included interview_only in its tracker bucket map; that
value belongs to the archive outcome.md Status: field, not the CSV
status column.
Fix: add a '## Tracker status vocabulary' block in /outcome (the only
CSV writer) defining the canonical underscore spellings once. Every
reader now references that block or explicitly lists both spelling forms
as read-tolerance for existing trackers. /outcome Step 4 writes
no_response and offer_declined. /html-report loses interview_only and
gains offer declined as a read-tolerance variant. /notion-sync Step 3
Status select options are aligned to the canonical spellings.
Pinned by tests/test_tracker_status_vocab.py (9 new cases following the
DraftedMeansDraftedToEveryReader CASES-table pattern). All 205 tests pass.
framework_version: 1.3.0 -> 1.3.1
* fix(workflow): address review findings on the tracker status enum (#298)
Follow-up to ca40df2, incorporating the maintainer and issue-author reviews.
Blockers fixed:
- CHANGELOG: the #298 entry had replaced the opening line of the #286 robots
entry, leaving its body dangling under the new fork heads-up. Restored the
deleted line and made the #298 entry self-contained above it (MadsLorentzen).
- /notion-sync Step 4 now normalises legacy space spellings to the canonical
underscore forms before setting the Status property. A raw push would
auto-create a separate Notion select option per unique string, splitting
closed applications across two filter buckets in an existing database
(MadsLorentzen).
Issue-author findings:
- The vocabulary block now states that the space spellings are the same
values as the underscore forms, not separate statuses, equally Final.
Previously a reader applying the Open/Final lists literally landed on
"not Final, not Open, undefined" for `offer declined`, and /apply Step 6b
would refresh a closed application's row instead of appending (jakob1379).
- The block moved below Step 1's closing --- as its own section: it was
splitting Step 1's numbered list and silently truncating section-scoped
reads of Step 1 to item 1 (jakob1379).
- Open is derived by exclusion from the one explicit Final list, so a new
status needs updating in a single place (jakob1379).
- /html-report's bucket map gains a case-insensitive catch-all that maps
unrecognised values to Rejected/Closed and names them once in the status
breakdown - the #298 failure mode with a different input (jakob1379).
- /apply Step 6b and /interview Step 0 anchor their final/open decisions to
the vocabulary block (jakob1379).
- /gmail-sync and /html-report drop their local restatements of the
read-tolerance rule (jakob1379).
Tests: html-report bucket assertions scoped to the Step 1 section; new pins
for the equivalence clause, open-by-exclusion, block placement, the Notion
normalisation, and the apply/interview anchors.
/apply wrote a CV and a cover letter to disk and then wrote nothing to
job_search_tracker.csv, so a drafted and submitted application was
invisible to /gmail-sync, /html-report, /notion-sync, /interview,
/upskill aggregate mode, and to /rank's dedup exclusion. The safety net
that would have caught it - /gmail-sync - refuses to create missing
rows, so the failure it exists to catch is the one that disables it.
Nothing detected the loss afterwards.
Step 6b appends a drafted row carrying the two document paths, the fit
rating and the posting URL, reusing /outcome's exact header so the two
commands cannot diverge. It runs immediately after "Files Created" and
before the optional application-form offer, which ends the turn on a
question - anything placed after that offer would be skipped whenever
the user never answers, reproducing the bug. Re-running /apply updates
the row rather than duplicating it, and never moves a row that already
reached applied or beyond back to drafted. The step is mirrored into
job-application-assistant, which defers to it rather than restating it,
because /scrape Step 5 routes straight into the skill; /scrape Step 6
now defers to the same step instead of adding a row of its own.
seen_jobs.json is deliberately left alone: drafting is not applying, and
that file's vocabulary has no value for either. /rank builds its
exclusion set from company+role in the tracker regardless of status.
drafted is introduced into the status vocabulary, and every reader that
meant "submitted" is updated to say so. These readers define their open
set by exclusion from the final statuses, so a new non-final value would
otherwise have joined all of them silently: /outcome's follow-up branch
would have drafted a chase email to an employer who never received an
application, /gmail-sync would have searched for mail about it and then
flagged it as stale, /notion-sync would have published an "Applied on"
date for it, and /html-report would have counted it in the headline
application total. /outcome Step 4 also overwrites the draft date with
the submission date when a row leaves drafted, so the date column keeps
meaning "applied on". The wider vocabulary reconciliation - underscore
versus space, the separate archive enum - stays a separate concern.
* fix(web-research): stop treating a WebFetch 403 as a dead posting
WebFetch sends a bot user agent, and many bank and corporate sites answer
with HTTP 403 while serving the same page to a browser normally. Every
command treated that as "page unavailable" and degraded silently rather
than failing loudly:
- /rank marked live postings `expired`
- /apply fell back to search snippets, or to vague cover-letter prose
- /scrape stored listing-page `#fragment` URLs, which fetch fine and
return unrelated jobs, so every later /rank and /apply run on that
entry failed
Adds 09-web-research.md as the single reference: the trust boundary, a
curl browser-header retry with a tag-stripping extractor, a four-step
escalation order, the login-wall case, why the employer's own careers
posting beats an aggregator listing (the requisition ID and the grade
survive there), and the rule that a search-result snippet is a lead
rather than a source.
Wires it into /apply, /rank, /interview, /outcome, /notion-sync, the
job-scraper skill, and writing-style rule 5. Bumps 03-writing-style.md
to 1.2.0; 09-web-research.md starts at 1.0.0.
Aggregator examples are given generically (LinkedIn, Indeed, national
job boards) so the guidance holds in any market.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
* fix(web-research): gate the browser-header retry on robots.txt
Addresses review feedback on #277.
WebFetch identifies itself as Claude-User and honors robots.txt, so a 403 has
two very different causes and they must not be treated the same: a WAF default
on a site whose published policy allows access, or a site that has actually
declined. Retrying with browser headers in the second case circumvents the very
opt-out mechanism site owners are told they can rely on, and the core framework
cannot hold a looser standard than it asks of community forks.
The escalation now runs tools/robots_check.py before the retry. A disallow for
"*" or for "Claude-User" skips the retry entirely and goes to step 3 (find the
employer's own posting). The rule is stated plainly in 09-web-research.md so
later edits do not erode it: the retry exists to get past bot-filtering
firewalls on sites whose robots.txt permits access; it is never used to
override a site that has said no.
Two findings from testing the gate against live sites, both pinned by
tests/test_robots_check.py (15 offline cases):
- The WAF usually blocks robots.txt too. privatebank.barclays.com returns 403
on the policy file to Claude-User and 200 to a browser, so a naive gate would
block the retry on exactly the sites the retry is for. The checker reads the
policy as a browser when the honest request is refused, then obeys it
strictly - a policy you are prevented from reading cannot be honored, and
robots.txt is not the protected resource.
- urllib.robotparser cannot be used. It ends a record at a blank line and
matches rules in file order, so Barclays' real file (blank lines between
"User-agent: *" and its rules, "Allow: /" before "Disallow: /cs/") reads as
everything-allowed. That fails open, in the one direction that matters. The
checker implements RFC 9309 longest-match instead, with ties resolved to
Disallow rather than Allow.
Verified live: barclays /careers/ allowed and /cs/ blocked, ubs.com allowed,
jobup.ch /api/ blocked while /en/jobs/ stays allowed. 09-web-research.md
1.0.0 to 1.1.0.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: kgb <kevingblackman@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
* feat(add-template): make /add-template engine-agnostic so Typst can register alongside LaTeX
/add-template hardcoded a lualatex|xelatex|pdflatex engine enum and .tex
assumptions, so custom templates could only be LaTeX. Replace the enum with a
declared source extension + compile command, so any toolchain (Typst via
`typst compile`, or others) registers the same way stock LaTeX templates did.
Stock CV/cover-letter pipeline stays LaTeX and untouched (per #181).
Also fixes a latent bug this surfaced: apply.md's compile step ignored the
ACTIVE-TEMPLATE block and always ran lualatex/xelatex on .tex regardless of
the active template, and .gitignore's cv/main_*.tex pattern would not have
ignored a non-.tex draft (personal-data leak). Both now resolve from the
declared extension/command.
* fix(add-template): satisfy security_guards on the .gitignore Typst fix
security_guards.py pins the personal-data ignore rules by exact string and
gates negations through an allowlist, so broadening cv/main_*.tex and
cover_letters/cover_*.tex to *.* (for .typ drafts) needed a matching update
to REQUIRED_IGNORE_RULES.
Also tighten the .gitignore itself per review: keep the re-include
negations at .tex instead of widening them to *.* too. The stock example
files are always LaTeX, so .tex is enough to re-include them, and a
wildcard negation would have also re-included build artifacts
(main_example.pdf/.aux) that should stay ignored. ALLOWED_IGNORE_NEGATIONS
needs no change since the negations are unchanged.
Also adds a CHANGELOG entry under Unreleased for the Typst/custom-template
support.
* 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>
* feat(apply,interview): write confirmed facts back to the profile in the same turn
The grounding audit added in #185 removes any claim the three sources do
not support. That is right, and it has a consequence the framework did
not close: the audit cannot tell a fabrication from a real fact the user
stated out loud in an earlier session. Both look identical to it - absent
from the sources - and both get stripped.
So a fact that surfaces in conversation and is never written down is lost
silently. A real metric the user confirmed disappears from every
subsequent CV, and nothing reports that it happened.
Adds a standing rule to /apply: when the user confirms, corrects or
supplies a fact not already in 01-candidate-profile.md, write it there in
the same turn and bump framework_version. 01 is one of the audit's three
sources, so the fact is grounded on the next run.
Adds the same exception to /interview rule 5, which previously forbade
touching profile files outright. Interview prep is where new facts
surface most often - a recalled metric, a corrected scope, a filled-in
STAR stub - and prep files are not a substitute for the profile.
Notes the source-consistency case explicitly: a fact added to 01 that
CLAUDE.md and the master CV do not mention is an absence, not a
contradiction, so it does not trip the audit's profile-consistency
warning. If the new fact corrects either of those, fix it there too.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
* fixup(apply,interview): drop framework_version bump from write-back rule
Bumping 01's framework_version on a personal fact write-back corrupts
check_upstream_updates.py's upstream_version > local_version signal, and
diverges from /setup and /expand precedent where version tracks the
file's structure, not personal-data edits to its content.
Per MadsLorentzen review on PR #211.
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Reviewer-side Factual Grounding Audit: every date, employer, job title, and quantitative metric in both drafts is checked against the union of 01-candidate-profile.md + cv/main_example.tex + CLAUDE.md's Candidate Profile section (grounded if ANY source supports it; inter-source mismatches surfaced as profile-consistency warnings; draft drift returned as Part A edits with reason "grounding"). Drafter-side rule makes those three sources the sole source of truth for facts - existing tailored CVs are structure/phrasing reference only. Fixes the structural drift loop where tailored output fed back as source material; companion to the maintainer-side #178 setup fix.
Reported, diagnosed, and implemented by @jovin-nicholas (#177); the failure mode was validated empirically by the output benchmark (blind judges found the exact escalation class in pre-audit outputs).
Closes#177
Seven improvements sourced from blind regression probes comparing current
outputs against real April-2026 baselines (each an area where the older
outputs scored better):
- every stated requirement addressed - matched or honestly gapped, never
silently omitted (the benchmark run omitted a stated Kubernetes
requirement entirely; omission reads as hiding under questioning)
- nice-to-haves engaged by name with honest adjacency framing; posting's
literal term preferred, including in CV section headings
- stated logistics/prerequisites addressed in the letter (clearances,
availability, job ID, multi-country language mapping)
- domain-transfer argument leads the CV profile statement for
domain-changers
- evidence links (href) on every verifiable named artifact
framework_version: 05 -> 1.2.0.
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The CV was hardcoded 'Always in English' - fine for the Danish/English
demonstration profile, a real disadvantage for fork users in markets
where applications are expected in the local language (cover letters
already match the posting's language). /setup now asks once and records
'CV language:' in CLAUDE.md's Identity section; /apply reads it with
English as the default, so existing users see zero behavior change.
The ATS keyword rule is reworded language-neutrally.
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Prompt-injection hardening from the dataflow analysis in #173 by @Defaultuser361: data-not-instructions rules in /apply and /rank, reviewer research constrained to the user-confirmed company identity, writing-style verify rule tightened to independently located sources (framework_version 1.1.0), SECURITY.md private reporting channel, README note. Closes#173.
CVs from /apply were named cv/main_<company>.tex, so a second role at the same company overwrote the first (cover letters already carried the role). Aligns CV naming to main_<company>_<role>.tex across apply, add-template, the CV template guide, CLAUDE.md, and SETUP.md; /outcome and /interview fallbacks glob main_<company>*.tex to match both legacy and new names. framework_version bumped on both touched framework files.
/setup Path A already mines documents/applications/<company>_<role>/
(job_posting.md, submitted drafts, outcome.md) to calibrate
04-job-evaluation.md and surface STAR candidates - but nothing in the
workflow systematically writes those folders, so the calibration machinery
only runs for users who hand-maintain the archive. /outcome closes the
loop: it writes the data /setup reads.
How it works:
- Identifies the application from job_search_tracker.csv (by argument, or
by listing open applications); applications made outside the workflow
get a new tracker row
- Records progress updates (interview stages, offers) and resolutions
using the exact status enum documents/README.md documents, plus one
additive value: in_progress, for open applications between updates.
/setup's calibration only draws conclusions from final statuses
- Archives the submitted cv_draft.tex / cover_letter.tex (copy, never
move; existing archived files are never overwritten - the archive is
what was actually submitted) and fetches job_posting.md from the
tracker's source URL while it is still alive; a dead URL gets a
user-pasted copy or an explicit unavailable stub, never a
reconstruction
- Updates the tracker row's status and notes; never restructures the CSV
- After 3+ resolved outcomes (or a repeating pattern), points the user
back to /setup Path A - /outcome writes data, /setup interprets it,
and this command never edits framework or profile files itself
- Idempotent: re-running appends stages and dated notes, never
duplicates folders, rows, or history
Also aligns the outcome.md status enum across docs: setup.md Step A3
listed hired/rejected/no_response/interview_only while documents/README.md
already had offer_declined; both now carry the full enum including
in_progress. documents/applications/** and the tracker are already
gitignored, so all recorded data stays personal.
Docs: README (commands list, file tree), documents/README.md (/outcome
cross-reference and in_progress semantics), one-line handoff at the end
of /apply Step 6.
An ATS reads the compiled PDF's embedded text layer, not the rendered page,
and LaTeX can silently produce PDFs whose text extracts as garbage: icon
glyphs where contact details should be, (cid:*) markers from fonts without
Unicode mappings, interleaved lines from multi-column layouts. This matters
more now that /add-template lets users bring arbitrary templates. The
existing Step 5 loop verifies what a human sees; this adds verification of
what a parser sees.
New Step 5d in /apply (CV only - cover letters rarely go through keyword
screening; cleanup renumbered to 5e):
- Extract the CV PDF's text layer with pdftotext -layout. pdftotext
(poppler) is an optional dependency: if missing, the mechanical check is
skipped with a warning and keyword coverage falls back to the visual PDF
read - the same graceful-skip pattern as salary_lookup.py
- Parseability checks verified against a real extraction of the stock
template: email/phone must survive as literal text (fontawesome icons
extract as harmless glyph-name noise like MOBILE-ALT/Envelope, but a
contact detail carried only by an icon or hyperlink is invisible to ATS),
no (cid:*) or replacement-character garbage, reading order matching
visual order, dates present
- Keyword coverage reuses the required/preferred list from Step 1, matched
in the posting's language, reported as covered / synonym-only /
missing-have-it / missing-gap. Honesty rule enforced: keywords the
profile genuinely supports get added to experience bullets; genuine gaps
stay visible, never stuffed
Integration: CLAUDE.md verification checklist section, ATS Parseability
guidance in 05-cv-templates.md, narrow Bash(pdftotext:*) entry in the
pre-approved permissions (keeping with the tightened scope from #27),
cv/*.txt gitignored (extraction is personal data; also deleted by the
step itself), and optional-dependency docs in README and SETUP.
Brings 02-behavioral-profile.md back into the reviewer's reading list (it
was dropped in the earlier token-efficiency refactor). The reviewer now
reads four files: 01 (candidate profile), 02 (behavioral profile), 03
(writing style), 04 (job evaluation). The LaTeX template files (05, 06)
remain excluded, since those govern structural/LaTeX concerns the drafter
already applied.
The behavioral profile is there to let the reviewer cross-check whether
the cover letter's voice matches the candidate's natural register -
something 03-writing-style.md does not encode (03 has the universal rules
like "no em-dashes, no cliches"; 02 has the per-person register like
"Collaborator PI should not be given a combative solo-hero tone").
Also cross-references 02 explicitly in the Part B "Tone and style issues"
category so the reviewer actually uses it during critique rather than
just skimming it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Audit of master vs the branch found three real coverage gaps in the
reviewer prompt and drafter's revise step. This commit restores them
without giving up the Part A (JSON edits) + Part B (narrative) structure.
1. Action-oriented reframing is restored as a Part B narrative category.
The previous refactor folded reframing into Part A edit rationales, but
structural weakness (e.g. "the whole opening paragraph is passive") does
not fit a clean find-and-replace and needs prose critique to surface.
2. Tone and style phrasing is strengthened from "anything that conflicts
with 03-writing-style.md" back to the master's proactive "check
against... flag issues with tone, formality, or voice", with explicit
examples (cliches, hedging, over-humility, inconsistent register).
3. Step 4 revise guidance is expanded from "Apply Part A... Apply Part B
using judgment" (which could be read as a free-for-all) to an
enumerated sub-list under Part B covering every category the reviewer
returns: missed keywords, company angles, action-oriented reframing,
tone/style. Keeps the architectural change (Part A/B split) but
restores the master's explicit "apply every kind of fix" discipline.
Also adds a small instruction to the reviewer: produce each Part B
category even if the finding is "no issues" - silence on a category can
be mistaken for skipping it.
One remaining judgment call left unchanged in this commit: the reviewer
no longer reads 02-behavioral-profile.md. The refactor excluded it on the
reasoning that 03-writing-style.md carries the voice/tone rules. This is
a conscious trade-off; if voice-matching starts slipping in practice,
restoring 02 to the reviewer's reading list is a one-line fix.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Adds a new Step 5 to the /apply workflow that compiles the CV (lualatex)
and cover letter (xelatex) and visually inspects the resulting PDFs before
presenting them to the user. This catches page-break failures that .tex
review cannot detect: orphaned cventry titles, cover letters spilling to
a second page, and bullet fonts not matching body text.
Also introduces relevance-weighted cutting as the rule for shrinking an
overflowing CV: score each candidate line by (a) relevance to the posting,
(b) uniqueness in the document, and (c) load-bearing role in the cover
letter, then cut the lowest-total-score line first, regardless of section.
This replaces the old static "cut oldest section first" heuristic, which
was wrong whenever a relevant older-role bullet competed with an
irrelevant recent-role bullet.
Bundled with the earlier pending token-efficiency improvements to the
/apply workflow (inline draft passing to the reviewer, scoped reviewer
file reads, single end-of-workflow verification pass).
Changes:
- .claude/commands/apply.md: new Step 5 (Compile & Inspect PDFs), renumber
old Step 5 to Step 6, update token-efficiency rules at top to reference
Step 6 for the verification checklist
- .claude/skills/job-application-assistant/05-cv-templates.md: switch
recommended compile engine from pdflatex to lualatex (pdflatex fails on
modern MiKTeX with fontawesome5 font-expansion errors), add
"Compile-and-Inspect Loop" section with needspace/enlargethispage
patterns, add "Relevance-weighted cutting" section
- .claude/skills/job-application-assistant/06-cover-letter-templates.md:
add compile command, add "Compile-and-Inspect Loop", document the
"\lettercontent{} + itemize" pitfall and the required font-matching
Raleway-Medium wrapper fix
- CLAUDE.md: add "Compiled PDF verification (MANDATORY)" checklist items
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Jakob Stender Guldberg