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>
